180mm for 4x10?

[Christopher Barrett]

Right now I feel like my 150 is a little wide and the 210 a little long for what I'm shooting with the 4x10. I seem to remember working with a nice Zeiss 180 many years ago (tessar? jena?). Are there any other 180's that cover the format that you guys like?

[Old-N-Feeble]

I'll not chime in other than to state you seem to like a 20-25 percent difference in focal length vs. 50 percent. That can be a LOT of lenses in a kit. OR... are you saying you ONLY want a 180mm lens? That's very limiting, IMHO. A Tessar will likely not cover. A double Gauss or plasmat would do. The diameter of actual image area of 4x10" (3.8 x 9.8) is about 266mm, I think.

[Dan Fromm]

Nominal 4x10's diagonal is approximately 274 mm. A 180 that covers 274 mm covers 75 degrees. Ain't no 75 degree Tessars. Look into late modern plasmat types.

[adelorenzo]

According to the lens comparison charts (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF5x7in.html) on this site the Apo-Sironar 180mm barely covers a 274mm image circle, all other modern lenses fall slightly short. So you'd be looking at some kind of an older lens if there is anything that fits the bill.

[Hugo Zhang]

Chris,

I think you were talking/thinking about that Zeiss Dagor 180 mm f/9 lens. It covers 810 and is hard to find.

Good luck.
Hugo

[Christopher Barrett]

I guess there's no way I'm gonna find a 180 as nice as my 150 or 210. Drag.

[Old-N-Feeble]

I guess I don't understand the problem with not having a 180 when you have perfectly good 150 and 210 lenses. There's only 40 percent difference between 150 and 210. Is there a very specific subject that requires a 180mm lens due to not being able to move the camera?

[Kimberly Anderson]

He wants what he wants...please stop trying to convince him otherwise.

I was looking for a non-existant 180 g-claron a while ago, so I know what he wants. 180 is a *very nice* focal length on a 4x10. And yes, sometimes you can't move the camera.

[Nicolasllasera]

I have heard of the fuji 180mm being able to cover 8x10. So it should cover 4x10. I think its the old one. Ari sold one a while ago I was tempeted to buy.

[Christopher Barrett]

Well, I tend to be a little obsessive with where I place the camera. That probably comes from 20 years of shooting architecture for a living. When all of that was still on 4x5 film, I carried 65, 75, 90, 115, 135, 150, 180, 210 & a 305 .

Old habits....

[Ari]

Fujinon-W 180 f5.6
Get the older version with lettering inside the rim.
It has a 308mm IC, I've used it on 8x10, and stopped down it won't even darken the corners.
Small-ish and very sharp.

[dave_whatever]

Air, how sharp are those old fuji 180s right into the far reaches of the coverage?

[Ari]

Hi Dave,
If you're looking for corner-to-corner sharpness, especially for landscapes, the Fuji may disappoint.
I used it occasionally for portraits, I liked it very much, and it does light up the whole GG. There's a very pleasing look to the older single-coated Fujinons.

[Alan Gales]

There's a very pleasing look to the older single-coated Fujinons.

I agree. I own the old letters on the inside, single coated, 250mm f/6.7 lens.

[Ari]

I agree. I own the old letters on the inside, single coated, 250mm f/6.7 lens.

And they do a good job with colour as well.

[Alan Gales]

And they do a good job with colour as well.

I've only shot 8x10 b&w with mine. I need to do some 4x5 color portraits with it.

[Oren Grad]

There's an early Dagor that I think is somewhere around 180mm equivalent. Apply whatever ideas you have about how much coverage the older Dagors pick up when stopped down.

I'd use a 180mm Apo-Sironar-S myself. But if you need room for movements, I think you're pretty much out of luck when it comes to modern lenses in that FL.

[ic-racer]

I don't know about old Fuji lenses but you are in luck, they made a modern design 180mm that covers 8x10:
125071

[djdister]

Any ideas why a Fujinon-W 180mm lens would turn into a de facto soft focus lens? Here is the lens itself, and a shot taken with it (a 5x7 neg). The degree of out of focus-ness on and around the tree was not intentional. The lens elements seem to be clean and properly seated, so I'm a bit puzzled about the extremely narrow area of focus. Any thoughts?

My lens: 125072 A shot taken with it: 125074

[Colin Graham]

If you don't mind going shutterless, the Series V 8x10 Protar will even cover 5x12. It's roughly 182mm. And it's the size of a bottle cap. It's a bit dim at f18, but overall a great lens.

[Steve Goldstein]

Will a 190mm Wide Field Ektar cover? I think it should, they have an 85degree Image circle IIRC.

[ic-racer]

Any ideas why a Fujinon-W 180mm lens would turn into a de facto soft focus lens? Here is the lens itself, and a shot taken with it (a 5x7 neg). The degree of out of focus-ness on and around the tree was not intentional. The lens elements seem to be clean and properly seated, so I'm a bit puzzled about the extremely narrow area of focus. Any thoughts?

My lens: 125072 A shot taken with it: 125074

That is pretty bad. My first thought is that you have the wrong rear cell, but your picture of the lens looks correct. Maybe a missing lens element. It is odd that the white lettering is gone. Did the lens ever work correctly?

[djdister]

That is pretty bad. My first thought is that you have the wrong rear cell, but your picture of the lens looks correct. Maybe a missing lens element. It is odd that the white lettering is gone. Did the lens ever work correctly?

I bought it used not that long ago, so don't have any history. The first few shots taken with it all have similar out of focus effects (another shot from it is below). The rear element seems to match, but it has no markings on it so I'm not sure it really is matched to the front cell. The shots look like vaseline is smeared on the lens, but the lens is clean. I guess I'll just have to assume the front and rear cells are not a matched pair, and consider that I have an accidental Petzval...

125079 And here is the "rear view" of the lens (still nothing jumps obvious): 125083

[Old-N-Feeble]

Any ideas why a Fujinon-W 180mm lens would turn into a de facto soft focus lens? Here is the lens itself, and a shot taken with it (a 5x7 neg). The degree of out of focus-ness on and around the tree was not intentional. The lens elements seem to be clean and properly seated, so I'm a bit puzzled about the extremely narrow area of focus. Any thoughts?

My lens: 125072 A shot taken with it: 125074

I agree with ic-racer... maybe someone swapped the rear element with a non-matching set.

[dave_whatever]

That is pretty bad. My first thought is that you have the wrong rear cell, but your picture of the lens looks correct. Maybe a missing lens element. It is odd that the white lettering is gone. Did the lens ever work correctly?

I would bet that someone coloured in the white lettering with a marker pen or paint. He problem with having white lettering round the lens, inside the filter ring, is if you're shooting into the sun with a filter (especially uncoated filters) on you can sometimes get a visible reflection of the lettering from the filter and hence ruin your shot. I had this once with a Mamiya 645 45mm lens shooting with a cokin grad. I was temped to fill in the lettering on that lens, or at least cover it with black tape.

[Steve Goldstein]

Perhaps it's entirely the wrong rear cell. What size lenscap does the rear take? It should be 54mm.

It's also possible that someone disassembled the rear cell and put an element in backwards. This would most likely have been the small one that sits closest to the diaphragm. I don't know if reversal is possible with this lens, this is just speculation. The element in question should appear concave.

[Roger Hesketh]

Meyer made a W.A. Aristostigmat that had a focal length of 7 inches.Or perhaps 7 and a bit inches. Also T.T.&H. made a 7 Inch Series VIIA Primoplane, both those lenses would cover with room to spare. Dallmeyer made a 178mm wide angle.

[Doremus Scudder]

The older Fujinon NW 180 purportedly covers a 280mm IC. I don't really know how you would tell it apart from the newer CM-W. Specs from the old website (saved on my computer) are below. Maybe look at Kerry Thalmann's page for more info about determining which lens series is which. Too bad the Fuji A only covers 252mm...

Sorry about no formatting, but you can figure it out.

Series; FL; Aperture; Elements; Groups; Angle of coverage; IC; Shutter, Filter Size; Coating, Printing Location

CM-W 180 5.6 6 5 71 260 C1 67mm EBC Marked on lens barrel.
NW 180 5.6-64 6 6 76 280 C1 67mm EBC Marked on lens barrel.

Best,

Doremus

[ic-racer]

I don't really know how you would tell it apart from the newer CM-W.

Yes, both have writing on the outside of the barrel but the "CM-W" has a yellow "CM" inscribed.
125126

[jesse]

Chris,

I think you were talking/thinking about that Zeiss Dagor 180 mm f/9 lens. It covers 810 and is hard to find.

Good luck.
Hugo

Yes, wide angle Dagor will do, not easy to find one in the market.
My new purchase wide angle Dagor 150/9 is on the way home, it will cover 8x10 with limited movement.

[jesse]

If you don't mind going shutterless, the Series V 8x10 Protar will even cover 5x12. It's roughly 182mm. And it's the size of a bottle cap. It's a bit dim at f18, but overall a great lens.

Totally agreed, what is the image circle about the 182/18 Protar?

[Colin Graham]

Not sure. I know I never taxed it much with 5x12. I believe its coverage is around 110°

[Christopher Barrett]

Man, for the price, I really ought to give the Fuji a try. You guys are saying that the older version with the lettering inside the barrel has a larger IC? Any down side to it? How does the coating compare to the newer one?

CB

[Ari]

Downside is no movements, but I like the look of it with colour, so the coatings are not such an issue for me.
The newer Fujis are very sharp, but I prefer the look of the older version lenses.

[djdister]

Perhaps it's entirely the wrong rear cell. What size lenscap does the rear take? It should be 54mm.

It's also possible that someone disassembled the rear cell and put an element in backwards. This would most likely have been the small one that sits closest to the diaphragm. I don't know if reversal is possible with this lens, this is just speculation. The element in question should appear concave.

Steve,

You hit the nail on the head with your second suggestion. I took the rear cell off, then removed the small inner element (closest to the shutter) and found that it was in backwards. After flipping it around, the bevel edge on the small lens element matched the bevel of the inner retaining ring and now the lens performs normally. I guess the previous owner decided to do some extensive cleaning and put it in wrong.

Thanks!

[StoneNYC]

Rodenstock APO Sironar-S 180mm has a 276 IC

[StoneNYC]

I know this might be still too wide but the Schneider SA 165mm has an IC of 395

[StoneNYC]

Schneider APO Symmar 180mm has an IC of 263

BUT everyone I've ever seen posting always says Schneider gives specifications with a lot of wiggle roll so real world results might have more IC than listed?

Hope those helped.

[scheinfluger_77]

Steve,

You hit the nail on the head with your second suggestion. I took the rear cell off, then removed the small inner element (closest to the shutter) and found that it was in backwards. After flipping it around, the bevel edge on the small lens element matched the bevel of the inner retaining ring and now the lens performs normally. I guess the previous owner decided to do some extensive cleaning and put it in wrong.

Thanks!

Did that do the trick? (I hope because I just purchased a Fujinon-w 180 myself)

[djdister]

Did that do the trick? (I hope because I just purchased a Fujinon-w 180 myself)

Yes I believe it worked. I haven't shot with it yet, but the focus looks much more even on the ground glass than before. Both the front and rear lens cells have smaller glass elements which face the shutter. Each of those small inner elements have one edge with a slight bevel. That bevel edge should match the bevel of the inner retaining ring to work properly.

I doubt your 180mm will have the problem mine did, but you would notice it right off because you will have a hard time focusing on even normal, flat subjects.

[David Karp]

I have an older single coated 180mm f/5.6 Fujinon W. It is plenty sharp across the field.

[Regular Rod]

I bought it used not that long ago, so don't have any history. The first few shots taken with it all have similar out of focus effects (another shot from it is below). The rear element seems to match, but it has no markings on it so I'm not sure it really is matched to the front cell. The shots look like vaseline is smeared on the lens, but the lens is clean. I guess I'll just have to assume the front and rear cells are not a matched pair, and consider that I have an accidental Petzval...

125079 And here is the "rear view" of the lens (still nothing jumps obvious): 125083

Is there a spacer in there? Mine looks to me to be less "tall" but it is a WS.

RR

[Regular Rod]

Steve,

You hit the nail on the head with your second suggestion. I took the rear cell off, then removed the small inner element (closest to the shutter) and found that it was in backwards. After flipping it around, the bevel edge on the small lens element matched the bevel of the inner retaining ring and now the lens performs normally. I guess the previous owner decided to do some extensive cleaning and put it in wrong.

Thanks!

Phew! What a relief. Has it made the total length of the assembled lens a little shorter now?

RR

[Regular Rod]

Man, for the price, I really ought to give the Fuji a try. You guys are saying that the older version with the lettering inside the barrel has a larger IC? Any down side to it? How does the coating compare to the newer one?

CB

I have the FUJINON W S 1:5.6/180 and it covers 8x10 at the smaller f stops with no movements (except maybe a little at the rear), although I mainly use it on whole plate (6½”x8½”) with movements.

http://cdn.ipernity.com/109/15/19/35401519.867729c3.2048.jpg

It has the lettering inside and it is the W S version. It is very sharp and it covers nicely into the corners. Your difficulty will be in finding one of these older lenses. I wouldn't part with mine and I suspect I am not alone!

RR

[Christopher Barrett]

Thanks all! What's the diff between W and W-S? The W's with the interior lettering are indeed scarce on eBay.

[djdister]

Phew! What a relief. Has it made the total length of the assembled lens a little shorter now?

RR

No change in the overall length of the lens - the inner element just flips around within the outer rear cell housing, so no net difference.


Is there a spacer in there? Mine looks to me to be less "tall" but it is a WS.

RR

No, no spacer in there. Mine is a -W not a -WS lens, so that could account for the length difference.