Options for 190mm- 210mm wide lenses that cover 8x10 WIDE OPEN

[wuckyboy]

Hi everyone - This is my first post on the forum so I just want to say thank you in advance for your input and information!

I'm looking to add a wide angle lens to my 8x10 kit that is usable wide open at its fastest possible aperture. I'm going to be shooting a lot of available light environmental portraits both indoors and outdoors so I'm looking for a fast lens from 190mm to 210mm that casts a large enough image circle so the corners of the 8x0 frame are useable and not blacked out and don't look like mashed potatoes haha. I'm OK with a bit of distortion or a bit of dimming but nothing extreme.

I've been doing a lot of digging and I'm finding that most image circle data is referenced at f22, so I'm looking for people who have experience shooting these 190mm - 210mm lenses wide open

Many thanks for the guidance!! It's very very appreciated!

[Roger Thoms]

Here a link to a recent thread specifically addressing 210mm that you may find helpful. https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?144247-210mm-for-8x10-quot/page11

Otherwise the widest I’ve shoot on 810 is 240mm so I'm note much help.

Roger

[wuckyboy]

Thank you Roger! I've actually read over that thread a few times before during my search. There is some good stuff in there!

I should add that I am looking for lenses that have a fastest possible aperture in the F4.5 - F6.7(ish) range.

To add, I will most often be shooting with these lenses on-axis with minimal movements.

In short I'm looking for a fast wide angle that I can shoot wide open and get good results consistently.

[interneg]

You're better off accepting that f16-f22 are the apertures you should be using, then things are much less of a headache - coming in with a 35mm mentality will do nothing other than frustrate you & waste film. Realistically you probably will want either an Apo-Sironar W 210mm or a Super Symmar XL 210mm, if you really need f5.6. Both are large & seriously expensive. There are other options - 210mm Angulon & Super Angulons or 200mm Grandagon-N which are either bigger and slower or need stopped down for optimal performance. Pretty much everything else modern-ish that covers in those focal lengths only just does so & only when well stopped down.

[Mark Sawyer]

If you're contact printing, most any lens that covers will be good. If you're enlarging, you'll probably be pickier:

210mm f/6.8 Goerz Dagor (get a later coated one)
215mm f/4.8 Ilex Acuton (a Plasmat, probably the fastest)
215mm f/4.8 Caltar S (same as above)
190mm f/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar
210mm f/5.6 Fujinon W
210mm f/5.6 Rodenstock Apo Sironar
210mm f/5.6 Schneider Apo Symmar
210mm f/6.3 Computar Symmetrigon (if you can find one)
210mm f/6.5 Cooke VIIb (if you can find one)
210mm f/6.8 Schneider Angulon
210mm f/8 Schneider Super Angulon ($$$)

Probably some others I'm forgetting...

[Bob Salomon]

...”There are other options - 210mm Angulon & Super Angulons or 200mm Grandagon-N which are either bigger and slower or need stopped down for optimal performance. Pretty much everything else modern-ish that covers in those focal lengths only just does so & only when well stopped down”.

And none are 5.6 lenses anyway.

[wuckyboy]

Hi Mark! - Thanks for that info. Do you know if these actually cover 8x10 @ their fastest possible aperture?:

210mm f/6.8 Goerz Dagor
215mm f/4.8 Ilex Acuton
215mm f/4.8 Caltar S
190mm f/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar
210mm f/5.6 Fujinon W
210mm f/5.6 Schneider Apo Symmar
210mm f/6.3 Computar Symmetrigon
210mm f/6.8 Schneider Angulon

I've been searching for a Wide Field Ektar for EVER and haven't been able to find one that was in great condition. (other than the $$$$ ones in HK)

[rdeloe]

How to calculate the size of the image circle at various magnifications has come up before: https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?59354-Formula-for-Image-Circle-Size-in-Relation-to-Magnification-Bellows-Extension I believe that conversation didn't accommodate aperture (but surely someone knows how to do that too).

Honestly, your best bet is probably just to buy and try. The Fujinon W 180/5.6 is rated by Fuji as a 280mm image circle at f/22, covering 6.5x8.5. The Fujinon W 210/5.6 is rated as 300mm image circle at f/22 (so covering 8x10). The 210/5.6 is a very nice lens. I have one. It's not very expensive. I can't promise it's sharp as a tack at f/5.6, but I I made a test shot at f/8 and was very impressed.

[Vaughn]

"210mm f/6.3 Computar Symmetrigon (if you can find one)"

I have one -- probably will not satisfy the coverage requirements of the OP...even closed down significantly.

[Alan9940]

If memory serves, the 190mm f/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar just covers 8x10 at f/22 with an image circle of about 308mm. According to this publication I found: https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00346/00346.pdf this lens is good for 8x10 without using swings. Since I usually use mine at f/32 or f/45 and contact print, I've never noticed any appreciable darkening around the edges/corners or any lack of sharpness. Getting into the super-wides for 8x10 generally requires a good back (weight of lens) and a hefty bank account.

[Dan Fromm]

OP, since you're going to shoot environmental portraits you'll be working somewhat closeup. Lenses' circles covered with good enough image quality at the edge are measured at infinity. Lenses that won't quite cover 8x10 at infinity will probably work for you.

Since you're going to be shooting environmental portraits, is what's going to be in the corners of the frame that important?

If you need it all, the lens for you is a Schneider 210/5.6 Super Symmar Aspheric HL, which Schneider claims covers 357 mm wide open. Dig deep ...

[MAubrey]

OP, since you're going to shoot environmental portraits you'll be working somewhat closeup. Lenses' circles covered with good enough image quality at the edge are measured at infinity. Lenses that won't quite cover 8x10 at infinity will probably work for you.

Since you're going to be shooting environmental portraits, is what's going to be in the corners of the frame that important?
Not the least because if shooting wide open, the environment in the corners is still likely to be out of focus anyway.

[Bernice Loui]

There are two 200mm wide angles lenses that were produced with the aperture requested by OP that will produce reasonable images at full aperature:

*200mm f6.8 Rodenstock Grandagon (GOOD lens, use it decades ago).
http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/largeformat_en.html#table1

*210mm f5.6 Schneider Super Symmar XL.
https://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=169&IID=1837

Both covers 8x10 at full aperture with good performance. Both are going to be difficult o find and expen_$$$$_ive when found for sale.

Step down to f8 brings in a few other options like the 210mm f8 Super Angulon which might meet the request of OP.
Another possible solution is to accept a taking aperture of f16 and smaller.

This does not resolve the related problems of camera alignment-precision, ability for the given 8x10 camera to use a lens of this focal lenght, film in holder flatness, and size-weight of this lens-camera combination.

All these problem go away with ease by stepping down one film format size, 5x7 or 13x18cm.

It would be worth knowing what specific kind of images OP intends to produce as 8x10 might not be the ideal image making tool for the images to be produced.


Bernice

[Mark Sawyer]

If memory serves, the 190mm f/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar just covers 8x10 at f/22 with an image circle of about 308mm. According to this publication I found: https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00346/00346.pdf this lens is good for 8x10 without using swings. Since I usually use mine at f/32 or f/45 and contact print, I've never noticed any appreciable darkening around the edges/corners or any lack of sharpness. Getting into the super-wides for 8x10 generally requires a good back (weight of lens) and a hefty bank account.

I bought that very catalog from Pacific Rim some time ago! It doesn't say anything about "just covers 8x10 at f/22 with an image circle of about 308mm", but does say it covers 8x10 without movements. I just checked Michael Gudzinowicz's specs for LF lenses (https://graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html), and he gives a 318mm image circle, which would more than cover 8x10, which needs about 300mm. Manufacturers are usually pretty conservative with their coverage figures. I've used mine for landscape on 8x10 and had no issues, though I had it closed down.

[jnantz]

Jason's site has a little of what you are looking for : http://motamedi.info/speed.htm
If you search the google with speed 8inch or 9inch or 210 mm lenses for 8x10 you might find some more..

good luck !
John

ps I don't know if they cover, but you might also think about looking at old tessars one might cover,
and the out of focus area is not very harsh.

[Bernice Loui]

Confirmed, used the 190mm Wide Field Ektar on 8x10, it does cover with good results at f22, at infinity. Wide open for 8x10, not so good.


Bernice



I bought that very catalog from Pacific Rim some time ago! It doesn't say anything about "just covers 8x10 at f/22 with an image circle of about 308mm", but does say it covers 8x10 without movements. I just checked Michael Gudzinowicz's specs for LF lenses (https://graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html), and he gives a 318mm image circle, which would more than cover 8x10, which needs about 300mm. Manufacturers are usually pretty conservative with their coverage figures. I've used mine for landscape on 8x10 and had no issues, though I had it closed down.

[Mark Sawyer]

Hi Mark! - Thanks for that info. Do you know if these actually cover 8x10 @ their fastest possible aperture?:

210mm f/6.8 Goerz Dagor
215mm f/4.8 Ilex Acuton
215mm f/4.8 Caltar S
190mm f/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar
210mm f/5.6 Fujinon W
210mm f/5.6 Schneider Apo Symmar
210mm f/6.3 Computar Symmetrigon
210mm f/6.8 Schneider Angulon

I've been searching for a Wide Field Ektar for EVER and haven't been able to find one that was in great condition. (other than the $$$$ ones in HK)

Those will all cover wide open. I think your best bet is the Acuton/Caltar S, which is the fastest, very sharp, definitely covers 8x10 (it's still my favorite in this range), and is surprisingly cheap! It's the sleeper few know about.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Thanks for the reference John, but nothing I looked at would cover 8x10. I was looking for much smaller coverage.

I heard said that among lenses there are three characteristics--fast, wide, cheap--you get to pick two. Adding in sharpness might complicate things, but the idea is that you are not going to get fast and wide without lots of money. At 210mm open wide and sharp you are going to need modern wide angle lens, the Rodenstock Grandagon and Schneider Super Symmar XL mentioned by Bernice and others are the best of the bunch, but will cost thousands of dollars. If you can go to f8, the Fujinon-SW or Super Angulon might save you $1000. The 210/5.6 Sironar-W (mentioned previously by Mark as the Apo-Sironar) also might be worth looking into. It is modern and intended for 8x10. I have found that the 150/5.6 Sironar-W looks good on 5x7 wide open. Again, it won't come cheap, but might be a bit cheaper than the others.

[Mark Sampson]

For environmental portraits, it might be better to accept a smaller f/stop and (gasp) add some lighting.
See the work of Arnold Newman (although he mostly used 4x5).
There are lots of inexpensive strobe outfits out there, both moonlights and pack/head setups. Hot lights are generally even cheaper. Plus they can be useful for other projects.
And when you're shooting 8x10, the added bulk and weight is less of a factor.

[Vaughn]

I made a series of enviromental portraits of my boys -- they got good at holding still for up to 2 minutes, tho usually 30 seconds is where I tried to keep it. YMMD.

A short exposure and a long one...4x10 and 8x10 (2 minute exposure)

[Alan9940]

I bought that very catalog from Pacific Rim some time ago! It doesn't say anything about "just covers 8x10 at f/22 with an image circle of about 308mm", but does say it covers 8x10 without movements. I just checked Michael Gudzinowicz's specs for LF lenses (https://graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html), and he gives a 318mm image circle, which would more than cover 8x10, which needs about 300mm. Manufacturers are usually pretty conservative with their coverage figures. I've used mine for landscape on 8x10 and had no issues, though I had it closed down.

I didn't say that the Pacific Rim catalog gave any reference as to image circle. I provided that link, if the OP was interested. That said, 318mm does cover 8x10, but with minimal, if any, movements. I, too, have used mine for landscape photography for several years and I've never been disappointed with the resulting images.

[John Kasaian]

I do seem to recollect seeing a nice 8x10 contact print taken with a 120 Nikkor f/8 SW somewhere on the internet.
The widest lens I've used on my 8x10 was a 159mm Wollensak Velostigmat "yellow dot" f/12.5 but they did make a f/9.5 version IIRC.

[Mark Sawyer]

The widest lens I've used on my 8x10 was a 159mm Wollensak Velostigmat "yellow dot" f/12.5 but they did make a f/9.5 version IIRC.

Both the f/9.5 and f/12.5 open to around f/6.5 for composition, but Wollensak apparently felt the wide open performance was lacking. Check yours out and you'll see it opens well beyond the f/12.5 on the scale.

[Ozzz]

Given the wide angle of coverage required and focal length in question, I doubt any of the wide angle lenses mentioned would properly produce a usable image at widest aperture setting. Unless you're ok with severe vignetting or have access to the a centre filter that compensates not only optical fall-off but also mechanical fall-off's.

[Greg]

Presently use a 200mm f/6.5 TAYLOR-HOBSON Cooke Series VIIB WIDE ANGLE ANASTIGMAT. This is my go-to very wide angle lens for my 11x14. Stopped down covers 11x14 with some (all be it rather little) movements. On my 8x10 the image on the GG with the lens wide open looks great, but I have never shot with the lens wide open so not sure how the final contact print image would look like. FYI, acquired the optic in barrel form from a FORUM member, then had SK Grimes mount it into a Copal 3 shutter. To me worth many times the $$ invested in it.

VM: "Series V11b EISTAL f6.5/f11 This was the 'new' Gauss version to overtake the V11 and was f6.5 to focus and f16 or less to shoot. It seems to have been introduced early in the 1920's, certainly by 1924. It was made typically in 63-222mm in 1935, and the shortest was for 6x9cm as on the 'Envoy' camera post WW2 (see B.J.A. 1951, p487 advert.), and this size could have actually been added later than 1935 or been in intermittent supply- it is there in B.J.A. 1928, p606 for example. Series VIIb covers 90°at f16 and 100° at f32 and these apertures were suggested for use over these angles. A lens No12,49x at 4.5in was used on 1/2plate. Normally 6.25in was used for 10x8 and 135mm for 1/1plate. Some were coded ANGLIC, probably in later lists, and it was made coated after WW2 and into the 1950's. It was seen at No 125,08x uncoated 4.18in, and Nos 310,39x in 5.25in; and 382,41x and 459,60x in 4.25in, these being coated lenses. These are fairly common coated ('a hard durable coating') as they were wanted postwar by professionals, and sold well: many are front mounted in Compur shutters, but this may be by repairers, rather than by TTH themselves as there is no mention of this in the advert. (see also Envoy). Results with these today can still be excellent if in good condition as they are sharp and contrasty. They may be the best of the Gauss lenses of this general type. It still featured in the last advert. noted in B.J.A. 1955, p495 as follows:
2.5in 63mm 4.25x3.25in at f16.
This was offered for many years prewar but were not always listed postwar. It was used on the Envoy wide angle camera however. (B.J.A. 1926, p650).
8in 203mm for 12x10 at f/16
8.75in 222mm for 14x11in at f/16"

My 8in covers 11x14 when I stop it down all the way. Plenty good enough for my contact prints.

[wuckyboy]

Thank you all for this wisdom and information! Such a huge help!

I think, for a number of reasons, the Caltar, Acuton, Ilex 215mm f4.8 variants are going to be what I try out first. Lots of people seem to use them on 8x10 (many more for 5x7 clearly).

I'm wondering how much I will have to stop down to actually make the corners of the images usable? I know this has a lot to do with how far away the subject is to the focal plane of the camera.

So lets say: how much will I have to stop down to get usable corners (i know thats subjective) while focused at approximately 15 feet? And then how much stopping down to get usable corners at infinity?

Im really looking forward to trying out this lens. Seems like it might fit the bill.
Thanks again everyone!

[scheinfluger_77]

...The widest lens I've used on my 8x10 was a 159mm Wollensak Velostigmat "yellow dot" f/12.5 but they did make a f/9.5 version IIRC.

There are 2 older uncoated Series III versions, 6.25”, on the auction site that shall not be named. Both in Betax shutter.

If you are set on the 180-210 range the Fujinon W 180/5.6 single coated with lettering in the barrel is supposed to cover 305mm. Don’t know how they are at the edges.

OP, the only way for you to really know if a particular lens works for you; is pick one, buy it, and start testing.

[Mark Sawyer]

Just remember that regarding your mission statement, "shooting a lot of available light environmental portraits both indoors and outdoors", if you're wide open, you're working with very shallow depth of field, indoor available light may mean extended exposures even with a fast lens. Not impossible, but it's a challenge...

But sometimes, ya gotta go for it.