90mm lens with 8x10?

[Robert Brummitt]

I have a 75mm lens that I had for a long time but now work with a 8x10 Deardroff with a 4x5 reduction back. My question is. Can I use the lens with the camera or should I should I sell it? The lens not the camera.

[IanG]

Your title says 90mm, but the text says 75mm :-)

Both would be fine with the reducing back. Some people like to shoot with 90mm lenses on 10x8 film allowing the edges to fall of with the deliberate lack of coverage. The resulting images can be interesting.

Ian

[Scott Whitford]

Like Ian said, the 90 (or 75) almost certainly won't cover 8x10, but it makes for an interesting - almost fisheye - effect.

Check out the work of Emmit Gowin for examples of this. I think he used a Schneider Angulon 90mm f/6.8 on 8x10. That lens barely covers 4x5.

Scott

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'm assuming the question here is really--can you focus to infinity and not have the bed in the picture with a reduction back and a 75mm on an 8x10" Deardorff, and the answer probably has to come from someone who has tried it.

I can go as short as 75mm on my Sinar 8x10" P with a 4x5" reduction back (not a format kit, but an 8x10"/4X5" reduction back probably from the Norma era) and bag bellows, so it might be possible.

I'd probably make a temporary lensboard out of something like mat board to test it out.

[Robert Brummitt]

Yes, I messed up the focal numbers. The lens has been in my bag for sometime and I rarely use it. My regular 4x5 can't manage the lens. That's why I asked about the Deardrof.
Thanks

[Neal Shields]

I have used a 90mm f8 super angulon in a recesed lens board on my Deardorff v8.

You get a circular image and there were NO movements but the bed didn't show.

[Maris Rusis]

I've used a 90mm f8 Super Angulon on a Tachihara 8x10 for an photographic exhibition titled Fishbowling. The idea was to get crowds of people in restaurants and bars etc to appear as if in a fishbowl. I shot at f64 to eliminate focussing and enable long exposures with the camera set down on tables and chairs.

Amazingly I did not get purely round images. The little 90mmf8 covered the 8 inch width of the film and just fell short of the 10 inch dimension. The bed of the camera did not show either.

So, I did not get "fishbowls" but the pictures were pretty wild anyway.

[Ole Tjugen]

Oh no!

Now I'll have to try the 90/8 SA on 9.5x12"...

[Maris Rusis]

Ole, don't get too optimistic . My 90mm f8 Super Angulon was pre-focussed on 1 metre so its coverage would have been better than at infinity. On 9.5x12 you may get round images, just. Good luck!

[Pete Watkins]

I can see a silly weekend coming up.
Pete.