View Full Version : Wide angle lense for 8 x10

25-Jul-2004, 17:14
Can I get some feedback on choices for a used lense. I am wanting a wide angle somewhere in the 150-180mm range. Need enough coverage for 8 x 10. For color landscape and architecture. Price range $ 300-800

tim atherton
25-Jul-2004, 17:56
Randy, there have been a couple of post on this recently

A few options - 159 Wollensak f12 (or 9.5) - later coated models are fine for colour (never tried an uncoated for colour) allows you some movement

6 1/4" (159mm?) WA Dagor f9

A not pristine 165 Super Angulon f8 - gobs of movement - big and heavy - right at the top end of you price range - even then it will probably have to be a bit battered... (as mine is)

tim atherton
25-Jul-2004, 18:06
woops should be - 6 1/2" WA dagor and Wollensak 159mm f12.5

Here's a few other posts - also do a search for some of the lenses I mentioned (I'm sure others will come up with a few more)








There is also the 190mm Wide Field Ektar - I had one for a short while but hated it - barely covered and found it softish

There is also the legendary 190mm Carl Zeiss Dagor f8 or 9? If you find one of those in a shutter, you've hit the jackpot!

Ralph Barker
25-Jul-2004, 22:35
Another option is to save up and buy a 150mm Schneider Super Symmar XL. It's still a good sized lens (95mm filters), but has the advantage of modern glass in a sharp aspheric design and a modern shutter. Plus, the f/5.6 aperture gives a wonderfully bright image on the GG. Ummmm, yummy. ;-)


tim atherton
25-Jul-2004, 22:49
Hey - that puppy weighs almost as much as my camera! (actually it's rather lighter than my Super Angulon). How's the falloff on it?

If you are going to save up there are also other newer bigger more expensive options (some still made, others not) A (decent) Super Angulon 165mm f8, Nikkor 150mm SW f8, Grandagon 155mm f6.8

Ralph Barker
25-Jul-2004, 23:08
Tim - I haven't felt the need for a center filter with the 150mm SS XL shooting B&W, but I might if I shot color chromes. But, I typically don't use excessive movements, so a good portion of the fall-off may be falling outside the image area.

Here's a scan of a straight 8x10 contact print:


<small>Fog off the coast at Patrick's Point, North Coast, California - HP5+, 150mm Super Symmar</small>

Richard rlin
26-Jul-2004, 06:12
I'd hope and wait for a new Cooke wide angle anastigmat series VIIc 158mm, why carry such a chunk if you'd be served by something maginally heavier than the #1 shutter alone

Ole Tjugen
26-Jul-2004, 07:32
Cheap, light and very little movements: Angulon 165mm/f:6.8 - not "Super".

Steve Hamley
26-Jul-2004, 07:39
Ralph's suggestion is a good one I think. I picked a mint used 150mm SS XL for a kilobuck, just slightly out of Randy's specified range. The lens came just a few days ago, so I haven't had a chance to shoot with it yet. I'll post how it works on color when it stops raining long enough to give it a whirl. It is heavy, but at 760 grams, not exceedingly so for a wide angle 8x10 lens with movements.

The 95mm filters are a pain, and the center filter costs almost as much as I paid for the lens - should you decide to buy one (I won't unless absolutely necessary). The lens caps are also essentially useless becuase of the size and the proximity of the glass to the edge of the cell barrels, and I'd really hesitate to carry this lens in a pack with the OEM caps. New ones are on the way from S. K. Grimes.


John Kasaian
26-Jul-2004, 08:08
I'm pretty fond of the 159mm f9.5 Wollensak, a nice lens and certainly within your price range. While it dosen't offer a lot of movement, it is very small and lightwieght especially when compared to a 165mm Super Angulon. Cheers!

Donald Brewster
26-Jul-2004, 09:22
I'll third the 159mm Wolly. Can't be beat on the price and is small and light. Might be tough for architecture, since not that much movement. If you want movements at that size, the price goes up quite a bit.

tim atherton
26-Jul-2004, 10:00
Of the lenses I've mentioned, I actually have the Wollensak 159mm Anastigmat Extreme WA 12.5 (there are several versions as well as the 9.5 version. I believe the 12.5 has more coverage. And they come in every level from scratched to hell with no shutter, to virtually pristine) and the Super Angluon 165mm f8.

The wolly is the "wollcoated" version (single coated I think) and is very nice. Just doesn't have a huge amount of coverage (maybe 1 1/2" of movement at most) But it's cheap (mine was almost pristine and cost about $130.00) It's also tiny. And depending on the shutter, (mine's a Rapax) you can simply remove the screw that limits the maximum aperture and open it up to at least f9.5. I'd never shoot at that, but it helps for focussing (some have suggested there could be a focus shift after closing down the aperture, but it's never shown itself).

It's pretty sharp (better than a 165 Angulon I tried, especially in the corners) with no noticable flare etc.

The Super Angulon is just big and heavy with tons of image circle - but unless I know I'm going to use it for something specific, it doesn't get carried. It's nice to have it when you need it every now and then, but the Wollensak stays in the camera backpack all the time - I think the lens board weighs more than the lens...

John Kasaian
28-Jul-2004, 13:09

If you can push your envelope a little("long" wise) an economical alternative might be a 210 G Claron. I remember seeing(I think) a few of Jim Galli's archicture shots using a 210 G Claron on an 8x10---very sharp! I know the image circle greatly improves as you stop down G-Clarons(it does on my 240) so it (I'm guessing here---maybe someone who knows better will chime in) should give you plenty more wiggle room than the other wallet friendly alternatives discussed so far. G-Clarons are small, light, and IMHO are still quite reasonable. Jim usually has some on ebay and he has a great reputation.