210 for 8x10

[Vaughn]

Wollensak 210 WFGR f6.8 - image circle 15 inches AFAIK.

I works fine with my 8x10...barrel lens. A nice little lens to work with!

Vaugh

[Brian Ellis]

"G-Claron f/9 (Copal 1, single-coated, covers 8x10 with very limited movements when stopped down)"

The 210 G Claron starts covering 8x10 at about f/16. As you continue stopping down the usable coverage continues to increase until you actually get adequate coverage for many subjects at f22 and very ample coverage for most subjects around f/45 and smaller. I never found diffraction to be a problem with 8x10 film because the enlargement factor is usually so small (e.g. even 4x produces a very big print). I've owned two 210 G Clarons used for 8x10 and liked them a lot, especially when compared with the price and weight of some other 210s that cover 8x10. I mostly photographed landscapes and architecture with mine and don't remember ever running out of coverage.

[mccormickstudio]

B - I've been eyeballing most of these lenses for about a year, and I think I'm about to try the Wollensak 159mm. Single-coated, it could have problem with flare.

On fleabay, the least expensive and most available of these seems (to me) to be the angulon 210 with 362mm image circle, might just work at full front rise, barely... about $630 on ebay now. The older super angulon 165mm is usually about $800, I don't know if it's mc. Most of the really good ones... over $1k.

I use a fuji 210 W (not the older, wider version with printing on the inside) on some of the eastgate shots you saw where the cone is visible. They have almost no shift at all.

I guess you need to do some mathematics on the $ value of no lensflare vs. $2k super angulon mc. Or the $/hour of digital editing. yikes.

Shot more peopleboxes this week. Happy new year!.

[Nick_3536]

Fuji W are popular and rare due to their small size and generally adequate coverage for many applications. The remaining lenses are relatively easier to come by if you are patient.

.

The Fuji isn't that rare. It shows up fairly often. KEH and Mpex have them usually for not much money. The problem is making sure you get the older model. Mpex I find better at making clear what you're getting. With KEH you need to look more at the clues often. Filter size for example.

[Carsten Wolff]

Dare I mention the 8" f6.5 Cooke VIIB W.A. Anastigmat (again)? Coverage is stated as 100deg @f32 and 90deg @ f16. I've had an uncoated 158mm Cooke until recently and still have a nice 108mm, coated, Copal 0 version (most were originally in barrel or front-mounted in Epsilon shutters)... But they are a bit rare and thus usually quite expensive, although they are small and have very good coverage... Still, for the price, I would probably look for something else.

[AJ Edmondson]

I have both a 165 and a 210 Angulon - both single-coated - which I used a lot when I was backpacking 8x10 and both of them seemed to be great performers the few times I shot transparencies. Most of my experience with them was B&W.

[BennehBoy]

I'm looking for a good option for shooting indoors in relatively confined spaces (think UK inside peoples homes), what would people suggest for that, I was thinking I might need to get a 150 SS XL, but would much rather avoid that level of expense.

[Ben Syverson]

I've seen 210mm Angulons mounted in a Copal 1, but most are Copal 3... What gives?

[DeBone75]

I have a 213 Repromaster barrel lens that is said to have a 400mm circle. 8X10 with plenty of room. Kind of slow though, f9. There is one in auction right now, not mine.

[Ben Syverson]

That Repromaster looks interesting... can it be mounted in a shutter?