A couple to avoid due to small image circle:
Fujinon T 300/8 - only 213mm, designed for 4x5, won't come close to covering 8x10 (325mm IC min)
Nikkor M 300/9 - 325mm IC just covers 8x10 but will not allow any movements
Most of the 300mm lenses have ICs over 400mm, which allow movements for 8x10.
- Leigh
I can confirm that the Nikkor has more room for movements than you might expect. I have used a couple inches of rise on it no problem. Usually shooting at f/45 or f/64.
But, if you want cheap, one of the big f/5.6 lenses are probably better and cheaper. One sold for like $300 last week I think.
Yes, you can use the Nikkor M 300/9 on 8x10 in a pinch, but a couple of inches movement on 8x10 is quite minimal.
I have that lens, but seldom use it for 8x10 since I have a Nikkor W 300/5.6 that's brighter with an IC almost 100mm larger.
- Leigh
It's probably down to deciding whether you want a smoother, portrait-friendly lens that is still sharp (Commercial Ektar, Tessar0 or something very, very sharp like the copy-flat field lenses or modern symmetrical lenses (Symmar and Sironar)?
Then which shutter? A modern Copal or Compur or a Compound or a bit of Americana. Each have their pluses and minuses.
I had a 300/5.6 Schneider Xenar in a Copal 3 that I liked a lot, worked well. I've also had Sironars and Symmars and like them a lot too.
What I wouldn't worry about is lens size, unless you are doing an ultralight outfit and really whittling. A 300 Symmar is a nice hunk of glass and it weighs the same as a big hunk of glass and metal. Toughen up!
FWIW a 14" APO Artar is quite usable on an 8x10---mine was, anyway. Nowhere near the image circle of a Commercial Ektar however, but certainly usable. Nikkor 300 Ms seem to vary in coveage from lens to lens. I have one that covers 8x10 straight on, but others have reported differently. Go figure! But 300 M's aren't and never were "cheap." Multi coating is overkill anyway with B&W film. IMHO, vintage glass---Kodaks, Wollensaks, Ilex and old Schneiders will cost you less and offer outstanding performance to boot.
I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.
Both of you are of course correct. You are going to have to sacrifice somewhere, either in speed/IC or with added weight/bulk. So depends on the subject/purpose.
I'm shooting a lot of 8x10 lately working on a project of exclusively contact prints, shot along the Withlacoochee River. I have no interest in lugging the giant Symmar I've got. I bring a Nikkor 300mm f/9, 210mm f/9 Kowa, and a 120mm f/8 Nikkor. When I find a decently priced 450mm f/9 that'll be added. Not much weight but a good range of FLs and abilities. Everything fits in a small backpack and I've got the 8x10 on the tripod over my shoulder (a wooden field cam).
A Nikkor 450 M will give you acres of coverage!Originally Posted by Corran
I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.
Of course, I meant the 300mm in regards to limited IC vs. weight/bulk.
Wow thanks for all the responses guys, first to all the questions
Price range $300-600 as long as its value for money
I am not worried about cosmetics in the slightest
Yes I need a shutter
Not worried about size or weight. Young and silly
I shoot mainly landscape and the figure, in b&w but I'd like to shoot more colour in the future. My most used lens equivalent in 35mm and MF is 50mm so 300 seems like a good place to start in 8x10.
Cheers
it might be a mistake to get hung up any specific lens...
maybe the approach could be to decide on the general type of lens you want and then grab what comes up in your price range when you see it?
if you like the format it won't be the last lens you buy and it can always be resold to subsidise something else later
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks