210mm lens for 8x10?

[Natenaaron]

I have always scratched my head when looking at lens charts. I read that the angle of coverage for an 8x10 is 350 on one place, and 420 on another place. All I know is my 210 caltar iin does not but I really like the perspective it gives. All I have now for my 8x10 is a 300mm and want something wider.

Is there a list somewhere, that people trust, which might give me my options?

Or maybe someone has a 210 that covers 8x10 that they really like and could recommend?

[Keith Pitman]

Did you try this?

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html

[Bob Salomon]

210 Apo Sironar W more then covers 810 with movements, the 210 Apo Sironar S is much smaller and fully covers but won’t allow much movement.

[Greg]

210mm Fujinon W f/5.6 Fuji says covers 352mm at f/22, I agree, if not more
210mm G-Claron Schneider says covers 260mm at f/22, mine covers a lot more than that, 8x10 with some movements
210mm f/5.6 Nikkor W Nikkor says 295mm at f/22, mine covers 8x10 but just barely
Personally acquired my 8x10 lenses with 5-10 day trial periods, then went and shot with them on my 11x14 usually at f/45.

[Greg]

Forgot to mention a 200mm f/6.5 TAYLOR-HOBSON Cooke Series VIIB WIDE ANGLE ANASTIGMAT. Not a physically large lens, but it covers 11x14 at f/64 with some movements possible. Mine is in a Copal #3. It's f/6.5 aperture is for focusing only, f/11 is really the largest aperture to shoot with.

[David Schaller]

My older Convertible Symmar 210/370 covers, although I haven’t pushed the movements. I also use a 240 G Claron that covers with limited movements.

[mdarnton]

I have always scratched my head when looking at lens charts. I read that the angle of coverage for an 8x10 is 350 on one place, and 420 on another place.

You could start by understanding the terminology and knowing that 350 and 420 aren't "angles of coverage". 420 degree angle equals a full turn and a quarter. That's wide and then some.

[Armin Seeholzer]

My Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm covers also with ease, but has no shutter but I use it in front of the Sinar shutter!

[Vaughn]

My 210mm for 8x10 has been a Wolly Graphic Raptar Wide Field lens (f/6.8). Tons of movement on 8x10. Small. A barrel lens that some folks have mounted in shutters.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?123854-210mm-(8-1-4-quot-)-f6-8-Wide-Field-Raptar-Lens

[Drew Wiley]

Kowa Graphic or identical Computar 210/9 in Copal 3s shutter. Scarce and pricey.

[Oslolens]

The 210mm Nikkor-W came with different filter sizes, both in Copal #1, mine is the biggest and has 77mm filter, and when compared with a Symmar-S, I like Nikkor-W corners much better just by looking at the ground glass. Avoid the 67mm version for 8x10".

Big Wehman, Toyo 5x7" and a small Chamonix

[Greg]

Had both and sold the Symmar-S. You are right, even in the corners of the whole plate format, the Nikkor-W outperformed the Symmar-S... not by much but there was a distinct difference. I'm sure the difference was more with the 8x10 format

[C. D. Keth]

I have a dagor type g-claron I got very recently that I like a lot. It doesn’t allow a lot of room for movements but enough for usual landscape stuff, enough for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Two23]

I recently bought a Fuji 210mm f5.6 (inside writing) and so far have been happy with it on Kodak 2D 8x10. It does cover and gives some movement. They seem to be commonly available from Japan.


Kent in SD

[Luis-F-S]

6.5” WA Dagor wider than 210 but it more than covers.

[Natenaaron]

Did you try this?

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html

I had not seen that

[Natenaaron]

Thanks folks. I will look into them

[Oslolens]

I had not seen thatThe numbers are misleading. Only conclusion is to buy a 200 Grandagon, 210 Sironar-W or Super-Angulon XL, while you have gotten tips on several small, useful lenses that may or may not suit your needs.

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[C. D. Keth]

Oslolens is right. The charts on the main site are helpful but not 100% of the story. Many lenses change coverage as one stops down. My g-claron is like that. If you look at it on those charts you’d never think it would be useful for 8x10. Other lenses have different versions with different coverage.

The only way to really figure it out and not stick yourself buying a very large, very expensive lens is to consult multiple sources of information. Check those charts. Search this site. Google it to consult other fora and resources. Put it all together to make your decision.

I narrowed my choice down to the 210mm g-claron and the older fujinon-w 210mm f5.6 w/printing inside the rim. That last detail on the Fuji-w make all the difference. I went to those two because they are small, inexpensive, and give me enough movements for my usage. I ended up finding a nice dagor type g-claron on this site and that made up my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luis-F-S]

Great, I've got a 210 Golden Dagor and a 210 G-Claron as well. Plasmat type, I've got G-C Dagor types in 150, 240, 270 and 305. Also have Golden Dagors in 6", 8 1/4, 9 1/2", and 12". Never saw a need for the 10 3/4 and now with the 270, really no need. The G-C's were very well priced, a couple of them I had to mount (screw into) in shutters and order the correct aperture scale. Typically use the Dagors on 8x10, really love the 6 1/2" WA Dagor for the format. Luis

[Bob Salomon]

Oslolens is right. The charts on the main site are helpful but not 100% of the story. Many lenses change coverage as one stops down. My g-claron is like that. If you look at it on those charts you’d never think it would be useful for 8x10. Other lenses have different versions with different coverage.

The only way to really figure it out and not stick yourself buying a very large, very expensive lens is to consult multiple sources of information. Check those charts. Search this site. Google it to consult other fora and resources. Put it all together to make your decision.

I narrowed my choice down to the 210mm g-claron and the older fujinon-w 210mm f6.7 w/printing inside the rim and a 58mm filter thread. Those last details on the Fuji-w make all the difference. I went to those two because they are small, inexpensive, and give me enough movements for my usage. I ended up finding a nice dagor type g-claron on this site and that made up my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rodenstock, for instance, gives the coverage at the diffraction limited stop and that is stopped down.

[Drew Wiley]

The Fuji 250/6.7 works well for 8x10, but that's obviously a different niche than a 210. It's more complex than head-on image circle, especially if tangential performance with tilts etc is involved. Then there's falloff issues. Maybe that's why I play chicken and avoid anything wider than 240/250.

[Tim V]

My dagor type G-Claron 210mm is great and at f45 allows for a good 1.5” of rise (landscape) before I start to worry about corners. Great lens, tiny and cheap!

[Corran]

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?144247-210mm-for-8x10-quot

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?135924-Another-210mm-lens-for-8x10-thread

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?153997-Wide-angle-lenses-for-8x10

[Michael Kadillak]

The Computar 210mm as well as some Kowa 210mm's (which I have) cover 8x10 very nicely but command a market price that can break the budget at times. Sometimes stepping up slightly to a 240mm (for which there are more viable options and for which real life coverage for 8x10 with real life movements is improved) at a more reasonable cost and a willingness to take a step back in the field is a very manageable alternative. In the insatiable desire to balance cost, coverage, performance, as well as size/weight of optics we as photographers fortunately have a number of options to consider as there is no "perfect" set of solutions within a subset that also has to incorporate the cost of sheet film. I contend that a wee bit of compromise at times is not a bad thing.

[Peter De Smidt]

I'm with Michael. A 210 on 8x10 sees same field of view as a 105 on 4x5, which isn't all that popular. 90s and 120s predominate in that range on 4x5, with the exception of the 110mm Super Symmar Aspheric. A 240 on 8x10 equals a 120 on 4x5, one of my favorite 4x5 focal lengths.

The great thing about 210s, is that there are so many of them out there. If you have one, or if you're getting one for 4x5, and you plan on also shooting 8x10, then a large coverage 210 makes a lot of sense. If, on the other hand, you're just getting a good lens for 8x10, 240/250 gives you a lot of options that have plenty of coverage.

Plus, some 240s covert into 450s on 8x10 by removing the front lens cell, another terrific focal length for the format.