Another 210mm lens for 8x10 thread

[Ari]

A recent conversation with another LF shooter has prompted me to ask the forum about a 210mm lens that covers 8x10 very well and provides good image quality.
My opinions are subjective wrt image quality, take them with a grain of salt.

The 210, when I had one, was my go-to lens for many 8x10 shots; environmental portraits, urban/industrial scenes.
I like the field of view, comparable to a 35mm lens on 35mm format.

So far, I've owned/tried:

Fujinon-W (IC of ~350mm) - image quality not good enough on 8x10, but great 4x5/5x7 lens
Sironar-W (IC of ~350mm) - excellent image quality, but quickly ran out of room
Kowa Graphic (IC of ~380mm) - image quality ok, some room for movements, a decent compromise; very small, which is a plus.

Barring the large, heavy and very expensive 210 XL, Grandagon 200, or Super-Angulon 210, is there anything else you would recommend trying out?

Thanks in advance.

[John Kasaian]

G Claron. When stopped down, there's not a whole lot of wiggle room, but I think you'll find them sharp, light weight, and affordable.

[Ari]

Thanks, John. Not much wiggle room, you're right.

[karl french]

I always go back to the 21cm f6.8 Angulon. I have an example from the 1950's. Coated and in a Compound shutter. It's always in my pack with the Cooke XVa.

[MAubrey]

If you could find one, a regular Angulon 6.8 210 would also do the trick, IC rated at 382, but that's quite conservative. Of course, the issue with angulons is going to be IQ. If the Fujinon isn't good enough, then that may not help you at all...

Maybe a Taylor Hobson Cooke Wide Angle Anastigmat? IC of 350
A Zeiss Protar? IC of 467

[Keith Pitman]

I always go back to the 21cm f6.8 Angulon. I have an example from the 1950's. Coated and in a Compound shutter.

Ditto the Angulon 210. Mine is in a Copal, circa 1965.

[ruilourosa]

hello

i got the older fujinon 210 and its one of the best i own, owed a 210 super symmar hm and it was enormous, quality is on a par (in black and white)

[Ari]

Thanks, everyone; I'd give the Angulon 210 a try, but I'd be quite curious about IQ.
My other two 8x10 lenses are the aforementioned Cooke XVa and 150XL, so the older Angulon would stand out.m Worth a shot, though.
I really like the Fuji 210 on smaller formats, but on 8x10 it seems to lose its qualities; maybe it has a more defined "sweet spot", I don't know.

[Corran]

Kowa Graphic (IC of ~380mm) - image quality ok, some room for movements, a decent compromise; very small, which is a plus.

Just curious, but who said the GK was just "okay" in terms of image quality? I've found mine to be very sharp, especially at typical working apertures (that is to say, I've never shot it wide-open). And yes it's a tiny little lens - the smallest I think I've used on my 8x10.

It's a great lens and compared to a lot of 210mm lenses with large IC can be found very cheaply. I don't think you could go wrong.

I would say though that for me a 210mm is a bit wider than your perceived 35mm on 35mm format. I'd be more inclined to go 240-270 for that in my opinion - I've found recently that I really like the 240/250 focal length. The obvious selection there is a 240mm G-Claron. I've used mine a couple of times and it's very good.

[MAubrey]

Just curious, but who said the GK was just "okay" in terms of image quality? I've found mine to be very sharp, especially at typical working apertures (that is to say, I've never shot it wide-open). And yes it's a tiny little lens - the smallest I think I've used on my 8x10.

It's a great lens and compared to a lot of 210mm lenses with large IC can be found very cheaply. I don't think you could go wrong.

I would say though that for me a 210mm is a bit wider than your perceived 35mm on 35mm format. I'd be more inclined to go 240-270 for that in my opinion - I've found recently that I really like the 240/250 focal length. The obvious selection here is a G-Claron.

35mm is something like a .14 crop of 8x10, yes? That'd put 210 at around similar to 29mm in AoV.

The Fujinon W 250 6.7 might be another nice one with its 400mm IC.

[Ari]

Just curious, but who said the GK was just "okay" in terms of image quality? I've found mine to be very sharp, especially at typical working apertures (that is to say, I've never shot it wide-open). And yes it's a tiny little lens - the smallest I think I've used on my 8x10.

It's a great lens and compared to a lot of 210mm lenses with large IC can be found very cheaply. I don't think you could go wrong.

I would say though that for me a 210mm is a bit wider than your perceived 35mm on 35mm format. I'd be more inclined to go 240-270 for that in my opinion - I've found recently that I really like the 240/250 focal length. The obvious selection there is a 240mm G-Claron. I've used mine a couple of times and it's very good.

Bryan, I did write myself a way out:


My opinions are subjective wrt image quality, take them with a grain of salt.

My copy wasn't that great, might have been a softie, I don't know. Operator error? Probably, at times, but it didn't impress me much.


35mm is something like a .14 crop of 8x10, yes? That'd put 210 at around similar to 29mm in AoV.

The Fujinon W 250 6.7 might be another nice one with its 400mm IC.

Sorry if I got the 35mm equivalent wrong; I like the 210 on 8x10, whether it's equivalent to 29mm or 35mm on a 35mm camera.
The Fuji 250 is a good lens, I've owned several, but it's not what I'm after.

[Corran]

Ah, I didn't realize that you were referring to a lens you used. I wonder...was yours in a Copal #1, and properly put in shutter? I can't remember where I got mine but as you probably know, some of these were pulled from barrels so there's always the nagging problem of shims and cell spacing.

I could send you a full-resolution scan of a negative from my 210mm if you like.

[MAubrey]

Bryan, I did write myself a way out:
Sorry if I got the 35mm equivalent wrong; I like the 210 on 8x10, whether it's equivalent to 29mm or 35mm on a 35mm camera.
The Fuji 250 is a good lens, I've owned several, but it's not what I'm after.

I'm not super sure of the equivalence myself. I was kind of hoping someone might confirm it! Either way, always shoot what you like.

There's also a Wollensak 210mm f/6.8 wide field, too. Don't know the coverage though, but I'd guess it's a dagor-type design, so maybe 380?

[Mark Sawyer]

If you don't mind an extra 5mm, the Ilex Acuton/Caltar Series S 215mm f/4.8 is a wonderful single-coated Plasmat that covers 8x10 and won't break the bank...

[Ari]

Thanks again, gents; Bryan, no need to send a scan, the offer is greatly appreciated.
I'll take your word for it.
You're right about those spacers, they're an annoyance, and seem to lead to a lot of confusion about the IC of the Kowa, Kyvytar and Computar lenses.
Thanks, Mark and MAubrey.

[Kevin Crisp]

My experience with the 210 G Claron on 8X10 was that it did better than barely cover the format when stopped down.

[Greg]

For shooting "urban/industrial scenes" with my 8x10, I use a 180mm f/12.5 Schneider Weitwinkel Anastigmat Dasykar lens.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?126344-Anybody-have-or-heard-of-Schneider-Dasykar-Lenses&highlight=Daystar

It's just a little wider than a 210mm lens. As for movements, I've never ran out of movements with this 180mm optic, in fact I regularly use it on my 11x14 with some movements if needed. I contact print my 8x10 and 11x14 negatives and find the sharpness of the image projected by this optic not to be a problem. Recently sent the lens to SK Grimes to be mounted in a Copal shutter, but they told me that the only way this could be done was to increase the distance between the front and rear groups of elements which might effect the image quality so just use it as a barrel lens. Best thing is that Dasykar lenses are real bargains to be had going for less than (pre-Super) Angulons.

A 220mm (just 10mm longer than a 210mm) Dasykar would allow pretty much unlimited movements on an 8x10, and its purchase price a fraction of a 210mm Angulon.

[angusparker]

I have both the Fujinon-W (old version) and the Computar. One for speed / the other for coverage and light weight. Both are good performers IMHO although I watch out for vignetting with the Fujinon. Interested to hear of all the alternatives - just got the 150SSXL recently as my super-wide 8x10 lens. Looking forward to taking it out.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dodphotography]

I've had a few friends either praise or hate the GK 210... seems to be a wide range in QC between copies. That said, I'd like one. I have the 150 SS XL, a recent acquisition, but had the Nikon 150 SW before... it's a love hate focal length for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg]

According to my Burke & James 1961 catalogue, a 210mm Goerz Dagor (both the f/7.7 and f/6.8 versions) will cover 10x12 inches at f/45. Back in the 1980s, I used a 240mm Double Anastigmat on my 8x10 and never ran out of movements. Golden Dagors can also be considered but they go for premium prices, and if you're not shooting color and only B&W... probably not worth paying more for a "Golden".

[Eric Leppanen]

My post in this thread contains a summary I put together a few years ago of 210mm options for 8x10:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?44442-210-for-8x10

The sharpest option IMO is the Sironar W, but I too found the coverage at times restricting. I initially tried a small lens/big lens dual solution, using a 210 APO Symmar L (barely covers) for backpacking and either a 210 SSXL (light falloff could be bothersome when significant movements are applied) or 200 Grandagon (less falloff but extremely bulky/heavy) for short hikes. I then explored lightweight f/9 solutions for field use, and compared a 210 Graphic Kowa and 210 Computar. I liked the optical performance of the Computar better than the Kowa, and it had plenty of usable coverage if one could tame the extreme amount of light falloff when significant movements are applied (if I had continued using 8x10 format I would have explored finding a center filter for it). The Computar also exhibited more field curvature than the huge, better corrected wide angle designs (SSXL, Grandagon), meaning I potentially had to stop down more to get everything sharp. Still, if I had to pick a universal 210mm 8x10 lens for field use, I'd go with either the Sironar W (if the coverage is adequate) or the Computar as the best blend of performance and size.

[dodphotography]

My post in this thread contains a summary I put together a few years ago of 210mm options for 8x10:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?44442-210-for-8x10

The sharpest option IMO is the Sironar W, but I too found the coverage at times restricting. I initially tried a small lens/big lens dual solution, using a 210 APO Symmar L (barely covers) for backpacking and either a 210 SSXL (light falloff could be bothersome when significant movements are applied) or 200 Grandagon (less falloff but extremely bulky/heavy) for short hikes. I then explored lightweight f/9 solutions for field use, and compared a 210 Graphic Kowa and 210 Computar. I liked the optical performance of the Computar better than the Kowa, and it had plenty of usable coverage if one could tame the extreme amount of light falloff when significant movements are applied (if I had continued using 8x10 format I would have explored finding a center filter for it). The Computar also exhibited more field curvature than the huge, better corrected wide angle designs (SSXL, Grandagon), meaning I potentially had to stop down more to get everything sharp. Still, if I had to pick a universal 210mm 8x10 lens for field use, I'd go with either the Sironar W (if the coverage is adequate) or the Computar as the best blend of performance and size.

The W's fetch a huge price tag these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maris Rusis]

I often chase landscape with a Nikkor-W 210mm f5.6 lens on my Tachihara 8x10. For infinity subjects I can get up to 15mm rise or fall @ f32 without vignetting. No bad for a lens with an official image circle of 295mm @ f22.

[Mark Sampson]

Ari,
What is your end product, and can you describe your workflow?
Having looked at your site a while back, I imagine that you're scanning the negative and making big ink prints. It seems to me that your choice of finished product will have quite an impact on your lens choices. Obviously making contact prints in the standard manner does not require the very highest level of lens performance...although I do love a very sharp lens.
Most of my own personal 8x10 experience has been making contact prints only, for which I found the 10"/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar to be a fine answer. Probably too long for you.
Professionally I used what was in the studio... the wide-angle lens we had (but rarely needed) was a 165/8 Schneider Super-Angulon. A fine lens but wider than you want, not to mention the size and weight.

[Ari]

First-rate answers, gentlemen, thank you.
Eric, I did like the Sironar-W very much, but it seemed to run out of room very quickly; a fine lens, though.

Mark, to answer your question:
The final product is a printed portfolio for prospective commercial clients.
I'm semi-retired from commercial photography, but it may be temporary, so I try to stay sharp, both for future prospects and the few current clients I have.
Yes, scanning and inkjet printing is how I work. I have good lenses, a good scanner (older model Creo), and a good printer.
I'm currently in between 8x10 cameras, and expect to return to the format by spring, if not earlier. Getting by with a 4x5 and RZ67.
So this thread is me musing in my spare time, and also updating previous threads on the same subject to see if there are any new answers.

I'm enjoying using sharp, modern glass, and the workflow I've chosen kind of demands modern lenses. Contact printing is definitely not an option any longer.
The Cooke (300mm) and 150XL do a great job much of the time, but a 210 that would fit in with those other two lenses would be a welcome addition.

[William Whitaker]

Contact printing is definitely not an option any longer.

Why?

[Ari]

Why?

Between work, family and work, and work and family, I'm tapped out for time. :)
Also, I don't have the space, nor the inclination.
What I'm now able to do in Lightroom is very similar to what I used to with wet printing, except I can now do it better and with much more precision, and with far less set-up/tear-down time (ditto the scanner and printer).

[Leszek Vogt]

Not sure if this one was mentioned with 295mm circle at inf at F22: Caltar HR 210mm f/5.6 lens on a Copal No. 1

Les

[Armin Seeholzer]

I'm voting for the 210mm Konica GRII much room for shift and tilt and very sharp only draw back no filter tread and not in a shutter! No problem with Sinar HLV.

[DrTang]

10" WFE? a little longer - but a lot of room and a great lens

[Ari]

Thanks again.
Les, the IC is a little tight for my taste.
Armin, I'd give that Konica a try, but I've heard it won't fit into a shutter directly; is that true? Also, no shutter means I'd have to take out an ND filter if shooting outdoors in daylight.
Dr, I had the 10" WFE, I thought it was a brilliant lens, but yes, longer than what I want.
210s are a problem for 8x10, if you don't want to spend ~$2500 on the solution.

[asf]

There's a nice modern 210 SA on eBay now for under $1900, an earlier one for around $1500 which is still nice

I'm using a computar, nice and small and good enough but would rather have a SA or Grandagon in the end

[dodphotography]

There's a nice modern 210 SA on eBay now for under $1900, an earlier one for around $1500 which is still nice

I'm using a computar, nice and small and good enough but would rather have a SA or Grandagon in the end

Is that market value? It's so hard using eBay as a gauge, Japanese sellers tend to start at a pretty high number.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[asf]

No idea but it seems fair

easy enough to do a sold items search to see but I can't imagine too many of these trade hands

I used to have the 150 and 210 SSXL, very sharp and small for what they are but fall off was often an issue
Now I use a 155 Grandagon and am keeping an eye out for a decent deal on a 200 or 210 equiv (I'd prefer the 200 Grandagon but they are really hard to find and the ones that do come up are pricey)

[Ari]

Thanks, Adam; those prices seem reasonable; if I had the money, I'd get the 210XL. If I needed a 210 urgently, I'd get the later-version SA from eBay.
I've not seen much fall-off with my own 150XL, or on 4x5, the 72XL, so I'm a fan of the XL lenses.

[asf]

The SA XL and SS XL are different designs

the SS XL has more falloff, caused problems with colors when large shifts were used

I had the center filters for these lenses and used them for commercial work but I never liked using CFs

[Ari]

Yes, that's good to point out here, but I just meant I was a fan of the "XL" lenses ever since they were introduced.
Larger coverage, lighter weight and good sharpness despite some minor problems.
The fall-off is there, but it's not heavy and thus never bothered me; it was never so bad that a digital centre filter couldn't correct it.

[Professional]

I am also a fan of SA XL lenses, i have 72mm which i hope it will make me happy later, but i was planning or eye-ed on 90 SA XL but it is discontinued, i couldn't find it as brand new anywhere, so if i will go for 90mm now then i will forget about XL and i will go with f4.5 version instead, but not sure which sharpest best f4.5 90mm version out there as used ofcourse..

Also, for 210mm i wasn't look at XL version, in fact i look at Symmar-L version, but sounds Schneider and Rodenstock traditional lenses are all or almost out of production now, wish if i know where i can get them brand new as last stored stock if possible, i really think about 210mm lens now before 90mm and also before 150mm which i have but want to change/replace it, so if you can find anywhere about 210mm brand new for 4x5 not SS XL please give me the link.

[Lachlan 717]

There's a nice modern 210 SA on eBay now for under $1900, an earlier one for around $1500 which

Fungus in the newer one.

[asf]

Huh, I see that in the description now but didn't in the photos

Also the older one from Korea says mold

Oh well




Fungus in the newer one.

[asf]

Not so hard to find an exc condition 90XL which will produce the same results as a new one would have
KEH often has them

I use the 90XL for the extra coverage it gives on 5x7 but the green stripe Rodenstock 90/4.5 is IMO the "best" quality for 4x5

I have had every XL lens made, SS and SA, the only ones I didn't find excellent were the 58 SA XL (I had 2 bad copies bought new) and the 80 SS XL (decent)
I had one of the first 110XL's when they came out, it was good but developed the haze, Schneider replaced it


I am also a fan of SA XL lenses, i have 72mm which i hope it will make me happy later, but i was planning or eye-ed on 90 SA XL but it is discontinued, i couldn't find it as brand new anywhere, so if i will go for 90mm now then i will forget about XL and i will go with f4.5 version instead, but not sure which sharpest best f4.5 90mm version out there as used ofcourse..

Also, for 210mm i wasn't look at XL version, in fact i look at Symmar-L version, but sounds Schneider and Rodenstock traditional lenses are all or almost out of production now, wish if i know where i can get them brand new as last stored stock if possible, i really think about 210mm lens now before 90mm and also before 150mm which i have but want to change/replace it, so if you can find anywhere about 210mm brand new for 4x5 not SS XL please give me the link.

[Professional]

Not so hard to find an exc condition 90XL which will produce the same results as a new one would have
KEH often has them

I use the 90XL for the extra coverage it gives on 5x7 but the green stripe Rodenstock 90/4.5 is IMO the "best" quality for 4x5

I have had every XL lens made, SS and SA, the only ones I didn't find excellent were the 58 SA XL (I had 2 bad copies bought new) and the 80 SS XL (decent)
I had one of the first 110XL's when they came out, it was good but developed the haze, Schneider replaced it

Ok, then i have to find that green stripe Rodenstock 90/4.5, i was looking for that 90XL for coverage, but i think i will just choose wider open over coverage, and because that 90mm/f4.5 was so much expensive maybe more than 90XL itself so i couldn't afford it before when it was in stock, now i can go for used one and call it a day, i found once that 90XL but somewhere i read that it isn't the best option there so i changed my mind.

[Pete Oakley]

I have a PPE 210 (Pilkington, Perkin, Elmer) that is pin sharp. I've used it on 5x7 but only looked through it on the 8x10 back, but there appears to be plenty of coverage. I use it with my Sinar Copal shutter as it's in barrel. Dirt cheap (the seller thought that it was an enlarging lens, and as we all know, nobody uses enlargers today). Anybody else seen one of these, forgot to say that it's multi coated.

[ic-racer]

A
Fujinon-W (IC of ~350mm) - image quality not good enough on 8x10, but great 4x5/5x7 lens

For the same size enlargement, the 8x10 negative will have twice the resolution. Maybe you are indicating that the image circle outside 5x7" is poor. In that case, maybe you don't have the correct 80 degree lens, or you have a dud.

[Ari]

For the same size enlargement, the 8x10 negative will have twice the resolution. Maybe you are indicating that the image circle outside 5x7" is poor. In that case, maybe you don't have the correct 80 degree lens, or you have a dud.

Maybe it bears clarification. The Fuji 210 may have a large enough image circle for 8x10, but that doesn't make it an 8x10 lens.
Yes, image quality outside the 5x7 area was noticeably softer and of lower contrast.
I don't have the Fuji any longer, that was a few 210s ago.
I don't think it was a dud since it was great on 4x5, very sharp and great contrast, in both colour and B&W.

[Greg]

Maybe it bears clarification. The Fuji 210 may have a large enough image circle for 8x10, but that doesn't make it an 8x10 lens.
Yes, image quality outside the 5x7 area was noticeably softer and of lower contrast.
I don't have the Fuji any longer, that was a few 210s ago.
I don't think it was a dud since it was great on 4x5, very sharp and great contrast, in both colour and B&W.

The Fuji 250 SFS is much the same... it actually covers 11x14 with movements but even stopped all the way down to f/90, the image quality outside of the central 4x5 area progressively just gets worse.

[ic-racer]

That is what I meant. The 80 degree version is the 8x10 lens.

[Ari]

That is what I meant. The 80 degree version is the 8x10 lens.

Yes, I've owned the 80˚ version several times, it has lettering on the inside of the barrel.

[jesse]

Rodenstock Apo Sironar 210mm f5.6 (same as later Sironar W)
159387

[angusparker]

[QUOTE=dodphotography;1369143]I've had a few friends either praise or hate the GK 210... seems to be a wide range in QC between copies. That said, I'd like one. I have the 150 SS XL, a recent acquisition, but had the Nikon 150 SW before... it's a love hate focal length for me.


Too funny, I feel the same way about the 150mm FL on 8x10 or its equivalent in 4x5 - sometimes wonderful results, sometimes a waste of time and weight.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[asf]

Rodenstock Apo Sironar 210mm f5.6 (same as later Sironar W)
159387

I had this one, excellent but always ran out of coverage on 810