Wide Angle Lenses for 8x10? - Lots of Questions!

[Mark_S]

I shoot mostly 4x5 landscapes, and my lens kit for that includes 75mm, 90mm and 150mm lenses, of which I find that I use the 90mm more than anything else. I also have an 8x10 camera, which I don't use a lot, but would like to start using more. The one lens that I have for it is not a great lens, it is a triple convertible with the shortest focal length being 12". I would like to get a decent lens for the 8x10. If I assume that I will shift my shooting from 4x5 to 8x10, then that would imply that I would want to start with the lens which would be the equivalent to my 90mm for the 8x10 - which would be a 180mm, or thereabouts. In looking around, it doesn't seem like there are many lenses in this focal range which will cover the 8x10 negative - am I missing something?

Does anybody know why this is the case?

There seems to be a 210mm Super Angulon, (my 90mm and 75mm lenses are both S.A., and I like both lenses) - they seem to have good coverage.

Is there a lens which is in the 150mm range which would cover 8x10, and if so, would it make sense for me to use this both for a wide angle lens on the 8x10 and as my normal lens when doing 4x5 (no honey, I didn't buy another lens, I just swapped this one for that one )

[Peter K]

Why not a Super-Angulon 1:8/165mm. With it's image-circle of 394mm it covers 8x10", 310mm, well. But with 1400 grams it's a heavy lens and not for all 4x5" cameras.

Here http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=41749 you can see this lens. The SA 210mm is larger and heavier. So it needs filters with M 127 x 1 mm diameter, compared with the smaller M 105 x 1 mm for the SA 165mm.

[Jiri Vasina]

It could also be the old Angulon 1:6,8/165mm, which is smaller and lighter (I have not used it myself, have only read about it...). It's declared coverage is 300mm, but judging from the smaller ones, some people are using the shorter Angulons well above their stated coverage (one example could be Ole Tjugen's Angulon 90mm shot on 5x7, which he has shown several times on such coverage questions).

[Capocheny]

Hi Mark,

The Nikkor 150SW and the SK 150XL Super-Symmar will both fit your bill... the 155 Grandagon will also work.

I can only speak to the Nikkor 150SW. Despite the shutter size being a Copal 1, the front and rear elements are huge. At 2.3 lbs and a 95mm filter size, it's far from being a light-weight! But, it has a huge IC of 400 at f22. It's a gorgeous chunk of glass!

Other lenses that would work as a wide on 8x10 are the Nikkor 120SW and the SK 110XL.

Lastly, the amount of bellows compression will also determine how much movement you have with the 110XL. I can't use the 110XL on my Dorff 8x10 and attain ANY movements. (No wide-angle bellows for it... and the bellows on my camera seem to be made with a thicker, less flexible material. YMMV.)

Lastly, if you can locate one... a 210 WF Raptar also works and is much, much less costly that any of the above-mentioned lenses.

Hope this helps in your decision.

Cheers

[Gem Singer]

The Nikon/Nikkor f8 150SW is a great wide angle lens for 8X10, if your camera can handle it. Even though it is mounted in a Copal 1 shutter, it takes a 95mm screw-in filter on the front and has an even larger diameter rear element. No longer manufactured, good used ones are scarce and usually demand higher prices.

The Nikon/Nikkor f5.6 240W is my favorite lens for 8X10 landscape photography. It is also a large, heavy lens, mounted in a Copal 3 shutter, and takes an 82mm screw-in filter. However, it is readily available on the used market at a more reasonable price.

If you want a smaller size, lighter weight lens, look for a Fujinon f6.7 250W. It's no longer in production, but sometimes comes up on the used market. It will cover 8X0.

[Gem Singer]

Capocheny types faster than me.

[John Kasaian]

150mm is very wide on an 8x10. Also these lenses can get very expensive and heavy as well, taxing both wallet and front standards. I have a 159mm Wollensak WA which is inexpensive and diminuative (at the cost of being slow: f/9.5, and having minimal coverage) but I don't use it all that much.
How robust is your camera? A 168mm SA is a formidable hunk of glass! How much do you want to spend? IMHO the Grandagon is a really impressive lens when it comes to wide angles.

I find that the 240mm-250mm "normal/wide" is a very useful focal length on the 8x10.

[Brian Ellis]

Do you do much walking/hiking? If so you'll find any lens in a Copal 3 shutter, and especially a Super Angulon, somewhat impractical because of size and weight. The two wide angle lenses I used for 8x10 and hiking (not overnight, just day trips) were a 210mm G Claron (ignore the specs, it covers 8x10 with room for movements as long as you stop down to f16 or smaller) and the 159mm Wollensak that John mentions. The Wolly is a very small, light, inexpensive lens, one of the few like that for 8x10. However, I used mine when I was only doing contact prints, I don't know how it would be if you enlarge.

[Mark_S]

OK - Lots of good info - THANKS!

If I am going to be doing any significant hiking, then it will probably be with my 4x5 kit, I don't imagine a lot of long hikes with the 8x10 - so weight is not a major issue there.

On the flip side, my camera is a Century Universal, which, although not flimsy, is also not the most robust camera that I have seen, so it might pay attention to the weight of the lens - Bellows compression would probably be an issue with some of the really wide lenses that I would like to use, so I am probably going to be hunting for something which is ~200mm, and not too heavy.

[aduncanson]

Kodak 190mm Wide Field Ektar?