300 mm Plasmats

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Tessars, especially the f6.3 versions can be really great performers. They typically have a bit better coverage than the f4.5 versions.

Very true. The little 150mm f6.3 Fujinon-W is an absolutely fantastic performer. The only thing it really lacks, compared to the 150mm f5.6 plasmats is a bit of coverage. Fuji rates it at 67 degrees and a 198mm image circle. I was a bit skeptical at first, but after using it for several years, and many backpacking trips, I'd have to say these figures are very realistic.

The 210mm f6.3 Zeiss Tessar T (single coated, post WWII vintage) is difficult to find in a factory mounted Compur No. 1 shutter, but if you can find one, it is another fantastic performer. Zeiss claimed a coverage angle of 70 degrees, which equates to a 294mm image circle. Again, that seems a bit optimistic, but I've never run out of coverage on 4x5 and it would also make a great, compact "normal" lens for 5x7.

Getting back to lenses for 8x10, the previously mentioned 420mm Fujinon-L has an f8 maximum aperture (constrained by the Copal No. 3 shutter) and is rated for a much more conservative 53 degrees of coverage. Even with such a conservative coverage spec, it still has an image circle of 480mm - plenty for 8x10 and even enough for 11x14 or 7x17 with modest movements.

Of course, probably the best known and most readily available of the f6.3 Tessar types are the Kodak Commercial Ektars. These are still highly regarded, and for good reason. They came in 8.5", 10", 12" and 14" and all were rated for 64 degrees of coverage. The 12" and 14" with image circles of 381mm and 444mm make great lenses for 8x10. The 8.5" has plenty of coverage for 4x5 and decent coverage for 5x7. I personally prefer the 210mm f6.3 Zeiss Tessar T in this focal length due to the smaller, lighter shutter and standard threaded filter size, but the Commercial Ektar is much easier to find and usually less expensive. The 10" Commercial Ektar has plenty of coverage for 5x7 or whole plate. It does just hit the corners of 8x10, but there are better choices in this focal length range (250mm f6.7 Fujinon-W) for the 8x10 format.

I have owned, and used all four focal lengths over the years, and if you get one in decent condition, you will not be disappointed in the performance. Kodak had amazing quality control back when these lenses were manufacturered, and the Commercial Ektar was their flagship, high end, professional product line. I have yet to see a Commercial Ektar, that was not suffering from obvious abuse, that wasn't a great performer. They were made from the mid-1940s through the mid-1960s (the latest I've seen was a 14" I used to own from 1967, the other focal lengths were discontinued 2 - 4 years earlier).

Thanks to their great performance, good coverage, inexpensive cost, compact size and lightweight, I am a big fan of the slower Tessar type lenses. The multi-coated Nikkor M series is the ultimate culmination of the Tessar evolution. I have owned and extensively used the 200mm f8, 300mm f9 and 450mm f9 Nikkor M lenses and they are three of my all time favorite large format lenses. The 200mm and 300mm are very compact and lightweight and offer comparable performance (but less coverage) than the best of the modern f5.6 plasmats, and the 450mm Nikkor M offers ULF coverage in a very compact size and light weight. I highly recommend all three.

Kerry

[jp]

Kerry, thanks for the Fuji details! I like tessars too and will keep those lenses in mind. I have a Fujinar 210/4.5 in a copal-3s which I like quite a bit for 4x5. I alternate from tessar to triplet to soft focus on 4x5 and don't even use my Plasmat 210mm.