Repromaster 150mm covergae

[mgeiss]

I sometimes find people claming that the Repromaster 150mm/9 will almost cover 8x10 at infinity, with a little vignetting in the outmost corners, although there is no information given regarding the f-stop for which this might apply.
Does someone here happen to have this lens and and use it on an 8x10" camera? I could live with dark corners as long as it isn't a "keyhole" effect with just a circle being illuminated on 8x10".

I know there are many alternatives in this FL-range for 8x10" but i have been offered a 150mm Repromaster, so I'm curious.


Also: Is this lens identical (in optical terms) to the 150mm G-Claron?

[Ian Greenhalgh]

It's very similar to a G-Claron, yes. Not sure of the coverage, you might need the 9/210 to cover 8x10, I'm not sure is there is a 180, I've heard it mentioned but never seen one for sale. The reason the Helioprint/Repromaster/Ultragon lenses are not more widely used and sell so cheap is that unlike the G-Claron, they are hard to put in a shutter. There are at least two different versions of the 9/150, don't know if they are optically different but they have different barrels.

[mgeiss]

Thank you, Ian!

I guess i'll have to do my own testing. I can get the 150/9 for little money, so i can probably sell it without loss. It would be a nice Lens for my diy wide-angle camera, if it covers.
If not, i won't have much use for it because i already own a 150mm and a 180mm for smaller formats.

[Ian Greenhalgh]

Good luck Matthias, sounds like an interesting project.

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. I thought I put up a reply, but it isn't here. Helioprint/Repromaster/Ultragon lenses were all made by Staeble, Agfa's captive lens maker. They're not G-Clarons, internet nonsense notwithstanding.

They're also not wide angle lenses. There are no 90 degree process lenses, and that's the angle a 150 mm lens has to cover to just cover 8x10.

There's a lot of nonsense on the internet about process lenses' coverage, some due to confusion between "cover" and "illuminate," some due to misreading of manufacturers' coverage claims. Process lenses' claimed circles covered are often at 1:1, i.e., twice the circle covered at infinity. On that point, see the absolutely silly coverage claims for Apo- and Process-Nikkors on http://homepage2.nifty.com/akiyanroom/redbook-e/

[Dave Grenet]

I have one of these somewhere and I'm pretty sure it doesn't cover. Not sure when I'll get a chance to dig it out and check it though...

[mgeiss]

Dan, i think you're right about that, but depending on the type of falloff and the amount of vignetting i *could* live with insufficient coverage/illumination as the camera will be some kind of fix-focus point & shoot 8x10" WA cam.

So the Lens will be stopped down to f/22-f/45 (depending on light and film speed) and focused to hyperfocal distance, which should be somewhere around 5 meters, given that i only do contact prints in 8x10" (and depending on which dof-calculator one uses).

Dave, it would be great if you could post a picture of the lens when you get the chance, so i could at least check if it is the same type as the one i'm being offered.

[Jody_S]

I have the normal 150 and the 2 210s (normal and wide angle), the only one I've used on 8x10 is the 210WA. If I get a chance tomorrow I can stick the 150 on the camera and have a look, but I'm 99% certain it won't come close to covering. If you're going to use one of these, I do recommend the 210/9 wide angle, it is a very good lens and usually dirt cheap. I don't know what the image circle is, but I've used quite a lot of movements with it.

[ronish1]

I have several repromasters with focal lengths going from 135mm to 210mm (they all came from Agfa bromide copy cameras much used by graphic artists/designers in the 1980s). I have used them as enlarger lenses - a task for which they seem ideally suited.
I have always thought these to be absolutely first class lenses.
On a De Vere 5108 10x8 enlarger the 210 f8 definitely covers 10x8 negatives. I am pretty sure that the 150mm will almost cover 10x8, but to be honest I can't really remember. I used to use it to make enlarged contact prints from 35mm negatives.
However I do now have a 10x8 camera, and although it may take a little bit of fiddling to get the 150 into the camera I will give it a try and report back. these lenses had huge coverage as copy camera lenses, so it is not out of the question.

[Dan Fromm]

Enlarging requires less coverage than taking.

[mgeiss]

Jody & ronish1, thank you, i'm looking forward to your observations!


If you're going to use one of these, I do recommend the 210/9 wide angle, it is a very good lens and usually dirt cheap. I don't know what the image circle is, but I've used quite a lot of movements with it.
I already have a 210mm/9 Apo-Gerogon as my moderate wide for 8x10" which was salvaged from some kind of process- or repro-camera. This is also a tack sharp lens at all distances and naturally shines as a close up lens in the 5:1-1:5 magnification range.

[rjmeyer314]

I have several of the Repromaster lenses: an 80mm (covers 4x5 on my Omega D2V), a 135mm (covers 5x7 on my 5x7 Elwood enlarger) and a 180mm (covers 8x10 on my 8x10 Elwood enlarger). I have a 210mm that just misses covering 11x14 (by about 1/2" in each corner). I also have 240mm and 305mm Repromasters that I plan to try on my 11x14 Seneca view camera. I'm sure they'll both cover. I've tried the 150mm on my 8x10 Century Universal. I have a Graflex 8x10 focal plane shutter unit on the back of the Century, and it added enough thickness that I couldn't get the 150mm to focus. I didn't try removing the focal plane shutter unit. Similarly, I tried the 150mm on my 8x10 Elwood. It wouldn't focus because the bellows wouldn't collapse enough. I wasn't ambitious enough to make a counter-sunk lensboard for it.

[ic-racer]

Most 150mm process lenses cover 8x10 at 1:1, perhaps that is the source of confusion.

[mgeiss]

Agreed, but i read two posts in forums from people claiming that their 150mm Repromaster does cover 8x10" at infinity with just some vignetting in the outmost corners. If this would proof to be true, i would be interested in the amount of vignetting and also the edge and corner-sharpness @f/22 and smaller apertures.

[Ian Greenhalgh]

I have several of the Repromaster lenses: an 80mm (covers 4x5 on my Omega D2V), a 135mm (covers 5x7 on my 5x7 Elwood enlarger) and a 180mm (covers 8x10 on my 8x10 Elwood enlarger). I have a 210mm that just misses covering 11x14 (by about 1/2" in each corner). I also have 240mm and 305mm Repromasters that I plan to try on my 11x14 Seneca view camera. I'm sure they'll both cover. I've tried the 150mm on my 8x10 Century Universal. I have a Graflex 8x10 focal plane shutter unit on the back of the Century, and it added enough thickness that I couldn't get the 150mm to focus. I didn't try removing the focal plane shutter unit. Similarly, I tried the 150mm on my 8x10 Elwood. It wouldn't focus because the bellows wouldn't collapse enough. I wasn't ambitious enough to make a counter-sunk lensboard for it.

Ooh, interesting, I've never seen 80 or 135 ones, I have only seen the 9/150, 9/210 and 9/240 for sale and a couple of others like the huge 9.25/210 and an 8/150.

Would you be able to post a picture of your lenses? I confess to being intrigued to see them.

[Fotoguy20d]

I have an Eskofot Ultragon 150/9 which someone gave me once. I've never used it, actually forgot all about it until just now, having a 150 G-Claron in Copal 0. I've used my Agfa Super-Intergon 210/9 on 8x10, and it covers and is quite sharp - not too much movement though from what I remember (I havent used it in a while, and at that it was on a 2-D which has little movement). I'll try the Eskofot tomorrow if I get a chance.

Dan

[ronish1]

The 150mm Repromaster 1:9/150mm will definitely cover 8x10 on a camera as well as an enlarger. I have just tried mine on an Eastman Commercial View and the image on the ground glass screen appears to be even and with full coverage into the corners at maximum aperture. One problem is that the ground glass does not extend into the corners, so one has to guess using the aerial image, which is very difficult to see. The only way of really knowing is to make a photograph.
As I have not yet made a test exposure I have not been able to gauge fall-off. I will make some test exposures on Ilford MCIV RC paper with various apertures to see whether fall-off is present and if so, to what extent.

[Dan Fromm]

ronish, falloff is easily calculated. If a 150 mm lens is focused at infinity, on 8x10 the angle covered is 90 degrees. Cos(90/2)^4 is .25. The corners will be two stops down from the center.

[mgeiss]

ronish1 , thank you very much for your tests and observations!
Sounds like a cheap wide-angle option for 8x10 is coming close. I can get the lens including flange for 10 Euros, and - given mine will be of the same type as yours - this would make the decision a no-brainer.

Are you able to see the whole aperture in the corners when stopping down? Then any vignetting should be almost gone.

[ronish1]

Mathias
If you can get the lens for 10 euros with its flange, then there is really no choice to make! Buy it. If you find its no good for your camera, it will be great on your enlarger.
A 150mm Repromaster will give similar coverage on 10x8 to a 75mm on 5x4, indeed a fraction wider, more like a 72mm lens. And it will probably have corner fall-off that is similar to the Super-Angulon and Biogons. Whether that is of the order of two full stops will depend on the actual lens design, but as these lenses were made to be used on graphic reproduction machines, no doubt they have been designed to have less fall-off than a "pictorial" lens.
Lens designers used many tricks to get around the inverse square law, none more interesting than the Hypergon. But that is another story.
The only thing you must remember is that fitting barrel lenses into shutters is very expensive, and probably a complete waste of time and money. If - like me - you are happy to use your lens by simply capping and uncapping it for exposures counted in half-seconds, then you will not have a big problem. I make a lot of negatives using printing paper -Ilford MG-IV RC gloss paper is ideal - so I'm exposing in multiples of seconds rather than fractions of them. But there plenty of situations in 8x10 photography where the same is true if you are using slower films like FP4.
Good luck

[mgeiss]

I'm fine with barrel lenses and using a cap as shutter. So far, only one of my LF lenses is shutter mounted, which is not a problem as i work with paper negatives most of the time. When using film i simply put a ND filter in front of the lens.

[Randy]

I have been skipping over this thread since I obviously have nothing to offer...then my old brain reminded me that I use a Konica Hexanon GRII 150mm on my 8X10 from time to time. Like another mentioned, my camera will not compress enough, so I mounted the lens behind a lens-board and mounted a packard shutter in front of the lens. I initially just used it for 4X10's with a cut down darkslide, but since I am poor and have gone to using Xray film, I just shoot a whole sheet and crop to my desire. Here are a few examples of 4X10 and the last one is full frame to give an idea of coverage. I am not positive that the Repromaster and the Hexanon are the same lenses, or even the same formula, so my contribution may be a waste.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/52893762/griia.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/52893762/griib.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/52893762/griid.jpg

[mgeiss]

Randy,
your contribution is very welcome, and i really like your 4x10" photos!
In my search for a budget wide lens for 8x10" i also came across the GRIIs, but they're not being offered much here in Germany.

[Dan Fromm]

In my search for a budget wide lens for 8x10" i also came across the GRIIs, but they're not being offered much here in Germany.

Look on ebay.co.uk .

I've had two, 150/9 and 210/9, used both. Both are somewhat flary, benefit from lens hoods. FWIW, I retired my 210, now use a 210/7.7 Beryl S (dagor type) because it is as sharp from f/16 down and gives better contrast.

[Ian Greenhalgh]

They almost never appear on ebay.co.uk, not seen one for sale in over a year, if I had I'd have bought it as I collect Hexanons.