Head and Shoulder Portrait Lens for 11x14 Camera

[diversey]

Which lens is ideal for head and shoulder portrait using a 11x14 Camera? Thanks!

[Hugo Zhang]

You probably need a 24 inch lens. 19 inch lens is good for half or whole body.

[Two23]

You probably need a 24 inch lens. 19 inch lens is good for half or whole body.


That could get expensive.



Kent in SD

[Vaughn]

That could get expensive. Kent in SD

Ideals are always expensive. One thing to consider is if the 11x14 has the bellows draw for the ideal portrait lens and a head & shoulder image. Isn't that getting close to a 1:1 image on the ground glass?

Other threads seem to indicate that people are using anything from 14" to 24" lenses for head&shoulder on 11x14. A 3/4 portrait with an old ~500mm lens worked nicely for me, but that is as close as I have gotten.

[Andrew Plume]

To me it depends on 'the look' that you're after

If the background will be rendered out of focus or verging that way, then it will (almost certainly) be expensive. If not (as much), well the cheapest route would probably be with un-shuttered barrel lenses. I bought a six element French casket set for around £300 last year, all of the elements cover 11 x 14 and if it was me, I'd start out with those. I also have a 19" f8 Dallmeyer which also does the job

These lenses are out there, but it just depends on the look that you're after

Good luck and regards

Andrew

[Tin Can]

Kinda depends on look, era, what one likes

so many are now acclimated to cell phone selfies that expectations may vary, big noses are big

I prefer 11X14" film in studio with vignetting, so coverage of full film is not a priority

some examples from google here

1890 film portraits (https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS850US850&biw=1536&bih=760&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TFXNXa6KLMGKtQWQyrPIBQ&q=1890+film+portraits&oq=1890+film+portraits&gs_l=img.3...71601.79888..89265...1.0..0.69.195.3......0....1..gws-wiz-img.Xq-BMeGPbRs&ved=0ahUKEwiu4MeW5unlAhVBRa0KHRDlDFkQ4dUDCAc&uact=5)

[diversey]

I have a 24 in APO Artar barrel lens (not red dot) and will give it a try. Does anyone have a photo taken by this lens?


You probably need a 24 inch lens. 19 inch lens is good for half or whole body.

[diversey]

I like this half body phot using a 19" lens!


Ideals are always expensive. One thing to consider is if the 11x14 has the bellows draw for the ideal portrait lens and a head & shoulder image. Isn't that getting close to a 1:1 image on the ground glass?

Other threads seem to indicate that people are using anything from 14" to 24" lenses for head&shoulder on 11x14. A 3/4 portrait with an old ~500mm lens worked nicely for me, but that is as close as I have gotten.

[diversey]

Do you have some photo examples from the lens you use for 11x14 camera? Thanks!


To me it depends on 'the look' that you're after

If the background will be rendered out of focus or verging that way, then it will (almost certainly) be expensive. If not (as much), well the cheapest route would probably be with un-shuttered barrel lenses. I bought a six element French casket set for around £300 last year, all of the elements cover 11 x 14 and if it was me, I'd start out with those. I also have a 19" f8 Dallmeyer which also does the job

These lenses are out there, but it just depends on the look that you're after

Good luck and regards

Andrew

[diversey]

I like those 1980 film portraits! What lens did they use?


Kinda depends on look, era, what one likes

so many are now acclimated to cell phone selfies that expectations may vary, big noses are big

I prefer 11X14" film in studio with vignetting, so coverage of full film is not a priority

some examples from google here

1890 film portraits (https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS850US850&biw=1536&bih=760&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=TFXNXa6KLMGKtQWQyrPIBQ&q=1890+film+portraits&oq=1890+film+portraits&gs_l=img.3...71601.79888..89265...1.0..0.69.195.3......0....1..gws-wiz-img.Xq-BMeGPbRs&ved=0ahUKEwiu4MeW5unlAhVBRa0KHRDlDFkQ4dUDCAc&uact=5)

[Pere Casals]

I like those 1980 film portraits! What lens did they use?

1890, not 1980 :)

[Andrew Plume]

Do you have some photo examples from the lens you use for 11x14 camera? Thanks!

Thanks, grateful

Nothing as yet available, sorry

regards

Andrew

[Tin Can]

David, shot on my Deardorff SC11, 11X14 film with Nikon 610 mm f9

Cannot recall shooting aperture, no PS, scanned on V700 so image area shown is about 8X10

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48240767486_4bf54522d1_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2guSxus)flickr2019-07-09-0002 (https://flic.kr/p/2guSxus) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[diversey]

A serious mistake, :o


1890, not 1980 :)

[diversey]

Nice shot! How many lights did you use?

[QUOTE=Tin Can;1524543]David, shot on my Deardorff SC11, 11X14 film with Nikon 610 mm f9

Cannot recall shooting aperture, no PS, scanned on V700 so image area shown is about 8X10

[MAubrey]

The thing about head & shoulders is that many shorter lenses with smaller image circles will now cover the film format at that magnification. If you want something with a large aperture, a 360mm or even 300mm f/4.5 tessar would do the trick nicely. I've also used a APO-Ronar 480mm f/9 that's worked well--nothing scanned though.

Of course the question then is: what kind of compression do you want in your subjects features?

[Tin Can]

2 softboxes with grids

Setting up for another next week, it will not be posted here




Nice shot! How many lights did you use?

[QUOTE=Tin Can;1524543]David, shot on my Deardorff SC11, 11X14 film with Nikon 610 mm f9

Cannot recall shooting aperture, no PS, scanned on V700 so image area shown is about 8X10

[Tin Can]

I use the Ronar 480 also

I do need to try my two 300mm f4.5 Wollensak back to back, one is SF and the other normal, but each uses a different flange which is slowing me down

But the shorter lenses put my huge SC11 too close to the subject






The thing about head & shoulders is that many shorter lenses with smaller image circles will now cover the film format at that magnification. If you want something with a large aperture, a 360mm or even 300mm f/4.5 tessar would do the trick nicely. I've also used a APO-Ronar 480mm f/9 that's worked well--nothing scanned though.

Of course the question then is: what kind of compression do you want in your subjects features?

[Pere Casals]

I like the portrait's depth, impressive... big format is big format...

[diversey]

Just spent $20 and bought a pair of used lights with two 2' square soft boxes last weekend. I will give them a try.



2 softboxes with grids

Setting up for another next week, it will not be posted here



[QUOTE=diversey;1524569]Nice shot! How many lights did you use?

[diversey]

I always thought 360mm and 300mm lenses are for 8x10.


The thing about head & shoulders is that many shorter lenses with smaller image circles will now cover the film format at that magnification. If you want something with a large aperture, a 360mm or even 300mm f/4.5 tessar would do the trick nicely. I've also used a APO-Ronar 480mm f/9 that's worked well--nothing scanned though.

Of course the question then is: what kind of compression do you want in your subjects features?

[Pere Casals]

I always thought 360mm and 300mm lenses are for 8x10.

Yousuf Karsh made most of his 8x10 portraiture with a 360mm, the Commercial Ektar 14".

___

A cheap and nice ULF choice found in shutter is a Symmar 360mm convertible to 620mm f/12, you would have two focals.

[MAubrey]

I always thought 360mm and 300mm lenses are for 8x10.

Yeah, that's because they don't work on larger formats at infinity. But you're not shooting at infinity. You're shooting at nearly 1:1 magnification, so the image circle is no longer the limiting factor.

[Jim Galli]

There's a 14X17 Versar on Ebay just now. I have no connection with the seller. That would be an 18" f6 Rapid Rectilinear. I would consider it a good choice. A Voigtlaender Euryscop Series IV #6 would be a fine choice also.

[Hugo Zhang]

Jim,

What lens did you use for your brother's 11x14 head shot? I still remember that picture.

[leondf]

Here's a self portrait using 11x14 x-ray film and a 480mm apo-ronar.197431

[Vaughn]

How about a Turner Reich for 11x14...a 12/21/28? One might not have enough bellows for a head and shoulders with the 28" element, but the 21" might just be the ticket. Known to be slightly soft when using only one element, that might be helpful with a portrait. I used the 28" element on a Kodak 2D to photograph a lunar eclipse. On my Zone VI 8x10, the 28" element has my standard on the last teeth of the rails to focus at infinity.

My Chamonix 11x14 might be able handle the 28" element for a head&shoulder, but I think it has only 33.5 inches (850mm) of bellows. I have a 24" Red Dot Artar that probably would work well...maybe a bit on the sharp side, though!

[Jim Galli]

Thanks Hugo, it was a 22" Voigtlaender Petzval (http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/JohnColeS.jpg). Still one of my favorites.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/JohnColeS.jpg

[diversey]

Nice shot!


Here's a self portrait using 11x14 x-ray film and a 480mm apo-ronar.197431

[diversey]

Does the Turner Reich lens have focus shift?


How about a Turner Reich for 11x14...a 12/21/28? One might not have enough bellows for a head and shoulders with the 28" element, but the 21" might just be the ticket. Known to be slightly soft when using only one element, that might be helpful with a portrait. I used the 28" element on a Kodak 2D to photograph a lunar eclipse. On my Zone VI 8x10, the 28" element has my standard on the last teeth of the rails to focus at infinity.

My Chamonix 11x14 might be able handle the 28" element for a head&shoulder, but I think it has only 33.5 inches (850mm) of bellows. I have a 24" Red Dot Artar that probably would work well...maybe a bit on the sharp side, though!

[diversey]

Nice shot!


Thanks Hugo, it was a 22" Voigtlaender Petzval (http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/JohnColeS.jpg). Still one of my favorites.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/JohnColeS.jpg

[leondf]

Nice shot!

Thanks. I need a new model. Comparing my photo with the other two here, mine is lacking the delicate tonal range of the others. I intend to buy some regular film and compare with the x-ray film. There are also specular highlights that could be eliminated with a polarizing filter, another issue to add to the list. Here's one of my son197491 Again, 11x14 x-ray film. 480mm apo-ronar.

[Vaughn]

Does the Turner Reich lens have focus shift?

I do not know. For sharper images, a yellow filter is recommended when using one element by itself to correct for the blue light not being focused properly.

[Hugo Zhang]

You actually can use single element of Cooke convertible lens for 11x14 head and shoulder. I have tried the rear element for some head shots. Not bad at all.

[Jim Galli]

You actually can use single element of Cooke convertible lens for 11x14 head and shoulder. I have tried the rear element for some head shots. Not bad at all.

And for that matter; Convertible Symmar's, Protar VII's, Convertible Wollensak lenses, and a host of others too. But, you'll need to work out of doors in good light. Focus with lenses darker than f5 indoors is not fun.

[Tin Can]

Becoming impossible for me


And for that matter; Convertible Symmar's, Protar VII's, Convertible Wollensak lenses, and a host of others too. But, you'll need to work out of doors in good light. Focus with lenses darker than f5 indoors is not fun.

[diversey]

Yes, I can. Thanks!


You actually can use single element of Cooke convertible lens for 11x14 head and shoulder. I have tried the rear element for some head shots. Not bad at all.

[diversey]

Nice too! It is very contrasty.


Thanks. I need a new model. Comparing my photo with the other two here, mine is lacking the delicate tonal range of the others. I intend to buy some regular film and compare with the x-ray film. There are also specular highlights that could be eliminated with a polarizing filter, another issue to add to the list. Here's one of my son197491 Again, 11x14 x-ray film. 480mm apo-ronar.

[diversey]

Glad to know! Thanks!


I do not know. For sharper images, a yellow filter is recommended when using one element by itself to correct for the blue light not being focused properly.