Newbie help: Best modern lenses for 8x10

[PaulSchneider]

Hi guys!

I'm thinking of getting into 8x10 and would like to start out with two or three lenses.

But I'm completely overwhelmed by the lens choice and different prices! I thought Canon had lot of choice already and now this ...

So please can anyone tell me which lenses are considered the best in their respectivr focal lengths?

I'm only interested in the most recent designs and would like to buy something I will never have to sell except if I stop with the hobby ...

On the ultra wide end, ist the super symmar XL 150 any good?

Why is the super symmar xl 210 so expensive and is it well regarded?

As a standard lens, should one get the 300 sironar s or the apo symmar?

Generally speaking, between sironar s and apo symmar -> is one generally better or do there exists specific things one should know about one brand or the other?

Kind regards

Paul

[Frank Petronio]

I don't know if you want extremes, but if you are more moderate in your needs then perhaps getting something like the latest 240 and 360 Sironar-S or APO-Symmar Ls are the best starting points, after which you can spend the big bucks on the 150XL and 480 lenses to round out your kit.

They are wonderful lenses but the market for reselling high-end 8x10 gear can bite you when you try to get out of it. Lots of people claim to desire it, but few have the ready cash or will to buy your gear when you decide to sell it! So the best strategy is to start with just one or two good lenses and make sure you want to stick with 8x10 over the long haul.

Pesonally, if I bought a Rodenstock then I'd want my other lenses to match and be Rodenstocks too. But I'd just as soon start off with a Schneider as a Roddy, they seem so close in most practical regards -- things like filter sizes often end up being the deciding factors.

Also, the modern lenses are big and heavy... a 14" Commercial Ektar in a #5 is still a baby compared to a modern 360.

[Mark Sawyer]

There's not a whole lot of difference between modern lenses. They all have the same design parameters, and all obey the same laws of physics.

"Why is the super symmar xl 210 so expensive and is it well regarded?"

More coverage. Yes, it's well regarded. If it wouldn't be well regarded, they wouldn't have made it. There aren't any surprises in modern optics; they all do the same things, and do them very well. It's mostly a matter of where do you draw the price line on diminishing returns, and what do you absolutely need. Most people don't need that extra coverage that the Super Symmar XL 210 gives, but if you do, you do.

The big thing is figuring out what you need before you buy something.

(BTW, you're lucky. Doing that for modern lenses is much easier than for vintage lenses, and correspondingly, although not near as much fun!)

[Walter Calahan]

Paul

There are many ways of defining "Best."

Why spend huge dollars on expensive glass when you do not even know if you'll like working in 8x10 yet?

Most modern lenses are pretty darn good in the 8x10 format. Many older lenses are too.

Choose the lenses that work with your photographic vision. Don't get a back full of glass that may end up fighting you, which will make shooting 8x10 frustrating.

[williamtheis]

as you look at lenses, you might want the specs... try

http://www.largeformatphotography.in.../LF8x10in.html

if you are doing close up work, you can get by with a much smaller image circle...

[John Jarosz]

What are your usual subjects?

Even though it's 8x10, will you only be doing contact printing?

Color or B&W?

If you will be doing 8x10 contact printed in B&W, then you have a lot of choices. For this kind of photography you'll have a hard time seeing the difference with many of the lenses (old and new).

While many of the newer lenses can give a lot of coverage, they are pricey and can be very heavy. If you are doing outdoor work, consider what you will be carrying into the field.

If you are doing critical color work that will be enlarged to poster size, then I'd stick with the modern stuff.

John (my opinion, anyway)

[John Kasaian]

A 240 G Claron would be a good start---far less costly than the glass you're talking about and not one bit inferior--my 2-cents anyway. The money you'll save will buy a lot of film!

[ic-racer]

There's not a whole lot of difference between modern lenses.

I second that.

Also, the older lenses are usually fine, and in the case of Fuji, you have to go with the older ones to get your 8x10 coverage.

Are you using a monorail or field camera? The Super Symmar XL 210mm may not be the first choice for a field camera, unless someone else is hauling your equipment

Here is a thread on some 210mm lenses that work well with an 8x10 field camera setup: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=62302

[Jim Galli]

8X10 works on the principal of brute force. It's an 800 hp V8 in a Ford Falcon. Spending an extra $1200 for 805 hp is ludicrous. It only takes 40 hp to move away from the stop light.

Now to answer your question, or at least one of them, on 8X10 I'd prefer a Dokter Optic 240mm f9 Germinar to the 210mm Symmar XL. And if I had $$$$ to spend, I'd love to have a Cooke XVa convertible as my normal based on how my old school single coated XV runs.

[Ben Syverson]

It is a mistake to start out in any new format with 3 lenses.

A better option is to buy an inexpensive modern "normal" lens (300mm for 8x10) and see how it feels. Shoot 10-20 sheets with it at least. If you find yourself wanting something lighter, wider, etc, then do some research.

Unlike smaller formats like MF or digital/35mm, lens "quality" or sharpness matters much less than coverage, aperture, price, and so forth. All the modern lenses are sharp enough to produce incredible 80" prints from 8x10.