PDA

View Full Version : Choice of 180mm for 8x10



Herb Cunningham
29-Sep-2005, 06:20
I have noticed that my subjects tend to lead more and more to wider lenses for 8x10-deep woods shots, for example. So I am using a 150 or a 240 more and more.

Does anybody have experience with the Rodenstock's apo macro S 180mm f 5.6? Bob salomon says it has "just enough" coverage for infinity. Since it is designed as a macro, the image circle at 1:1 is 415mm, whopping big coverage for 8x10. My small Rodenstock 180 does not have enough coverage for 8x10. I forgot that and ruined a really good shot last month.

I have a Nikon SW 150, which is a really good lens, but it requires a Sherpa to bring it along.

Any lens that has a really small aperature is a real problem for us geezers. My f 12.5 Wollensak I call the Prince of Darkness. They are ok in bright sun, but very difficult in deep shade.

Any other lens choices in this focal length would also be appreciated.

Dan Fromm
29-Sep-2005, 06:46
Herb, a lens that covers 415 mm at 1:1 will cover only 208 mm at infinity. 5x7 with no moves, not 8x10.

Sorry,

Dan

Steve Hamley
29-Sep-2005, 06:48
Herb,

For some reason the 180 mm focal length is particularly sparse in 8x10-covering lenses and unfortunately you won't find a small, light, bright, coated lens in this focal length. If you have to have bright, I'd try the (uncoated) 7" f/6.8 Berlin Dagor and use a good lens shade. If you can stand f/8, a coated 6-1/2" WA Dagor is probably your lens.

The macro won't work; 415 mm at 1:1 equals about 207 mm at infinity. The regular Apo Sironar-S should have more coverage at any given distance.

The typical choices are a 7" f/6.8 Berlin Dagor (tiny, mine seems to cover but it's a "new" lens still being tested) or Series III Dagor, a 190mm WF Ektar (not exactly a lightweight - I'd rather carry the 150 SW), or a 6-1/2" f/8 WA Dagor (also tiny and covers at smaller stops). A Series VII Protar with the 13-3/4" and 11-3/16" cells will give you a 7" f/7 lens, and two 13-3/4 cells will give you an 8" lens.

If you can go 210 mm, you have a lot more choices, 210mm G-Claron f/9, 8-1/4" f/6.8 Dagor, etc.

Steve

Ole Tjugen
29-Sep-2005, 07:00
A Fujinon-W 180mm should just cover. So does a Schneider Angulon 165mm f:6.8, which is one of my most used lenses on 5x7" and 18x24cm (sorry, no 8x10" - yet).

Chauncey Walden
29-Sep-2005, 08:13
Ole, I tested my 165 Angulon against my 159 Wollensak EWA on 8x10 and as a result the Angulon, while very sharp, went into the 5x7 bag and the Wollensak stayed with the 8x10. The Angulon ran out of steam about 3/4 inch (whoops, 18mm) from the corners. YMMV.

Chauncey

Eric Leppanen
29-Sep-2005, 09:08
You could save two thirds of a pound by replacing your SW150 with a used SS150XL f5.6. The SSXL shouldn't need a center filter if you shoot B&W or color neg film. It will run you roughly $400-500 more versus what you could likely get for your SW150 on the used market, though.

N Dhananjay
29-Sep-2005, 09:20
One othe roption is the 183 mm Protar series V. Bags of coverage for 8x10 and very small and light. Unfortunately at f/18 it is a little slow and makes focussing tricky in dim light but if you work outdoors in good light, that should not be a problem. Cheers, DJ

Christopher Perez
29-Sep-2005, 09:24
If you don't mind using really old lenses, try a 183mm Baush and Lomb f/18 Series V Protar in shutter (mine are mounted in Supermatic #0's). They are plenty sharp for many kinds of subject at f/22, f/32 or f/45. There's plenty of room for movements with these lenses.

Additionally, the aforementioned 165mm Angulon f/6.8 are nice too.

Kodak's 190mm WideFieldEktar hits the corners of 8x10.

In modern lenses I think you'd be left to 150SuperSymmar XL (hugely expensive), 150Nikkor SW (hugely heavy), or Schneider's 210mm Super Symmar HM or XL (cost? what matters cost?).

Donald Brewster
29-Sep-2005, 09:26
Take a look at http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenseslist.html

My suggestion would be the 190mm Wide Field Ektar.

Brian Ellis
29-Sep-2005, 09:34
I haven't used the 159mm Wollensak F12.5 but I've owned two of the 9.5 versions and even with my fairly poor vision had no trouble seeing things on a plain 8x10 ground glass. The 9.5s come up on ebay fairly often and sell in the $250-$300 range. Mine were excellent for contact prints, I don't know about enlargements. Wide angle lenses for 8x10 are problematical, once you get shorter than the 210 G Claron they tend to be either very big or very expensive or both. I thought the F9.5 159mm Wollensak was a real bargain with it's good coverage, reasonably bright image on the ground glass, and tiny size, weight, and price. You might also consider the F9 210 G Claron. I've owned two of those also. It's a little longer than what you're looking at but it covers 8x10 when you stop down to F22 and coverage increases with ample room for movements as you stop down further. It's also sharp, small, light, and relatively inexpensive.

Kerry L. Thalmann
29-Sep-2005, 11:37
Herb,

As others have mentioned, there aren't a lot of options in a 180mm wide angle for 8x10. This has always struck me as odd given the popularity, and large number of options, of the 90mm wide angle on 4x5.

Your choices in modern lenses are either shorter (and huge) or longer (and huger). In the older lenses many have tight coverage and/or very slow maximum apertures. I keep hoping that Cooke will introduce an updated version (multicoated, Copal shutter) of their Series VIIb f6.5 Wide Angle Anastigmat series. The old 158mm Series VIIb is one of the best of the older wide angles, but it's hard to find and originally came only in a barrel mount (although I have seen a couple remounted into shutters).

Too bad there was never a 180mm version of the f9 Computar. I use a 150mm f9 Graphic-Kowa as my wide angle of choice on the 4x10 format, but it won't cover 8x10.

Kerry

tim atherton
29-Sep-2005, 11:50
"Too bad there was never a 180mm version of the f9 Computar. I use a 150mm f9 Graphic-Kowa as my wide angle of choice on the 4x10 format, but it won't cover 8x10. "

did you ever try to mix and match the 150mm and 210mm elements...?

There is always the mythical 180mm f9 Carl Zeiss Dagor

Kerry L. Thalmann
29-Sep-2005, 11:59
did you ever try to mix and match the 150mm and 210mm elements...?

Tim,

Not yet. I just recently obtained a 210mm f9 Computar. Prior to that, my only 210mm of this ilk was a Graphic-Kowa. As I posted in The Computar lens and ULF coverage (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/498719.html) thread, the construction of the 210mm of Computar (6/4) is definitely different than the 210mm f9 Graphic-Kowa (6/6). So, I don't think mixing and matching cells with a 210mm (6/6) and 150mm (6/4) Graphic Kowas would work too well. Now that I have f9 Computars in both 150mm (6/4) and 210mm (6/4), I'll have to give it a try.

I'll probably try both permutations, but does anyone have any predictions which combination (210 front + 150 rear, or 150mm front + 210mm rear) will yield the better results?

Kerry

Andrew_3677
30-Sep-2005, 11:25
I have the 180mm f6.8 Carl Zeiss Dagor...i got it thinking it would cover 8x10 but it doesnt by quite a bit unfortunately...still looking for the mythical f9 version.

Kerry L. Thalmann
30-Sep-2005, 11:56
I have the 180mm f6.8 Carl Zeiss Dagor...i got it thinking it would cover 8x10 but it doesnt by quite a bit unfortunately...still looking for the mythical f9 version.

I don't have the lens coss-section in front of me, but I seem to recall the f9 Zeiss-Dagor isn't really a Dagor. I believe it is actually an updated version of the Zeiss Series III Protar. I used to have a little 12.5cm f9 Zeiss Dagor that was a great lens. My sample had been retro-coated and installed in a Copal No. 0 shutter. It didn't quite cover 8x10, but covered 5x7 with room to spare.

Kerry

tim atherton
30-Sep-2005, 12:04
If I recall correctly, there was a Carl Zeiss Jena Dagor 180mm f9 and a Carl Zeiss Jena Protar 180mm f18

Again, from memory, the one version of the former I have seen said "Goerz Dagor,
Carl Zeiss Jena" on it and was mounted (possibly remounted) in a Compur

Kerry L. Thalmann
30-Sep-2005, 12:31
If I recall correctly, there was a Carl Zeiss Jena Dagor 180mm f9 and a Carl Zeiss Jena Protar 180mm f18

Tim,

The f18 version was a Series V Protar. Zeiss made three different wide angle version of the Protar, the f9 Series IIIa, the f12.5 Series IV and the f18 Series V. I don't recall the exact maximum coverage of the Series III and IV, but I believe it was about 97 degrees at "small stops"for the Series and I think 100 degrees at "small stops" for the Series IV. I don't remember exactly what they considered "small stops", but I think it might have been f45 or smaller. The only Series IV Protars I recall seeing have been longer lenses. I know there was one in the 390mm range that covered 12x15 wide open. I seem to also recall there was an f9 Series IIa Protar in the 196mm range that didn't quite cover 11x14. It would offer very generous movements on 8x10. All the Series IIIa and IV Protars I have seen were barrel mounted, uncoated pre-WWII samples. Baush&Lomb continued to offer a couple focal lengths (113mm and 183mm that I know of) after WWII. These were single coated and came in shutters (Compur 0 for the 113mm and Supermatic for the 183mm).

Most of the f9 Zeiss Dagors I've seen over the years (7.5cm, 10cm, 12.5cm, 15cm and 18cm) came in Compur shutters.

Kerry

tim atherton
30-Sep-2005, 13:54
Kerry,

I'm not someone who usually keeps notes on all the lens history stuff... so take this with a pinch of salt.

I seem to remeber an article on Zeiss lenses that said somethignlike after Zeiss bought C.P. Goerz in the 1920's (1926?) they used some of the Dagor designs to replace a number of their existing lens lines, one of these became the f9 Zeiss Dagor a 100 degree coverage lens that replaced the Protar III's in the catalogue

Kerry L. Thalmann
30-Sep-2005, 16:32
I seem to remeber an article on Zeiss lenses that said somethignlike after Zeiss bought C.P. Goerz in the 1920's (1926?) they used some of the Dagor designs to replace a number of their existing lens lines, one of these became the f9 Zeiss Dagor a 100 degree coverage lens that replaced the Protar III's in the catalogue

Yes, the German Goerz was absorbed into the huge Zeiss-Ikon conglomerate in 1926. However, I don't believe Goerz had any f9 wide angle designs. As part of that deal, Zeiss not only bought the rights to the Goerz designs, but also their trade names (including Goerz and Dagor). What I believe happened (and I could be wrong) is that they used the Dagor name on an updated version of their Series IIIa Protar. Perhaps they thought the Dagor name had more prestige than their own Protar trade name. One easy way to settle this would be to look at the lens cross section diagrams. Unfortunately, I don't have those for the f9 Zeiss Dagors.

Of course, prior to this the American divsion of Goerz had split off and become a separate company (C.P. Goerz American Optical). They would later develop their own f8 Wide Angle Dagor - a different design than the f9 Zeiss Dagors.

Kerry

Dan Fromm
30-Sep-2005, 18:53
To add to the confusion, the Vade Mecum, which isn't always right or even clear, says:

"Wide Angle Dagor f9.0 150mm,etc.

This is the Goerz lens in a new label. By this period the covering power of the Dagor was still valuable and it was mostly this slower, wider version that was sold, leaving the Protar to supply the declining market for symmetrical anastigmats. They are engraved only Goerz- Dagor or Dagor and were seen at No2,214,78x (1936) and No2,802,51x (about 1942), the latter being one of a stereo pair of Zeiss Dagors. (They were known as stereo aerial survey lenses). It seems that the external curves of the Dagor and wide angle version are much the same but the wide angle has bigger external glasses even though slower, and smaller internal ones to fit it for wider angle use. Sales included the Kodak wide-angle camera, with Dagor f9/100mm being used for 1/2plate at No2,062,89x."

Muddle on thr0ugh,

John Kasaian
30-Sep-2005, 20:53
If I had the bucks, a 165mm Super Angulon would be the cat's meow. The 159mm Wollensak WA is a fine little lens though---I have one (yellow dot!) and I'm not complaining.

tim atherton
30-Sep-2005, 22:55
I think this is the US Patent for the Goerz wide angle F9 filed by Franz Urban of C.P Goerz Berlin in Dec 1923

http://64.132.7.41/pcgi-bin/patents/us/pdfcache/1641402.pdf

apparently in 1936 the f9 Zeiss Dagor was avaialble in : 7.5cm, 10cm,
12.5cm, 15cm, 18cm, 21cm, 24cm and the 18cm was listed with an aimage circel of 15-1/2 inches at smaller stops. It came in barrel or compur shutter