8x10 Lens List

[marcookie]

List of modern lenses
[1] https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html

A useful blog post
[2] https://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blog/2016/11/good-lenses-for-an-8x10-view-camera

Older lens list
[3] https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenseslist.html

Large databases with modern and old lenses
[4] http://www.allenrumme.com/lensdb/DBIntro-1.html
[5] http://lf.animaux.de/lenses
[6] http://www.dioptrique.info/

A personal list for 8x10 up, largely based on Alexander Rutz animaux.de list. You can download the file and explore it as you want. I am adding information as I research it.
[7] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kwN6WTWZjXzWL6rbTQ4Rv2TU5bB8wgB9sqf9U0mTtPQ/edit?usp=sharing

Please let me know for any error or important information that I might be missing. You can add comments directly in the document.

Disclaimer: The data comes without any warranty.

[Dan Fromm]

I use FireFox. Your spreadsheet locks it. Before it locked Firefox moving around in the sheet was slow and difficult. From as much as I could see of the sheet, your list is, like all such lists, incomplete.

As teachers of musical instruments say, "Back to the woodshed."

[Jac@stafford.net]

Works for me in Firefox (Apple OS). It is locked to protect the data.

I downloaded it to Open Office for convenience.

[Hugo Zhang]

No listings of Protar lenses? Also I know Carl Zeiss Dagor f/9 180mm coves 8x10 format.

[Bernice Loui]

Suggest either another list or dividing the lenses by formulation type ie:
List appears to be image circle centric which can be lesser compared to lens personality and formulation.

*Dagor.
*Wide field Dagor.
*Reversed Dagor aka Angulon.
*Protar.
*Wide angle Protar (Protar V).
*Plasmat.
*Wide field Plasmat.
*Dialyte.
*Tessar.
*Heilar.
*Gauss.
*Biogon-Lamegon type.
*Telephoto (reduced bellows draw relative to effective focal length).
*Soft Focus.
*Hypergon.
*Topogon.
*Petzval.
*Landscape.


Bernice

[Jac@stafford.net]

lenses by formulation type

It would be good to add that a column so we could sort on type, coverage, etc.

[klw]

http://lf.animaux.de/lenses

[Bernice Loui]

More would be number of Iris blades and shape due to shutter or barrel, or no iris, or in the case of Imagon disc type and number of disc specific to that lens.


Bernice

[Dan Fromm]

Jac, it still locks my Firefox. I have to close the wretched thing and close my LFPF tab and reload LFPF to be able to use LFPF.

As I said, limited. As far as I can see -- not very -- it includes lenses from Germany, Japan and the US. No UK, no former Soviet Union, no France, no Italy, no Switzerland. It is the nature of these things to be incomplete, but still ...

[marcookie]

Thank you all for the replies and suggestions. I edited the first post: now the document is editable.

I am sorry if this does not work with Firefox... it is also a bit slow on my chrome.

[marcookie]

Dear forum,

we need your help to organize the information on large format lenses.

I put together a Google Sheet document with the information on new and old large format lenses for 8x10 format and up. I chose a cutoff at 305mm diagonal coverage.

I built this document because I found it difficult to find information, especially on the older lenses. Hopefully with the power of internet sharing we can compile a more complete source of information.
You can edit this document and add entries. Please do not modify the order of columns. The primary ordering is focal length, and secondary order is coverage.

8x10 Lens List - Editable (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kwN6WTWZjXzWL6rbTQ4Rv2TU5bB8wgB9sqf9U0mTtPQ/edit?usp=sharing)

8x10 Lens List - Original locked file to preserve data in case something bad happens (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nwqndZJVZ9a0VFTEXcOWG28kLJi448vW6DHy95o_8r0/edit?usp=sharing)


I added a column for lens formulation, but I don't know how to associate them:
*Dagor.
*Wide field Dagor.
*Reversed Dagor aka Angulon.
*Protar.
*Wide angle Protar (Protar V).
*Plasmat.
*Wide field Plasmat.
*Dialyte.
*Tessar.
*Heilar.
*Gauss.
*Biogon-Lamegon type.
*Telephoto (reduced bellows draw relative to effective focal length).
*Soft Focus.
*Hypergon.
*Topogon.
*Petzval.
*Landscape.

Sources:
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenseslist.html
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html
https://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blog/2016/11/good-lenses-for-an-8x10-view-camera
and some bits from other sources or personal information

I added the column... I don't know how to associate them though in most cases. Feel free to edit the Google Sheet, it is open now

[marcookie]

http://lf.animaux.de/lenses

Excellent, really excellent source that I missed. However it is not editable and it is missing most lens weight, which is a very important factor for me.

[neil poulsen]

Two lenses not yet mentioned that are good for 8x10 . . .

610mm Repro Claron f9 mounted in a Universal #5 shutter. (Single coated.) Looks like a symmetric lens. Nice thing about this lens is that it's filter size is 82mm, which is a common size. (Same as most 90mm f5.6 lenses.) Jim Galli has suggested that Repro Clarons have a 50 degree angle of coverage. That would give it an image circle of about 560mm, plenty for 8x10.

The Nikkor M 450mm is a well-known lens that's multi-coated. I have the Nikkor Q 450mm f9 lens that's single-coated. It has a little smaller filter thread of 62mm. (Versus 67mm for the 450mm M.)

[marcookie]

Jac, it still locks my Firefox. I have to close the wretched thing and close my LFPF tab and reload LFPF to be able to use LFPF.

As I said, limited. As far as I can see -- not very -- it includes lenses from Germany, Japan and the US. No UK, no former Soviet Union, no France, no Italy, no Switzerland. It is the nature of these things to be incomplete, but still ...

I added a couple manufactured from Cooke (UK I guess). From this source http://lf.animaux.de/lenses
Please feel free to add more as the file is now editable!

[marcookie]

Two lenses not yet mentioned that are good for 8x10 . . .

610mm Repro Claron f9 mounted in a Universal #5 shutter. (Single coated.) Looks like a symmetric lens. Nice thing about this lens is that it's filter size is 82mm, which is a common size. (Same as most 90mm f5.6 lenses.) Jim Galli has suggested that Repro Clarons have a 50 degree angle of coverage. That would give it an image circle of about 560mm, plenty for 8x10.

The Nikkor M 450mm is a well-known lens that's multi-coated. I have the Nikkor Q 450mm f9 lens that's single-coated. It has a little smaller filter thread of 62mm. (Versus 67mm for the 450mm M.)

I added the repro claron thanks.

Is there a fixed formula to get angle of coverage form image circle?

[Dan Fromm]

I built this document because I found it difficult to find information, especially on the older lenses. Hopefully with the power of internet sharing we can compile a more complete source of information.

Oh, dear. There are many such lists out there. Read this site's FAQs. Plagiarize from Allen Rumme's list at http://www.allenrumme.com/lensdb/DBIntro-1.html The link in the first post in this https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?138978-Where-to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses discussion contains, among other things, links to lens makers' catalogs, collections of lens makers' catalogs, articles on lenses, ... I'm not sure you looked very hard.

[QUOTE]I added a column for lens formulation, but I don't know how to associate them:/[QUOTE] <List of lens names and design types, originally posted by Bernice Loui, follows.>

You don't know enough to do the job. There are sources of information. There are books on the subject. The most accessible is probably Rudolf Kinglake's A history of the photographic lens. It is dated -- he cut off as of the late 1940s -- but will give you a grounding. Obtain a copy and study it.

I'd like to discourage you from this effort. Wikipedia entries have proved many times that pooled ignorance is still ignorance. Until you learn more, you're not going to be able to tell excrement from shoe polish so won't be able to keep the list reasonably error free. And that's assuming that no pranksters add lenses, imaginary or real and deliberately misrepresented, to it and that no well-meaning ignoramuses will inadvertently add misinformation. Misinformation isn't better than none.

[Jim Noel]

Oh, dear. There are many such lists out there. Read this site's FAQs. Plagiarize from Allen Rumme's list at http://www.allenrumme.com/lensdb/DBIntro-1.html The link in the first post in this https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?138978-Where-to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses discussion contains, among other things, links to lens makers' catalogs, collections of lens makers' catalogs, articles on lenses, ... I'm not sure you looked very hard.

[QUOTE]I added a column for lens formulation, but I don't know how to associate them:/[QUOTE] <List of lens names and design types, originally posted by Bernice Loui, follows.>

You don't know enough to do the job. There are sources of information. There are books on the subject. The most accessible is probably Rudolf Kinglake's A history of the photographic lens. It is dated -- he cut off as of the late 1940s -- but will give you a grounding. Obtain a copy and study it.

I'd like to discourage you from this effort. Wikipedia entries have proved many times that pooled ignorance is still ignorance. Until you learn more, you're not going to be able to tell excrement from shoe polish so won't be able to keep the list reasonably error free. And that's assuming that no pranksters add lenses, imaginary or real and deliberately misrepresented, to it and that no well-meaning ignoramuses will inadvertently add misinformation. Misinformation isn't better than none.

X2

[Greg]

I say give marcookie a pat on the back and some encouragement. Need for an all inclusive list is very much out there. Personally have purchased more than a few little know optics from around 1880 to 1930 without the least bit of info on them to guide me. Took a chance on acquiring a 5.9” No. 5 Gray Periscope for my 11x14. Only after testing the lens out, found a vintage ad that told me that it did indeed cover 11x14. A universal table/list for (all) 8x10 lenses seems to me to be the optimal starting point.
kudos to marcookie on this end

[Nodda Duma]

Allen Rumme's list is very comprehensive. However, as a lens designer, I prefer the database at http://www.dioptrique.info/ (I have about 25% of the prescriptions converted to modern Zemax format)

[goamules]

Ha! Gotta agree with Dan, this is a re-do of existing info: do enough research, don't start a new list, ask people to populate it, and don't explain why. This is the information age, but not how most people interpret that. It's not "ask strangers for information, assume it's all correct." It's instead the era of easy research for YOU, the compiler to do, with vetted and peer reviewed sources, and primary sources. Where have you looked? Where have you not? Why not?

[marcookie]

Plagiarize from Allen Rumme's list at...


A list of specs does not have any copyright.

[Dan Fromm]

You don't know what plagiarize means.

[marcookie]

You don't know what plagiarize means.

You are correct... (English is not my native language).

[Bernice Loui]

As previously mentioned there are already a good number of list already on the web detailing LF lenses. There are web pages from companies like Schneider with detailed information about their LF lenses. There are web pages that details specific formulations/prescriptions of numerous lenses like http://www.dioptrique.info/ as previously mentioned.

Question becomes, what is the goal-intent of making another lens list? The title notes lens list for 8x10 which implies lenses that will work for 8x10, except this is not a difficult lens requirement to figure out based in some basic lens information (Specified image circle of 312mm or greater required) look up.

Based on observations on LFF and on the web, there is now a generation and group of LF film folks who are moving into 8x10 film cameras out of curiosity or belief that 8x10 is the ultimate film camera. This is good in ways as it can help preserve the future of LF image making, bad due to the LF starter being caught with the harsh realities of making images using an 8x10 view camera. Today there is SO much LF film camera gear on the used market at remarkable prices trying stuff out is not that difficult. What would be more constructive is for those new to LF to accept and realize there is a very significant learning curve involved and it will take time and making a pile of mistakes and wasting a whole lot of film and more in the learning process.

It is not the camera or related gear that produces an expressive image, it is the ability and creativity of the image maker that has the ability to produce an expressive image. The camera-lens and related gear and materials is merely a means.

For those who are more interested in photographic lens history, get a copy of Rudolf Kingslake's, "A History of the Photographic Lens." This is a GOOD on this topic. Once this knowledge is properly digested and acquired a better and greater understand of the theoretical and historical aspects of photographic lenses can be had. Except that is not nearly enough. To gain real world experience with photographic and related imaging lenses is to use them in real world image making realities for an extended amount of time. Even then, the perceptions of any given individual lens will be biased towards the preferences of the image maker. This is why making recommendations on lenses is difficult and fraught with non-agreement.


Bernice

[marcookie]

As previously mentioned there are already a good number of list already on the web detailing LF lenses. There are web pages from companies like Schneider with detailed information about their LF lenses. There are web pages that details specific formulations/prescriptions of numerous lenses like http://www.dioptrique.info/ as previously mentioned.

Question becomes, what is the goal-intent of making another lens list? The title notes lens list for 8x10 which implies lenses that will work for 8x10, except this is not a difficult lens requirement to figure out based in some basic lens information (Specified image circle of 312mm or greater required) look up.

Based on observations on LFF and on the web, there is now a generation and group of LF film folks who are moving into 8x10 film cameras out of curiosity or belief that 8x10 is the ultimate film camera. This is good in ways as it can help preserve the future of LF image making, bad due to the LF starter being caught with the harsh realities of making images using an 8x10 view camera. Today there is SO much LF film camera gear on the used market at remarkable prices trying stuff out is not that difficult. What would be more constructive is for those new to LF to accept and realize there is a very significant learning curve involved and it will take time and making a pile of mistakes and wasting a whole lot of film and more in the learning process.

It is not the camera or related gear that produces an expressive image, it is the ability and creativity of the image maker that has the ability to produce an expressive image. The camera-lens and related gear and materials is merely a means.

For those who are more interested in photographic lens history, get a copy of Rudolf Kingslake's, "A History of the Photographic Lens." This is a GOOD on this topic. Once this knowledge is properly digested and acquired a better and greater understand of the theoretical and historical aspects of photographic lenses can be had. Except that is not nearly enough. To gain real world experience with photographic and related imaging lenses is to use them in real world image making realities for an extended amount of time. Even then, the perceptions of any given individual lens will be biased towards the preferences of the image maker. This is why making recommendations on lenses is difficult and fraught with non-agreement.


Bernice

Thank you for the analysis. I removed my list and simply added a bullet-point list of lists.

My ultimate goal with this thread was to find lightweight lenses to go out and shoot more.

[Dan Fromm]

My ultimate goal with this thread was to find lightweight lenses to go out and shoot more.

You've been directed to places that will teach you what you want to learn. Take the advice.

Good luck, have fun.

[marcookie]

You've been directed to places that will teach you what you want to learn. Take the advice.

Good luck, have fun.

Fun and frustration with wasted film. Which at the end just increases the fun.

[Bernice Loui]

"Shoot more" GOOD, 8x10 is never lightweight. There is far more to this view camera stuff then just camera and lens. Tripod, light meter, filter set, cable release, dark cloth, carrying case and more. Add to this film holders. Beyond the bulk of 8x10 film holders they weight about 1.5 pounds each for the traditional plastic variety. 10 holders results in 15 pounds or a second camera. Any good stable 8x10 tripod with a good stable tripod head is NOT going to be light weight.

There are small lenses that cover 8x10, their trade off is full aperture and other optical trade offs (modern f5.6 Plasmats) for 8x10 is not going to be small or light weight) . It is not possible to bend the ways of Nature as Nature has created all the rules that lenses and the entire image making system function on.


Bernice





My ultimate goal with this thread was to find lightweight lenses to go out and shoot more.

[angusparker]

My two cents on what 8x10 lenses you might want to get, assuming you want something modern: https://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blog/2016/11/good-lenses-for-an-8x10-view-camera

[marcookie]

My two cents on what 8x10 lenses you might want to get, assuming you want something modern: https://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blog/2016/11/good-lenses-for-an-8x10-view-camera

Excellent I have been visiting your blog post many times.

[angusparker]

Excellent I have been visiting your blog post many times.

Thank you