Lens for 1:1 - 1:2 on 8x10

[rich caramadre]

What is a good focal length for shooting close ups on 8x10. Somewhere between 1:1 - 1:2. The lenses I have are 240 and 360.

[el french]

Any focal length will work as long as the bellows will stretch far enough You may want to investigate using a reversed enlarger lens.

p.s. The trade off for focal length is working distance. Longer focal length lens will have longer working distance.

[CP Goerz]

Non-red dot Goerz APo Artars.

[Bob Salomon]

The 120 and 180 Apo Macro Sironars and the older 210 and 300mm Makro Sironars all easily do this superbly.

[Justin Cormack]

What is a good focal length for shooting close ups on 8x10. Somewhere between 1:1 - 1:2. The lenses I have are 240 and 360.

at 1:1, bellows extension is twice focal length, and at 1:2 it is 3x. Use the longest lens you can within that to get more subject distance. Remember coverage expands so at 1:1 any 4x5 lens covers 8x10. So depending on your max extension, 120 or 180 as Bob says are probably good, you might get away with your 240 at 1:1 depending on your camera.

[Dan Fromm]

Any focal length will work as long as the bellows will stretch far enough You may want to investigate using a reversed enlarger lens.

p.s. The trade off for focal length is working distance. Longer focal length lens will have longer working distance.

Re the enlarger lens, you're somewhat mistaken. Enlarging lenses are designed to be used with the small negative behind them and the large print in front. This is the same situation as shooting at magnifications no higher than 1:1. So the OP should use an enlarging lens facing normally if he uses one at all.

One other consideration which applies to taking lenses as well as to enlarging lenses. The lens the OP uses will have to cover at least 8x10 at his working magnification. If he uses it at 1:1, it will have to cover at least 4x5 (150 mm) at infinity. At 1:2, somewhat more than 200 mm at infinity. A short lens like the 120 and 180 that Bob Salomon suggested isn't right for lowish magnifications on 8x10.

Justin, you're thinking of 2:1, the OP wrote 1:2.

CP Goerz was on the right track, most process lenses are optimized for the magnifications the OP wants. A dialyte type Apo Nikkor or modern coated Apo Artar would do well. 240 mm or 10" to be sure of adequate coverage.

[aduncanson]

Non-red dot Goerz APo Artars.

CP, Are you implying that the Red Dot Artars are re-optimized for something other than 1:1? I recall reading that Red Dot Artars that were factory mounted in a shutter were optimized for distance shots, but I was never sure if that was true, nor did I know how to tell if a particular lens in a shutter was mounted that way by the factory.

Thanks - Alan

[ic-racer]

If you like the angle of view of a 300mm at infinity you can match that with a 150mm at 1:1.

Good thing is that most 150mm lenses will cover 8x10 at 1:1.

[Bob Salomon]

Dan:
"A short lens like the 120 and 180 that Bob Salomon suggested isn't right for lowish magnifications on 8x10."

The Apo Macro Sironars are corrected for 1:5 to 2:1 on formats up to and including 8x10.

[Oren Grad]

A short lens like the 120 and 180 that Bob Salomon suggested isn't right for lowish magnifications on 8x10.

Dan, per Rodenstock literature the 180 Apo-Macro-Sironar is specified to cover 302 mm at 1:5 and 415 mm at 1:1 at working stops 16-22, so it should be OK in the OP's 1:1-1:2 range.