View Full Version : 210mm or 240mm for Portraits?
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for adding me to your group. I'm new to LF and am wondering about which lens is best for me and my style of shooting. I have a Calumet 4x5 with a 16" (400mm) bellows and a 150 Schneider 4.5 Xenar lens, but I'm looking to add a longer lens for portraits.
I'm considering either a 210mm or a 240mm (I'm assuming 300mm will require more bellows than I have). First of all, can I assume that I have enough bellows length for close ups with either the 210 or 240?
Secondly, for a newcomer to LF, would you recommend that I use a 210 or 240 for portraits? Currently, I'm looking at a 210mm/5.6 Schneider APO Symmar MC in a Copal 1 shutter or a 240mm f/9 Rodenstock Apo-Ronar Lens in Copal 1 Shutter.
I'm just now starting to dig into the wealth of information that this group has generously shared and it's a little overwhelming.
Can a few of you veterans give me some guidance on the 210 vs. 240 choice?
Thanks for sharing your experience.
John
Either would be fine.
I'd try to find an older lens with a shutter with more aperture blades for a rounder aperture.. Thin depth of field will mean the background will be out of focus and you want that that look good too.. The copal-1 isn't bad, but you can do better with a Kodak Ektar Professional, or a Fuji 210/4.5 or 240 in Shannel or Copal-3 shutter. You don't need a super sharp top of the line glass to do nice portraits.
Exploring Large Format
2-Jul-2020, 09:44
Either would be fine.
I'd try to find an older lens with a shutter with more aperture blades for a rounder aperture.. Thin depth of field will mean the background will be out of focus and you want that that look good too.. The copal-1 isn't bad, but you can do better with a Kodak Ektar Professional, or a Fuji 210/4.5 or 240 in Shannel or Copal-3 shutter. You don't need a super sharp top of the line glass to do nice portraits.New to shutter distinctions. I get that there are many shutters preferred over Copal, but are you suggesting a Copal #3 is better than a Copal #1, all things being equal. If so, could you explain?
Thanks much!
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Luis-F-S
2-Jul-2020, 12:03
You should be able to find either in a Copal 1.
I'm with JP on the older lenses.
If you were to get an Apo-HM Symmar /Ronar/ whatever modern lens, your portraits will show every pore, hair & skin imperfection.
If you will be using the lens for portraiture only, you would be well served with something like a 210mm 4.5 Tessar, Ilex Paragon, Wollensak Raptar or Velostigmat...these are generally softer when open, and sharpen up when stopped down.
One plus is that the older shutters have lots of aperture blades, for round aperture, which gives nice OOF rendering.
The corresponding downside is that older shutters need more maintenance.
If you are looking for a general purpose lens, maybe a 210mm f 6.1 Xenar would be a good compromise. (Tessar formula) . Small, uses 46mm filters, in a Copal 1...5 blade shutter.
You will get a lot of differing opinions here, but what you choose should reflect what you want to achieve.
BrianShaw
2-Jul-2020, 13:02
“ Secondly, for a newcomer to LF, would you recommend that I use a 210 or 240 for portraits? ”
That close enough to not matter.
210 or 300. Your 150 will be good for environmental portraiture.
My favorite has become the Kodak Commercial Ektar... but they tend to be on the pricey side.
“ Secondly, for a newcomer to LF, would you recommend that I use a 210 or 240 for portraits? ”
That close enough to not matter.
210 or 300. Your 150 will be good for environmental portraiture.
My favorite has become the Kodak Commercial Ektar... but they tend to be on the pricey side.
Is a 16” (400mm) bellows long enough to use a 300mm?
cuypers1807
2-Jul-2020, 13:29
I use an older 240mm Rodenstock Sironar regularly on my Chamonix 4x5 for portraits.
Alan Gales
2-Jul-2020, 13:40
Like Brian says, 210 and 240 are pretty close. I also favor the Kodak Commercial Ektar but everyone is different.
Read this!
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/portrait-lenses/
Also check out the Image Sharing (LF) and Discussion section on this forum. Study the portraits there to see what you like. Many times the lens the photographer used for the portrait is listed. If you find you are interested in certain lenses then type in that lens on Flickr to see more examples.
Secondly, for a newcomer to LF, would you recommend that I use a 210 or 240 for portraits? Currently, I'm looking at a 210mm/5.6 Schneider APO Symmar MC in a Copal 1 shutter or a 240mm f/9 Rodenstock Apo-Ronar Lens in Copal 1 Shutter.
I don't know either of these lenses specifically, but assuming that both are in good condition, I don't see how you can go wrong with either for portraits. Keep in mind that your first lens is almost never your last lens--if you can get either one for a decent price in good condition, pick one and see what you like. You can always sell it and try something else.
As for a choice between the two focal lengths, I can only offer my own perspective. I only rarely do portraits, but in building my lens kit I opted for a 240mm over a 210mm because it was more clearly distinct, in terms of focal length, from my 150mm lens. I have done a couple of portraits with the 240 (I have the Schneider g-claron), and have been immensely pleased with the results.
Good luck, and have fun with it!
Bruce
BrianShaw
2-Jul-2020, 14:07
Is a 16” (400mm) bellows long enough to use a 300mm?
I use a Cambo SC-2 with normal bellows and a 12-inch Kodak CE for headshot portraits with no trouble at all.
Like Brian says, 210 and 240 are pretty close. I also favor the Kodak Commercial Ektar but everyone is different.
Read this!
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/portrait-lenses/
Also check out the Image Sharing (LF) and Discussion section on this forum. Study the portraits there to see what you like. Many times the lens the photographer used for the portrait is listed. If you find you are interested in certain lenses then type in that lens on Flickr to see more examples.
Thanks for the suggestion, Alan. Can you tell me more about the Kodak Ektar commercial? Can you find it on eBay? There’s a number of different Kodak Ektar’s. What’s the specific focal length and f-stop?
Luis-F-S
2-Jul-2020, 14:14
You should be able to find a 210 Geronar in a modern Copal 1 shutter easily and cheaply. You can also look for a Caltar E which is a Tessar design, again in a modern Copal 1. Don't pay over 2 bills for any of these. You can go from more open to stopped down depending on how sharp you want the image.
Remember that most lenses are better than most photographers!
Good Luck!
Luis
BrianShaw
2-Jul-2020, 14:38
Google... ;)
https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00346/00346.pdf
I use a Cambo SC-2 with normal bellows and a 12-inch Kodak CE for headshot portraits with no trouble at all.
Are you able to get tight close ups? Is it possible that you can post such a picture? If not, no problem. Thanks for weighing in on the issue and giving me your experience.
Alan Gales
2-Jul-2020, 14:39
Thanks for the suggestion, Alan. Can you tell me more about the Kodak Ektar commercial? Can you find it on eBay? There’s a number of different Kodak Ektar’s. What’s the specific focal length and f-stop?
8 1/2" (216mm) f/6.3
10" (254mm) f/6.3
12" (300mm) f/6.3
14" (356mm) f/6.3
https://www.surpluscameragear.com/kodak-commercial-ektar-lenses-free-download/
The Commercial Ektars were the pro lenses. Regular Ektars make great portrait lenses too. I own the 14" Commercial Ektar which is about 356mm. I use it on 8x10 though. The 14" was a favorite of Yousuf Karsh who is one of my favorite portrait photographers.
Yes, you can find both Commercial Ektars and Ektars on eBay. That's where I bought mine.
Drew Wiley
2-Jul-2020, 14:47
I've used both focal lengths. I wouldn't worry about that minor distinction too much. It's more important to home in on a specific kind of lens. Anything in a big no.3 shutter might be unduly heavy for a lighter weight 4x5. But lightweight 240 lenses in no.1 or no.0 shutter are going to be in a smaller f/9 maximum aperture so a little bit dimmer viewing, or perhaps a bit less wide open working aperture. You also might be concerned with the "look" your lens provides. Late plastmat lenses can be extremely sharp and contrasty, but for that very reason can produce a somewhat harsh look in portraiture, or have somewhat distracting harsh background blur. For that reason, my old Schneider Componon S 210/5.6 in a no.1 shutter gave a nice rendering for portraiture than my newer equivalents. Another nice portrait option would be the little Fuji 210L. If your primary application is something like landscape work, however, the Fuji 250/6.7 is a no.1 shutter lens you might want to look at. There will be plenty of other recommendations from others, related to their own idea of pleasing look in a portrait image. I really prefer separate lenses for that sort of thing than the super-hard-sharp ones I use in landscape work. Being large format, you'll still have lots of real estate on the film for high-quality enlargements without worrying about detail loss.
Alan Gales
2-Jul-2020, 14:48
At one time I owned a Caltar 210mm lens like Louis suggested in post #13. It was a rebadged Rodenstock Geronar. It was a great little lens and even folded up into my Crown Graphic. I've even seen them sell for $100 and less.
Ilex Paragons mentioned earlier are also great portrait lenses. They are also inexpensive.
Like Louis says, most lenses are better than most photographers. Get what you can afford and spend your money on film. That's how you get good!
Peter De Smidt
2-Jul-2020, 16:26
210's f/5.6s are very widely available in modern and compact Copal 1 shutters. 240 F/5.6 are much bigger lenses in huge Copal 3 shutters. Alternatively, there are 240mm f/9 lenses, such as a G-claron, Fuji A, Doctor Optic.....They are in number 1 shutters, but they let in less than half the light for focusing. Old lenses in old shutters can be great. I have a boat load of them, but their shutters are often cranky, some requiring special cable releases.....When I shoot with one of the old lenses, I have to spend more time making sure everything on the shutter is correct and check that it's operating ok. That's a pain. The more you have to think about those types of things, the more one's attention is pulled away from the aesthetics of the photo. I'd get a Fuji W 210, a Nikkor 210 W, Schneider Symmar S, or, well I forget what the Rodenstock version was. Sironar N? You should be able to get a very nice example in a properly working Copal shutter for under $300, possibly quite a bit under.
8 1/2" (216mm) f/6.3
10" (254mm) f/6.3
12" (300mm) f/6.3
14" (356mm) f/6.3
https://www.surpluscameragear.com/kodak-commercial-ektar-lenses-free-download/
The Commercial Ektars were the pro lenses. Regular Ektars make great portrait lenses too. I own the 14" Commercial Ektar which is about 356mm. I use it on 8x10 though. The 14" was a favorite of Yousuf Karsh who is one of my favorite portrait photographers.
Yes, you can find both Commercial Ektars and Ektars on eBay. That's where I bought mine.
Karsh is my favorite too. His Hemingway pic is largely responsible for my learning to shoot film.
Martin Aislabie
2-Jul-2020, 20:14
The longer the lens - the more room you need.
This is often very important when shooting portraits - as you often cannot stand far enough back, if you are working inside.
Head shots are rarely a problem but 3/4 length shots can be a problem.
Martin
CatSplat
2-Jul-2020, 21:28
If you want something in the 240-ish range but don't want to deal with a Copal 3, maybe consider the Fujinon 250mm f/6.3 (or the earlier f/6.7 with greater coverage) in a Copal 1.
Mick Fagan
2-Jul-2020, 22:45
I have a Fujinon 210 f/5.6 which is pretty good for portraiture, I also have the Fujinon 250 f/6.3 which is quite better for portraiture; as far as I am concerned that is.
I've had and used various lenses around the 200mm to 215mm length on 4x5' cameras over the last couple of decades. However, after chancing upon a 250mm lens I have hardly used the 210mm lens. I quite specifically used the 250mm lens for a short while to get the feel of it, one day I had a portrait session with time. After using the 210mm for a couple of sheets, I switched to the 250mm for the next two sheets.
The sitter had a definite preference to the 250mm images; so did I. One thing I did do in this session, was to enlarge the image of the head on the ground glass, to approximately the same size. This was a requirement to get the clothing being photographed all in.
The differences are subtle, but there. Pretty much since acquiring the 250mm lens, I've used it exclusively over the 210mm lens.
The bottom line, is that either focal length will give very pleasing results.
The attached image is with my 250mm lens, the garage door behind the subject is about 250mm behind her head. If I had used the 210mm lens, I would have positioned her slightly further away from the garage door to get the same out of focus effect on the background. Essentially, one could get an almost identical image from either focal length, but the look of the 250mm seems to be just ever so slightly better than if shot with the 210mm focal length for my tastes; the f/stop used was f/16½.
Mick.
205395
Alan Gales
3-Jul-2020, 08:02
Karsh is my favorite too. His Hemingway pic is largely responsible for my learning to shoot film.
Yes, great photograph of one of my favorite writers! Great story too!
https://karsh.org/photographs/ernest-hemingway/
mdarnton
3-Jul-2020, 09:26
It doesn't seem to have been mentioned here that many portrait photographers do not like the rendition of all of the modern lenses named, finding the out of focus areas unpleasant relative to the older tessar formula, which is famous for smooth out-of-focus rendering. Examples of tessars are the Commercial Ektar that Karsh used, and the very many f/4.5 old lenses floating around from Wollensak and Ilex.
https://live.staticflickr.com/8735/17384810858_1088058f90_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/sueGAf)
BG (https://flic.kr/p/sueGAf)
by Michael Darnton (https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldarnton/), on Flickr
and an overall creamy smoothness that modern lenses don't have:
https://live.staticflickr.com/3847/14690979160_10ee14c2fd_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ooc7h9)
Eric (https://flic.kr/p/ooc7h9)
by Michael Darnton (https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldarnton/), on Flickr
Peter De Smidt
3-Jul-2020, 09:55
This out-of-focus rendition appears quite good to me:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wnjygw09rm7jf3p/Gouda_1200.jpg?raw=1
Fujinon 210 W @ f/8.
mdarnton
3-Jul-2020, 10:21
To me it looks hard. Same shot two lenses would be interesting.
This out-of-focus rendition appears quite good to me:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wnjygw09rm7jf3p/Gouda_1200.jpg?raw=1
Fujinon 210 W @ f/8.
Is this Fujinon W a wide angle lens? Does this matter at all for shooting portraits?
Bernice Loui
3-Jul-2020, 10:57
The "W" designation is irrelevant for your needs, only spec that is important is specified focal length.
Bernice
Is this Fujinon W a wide angle lens? Does this matter at all for shooting portraits?
Peter De Smidt
3-Jul-2020, 11:00
Hard in what way? I'm not disagreeing, I'm just not sure what you mean. I did also photograph the scene with a Verito, but I won't be able to get to editing that one for awhile.
Tessars have been made in tremendous variations, and they come with different shutters... I've seen some with good out-of-focus rending, but others have quite a bit of squirelliness.
Bernice Loui
3-Jul-2020, 11:47
IMO, Tessar/Plasmat. Dagor and .... ALL must be evaluated individually by the image maker to see if the results meet their image making goals. Some of these view camera lenses have been around for over 100 years with their optical and mechanical condition unknown until individually evaluated-tested.
IMO, it is absurd to judge any lens by it's formulation, reputation and stuff written on the web about any given lens alone as there are very real possible variations to any individual vintage and modern lens in question.
All of this adds much confusion and difficulty for a new to LF image maker with very limited real world-real time experience with all this LF stuff. It is also why the recommendation for those new to LF to get a modern Plasmat in a proven Good-Relaible shutter as a starting point. There are SO many potential variables to add to all
possible confusion. Lenses such as Kodak Ektar (yes, it is one of my all time faves) still have the potential problem of iffy shutters and all that comes with neglected shutters adding to the difficulty of evaluating an individual lens personality as a keeper or passing it on to another home.
Basically, pick a modern 210mm or 240mm f5.6 for now, make portraits and see if the image results meet your image goal needs. If the 210mm or 240mm f5.6 plasmat does NOT meet your image goals, then it is time to consider and decided on why and what could be different to meet your image goal needs.
There is no absolute correct or wrong to this, just meeting your image goal needs.
Bernice
Tessars have been made in tremendous variations, and they come with different shutters... I've seen some with good out-of-focus rending, but others have quite a bit of squirelliness.
Peter De Smidt
3-Jul-2020, 12:11
I agree with Bernice. How a lens is used will also affect it's out-of-focus rendering, which changes with how close one is to the subject, f stop, distance to background, lighting...
I have a really nice 240 Wollensak Raptar, but I don't use it very much, as I don't like the shutter. A Copal shutter has a big slider to open the lens for focusing. It's very easy to tell if the lens is open or not. With the Raptar, you have to use 'T" setting on the shutter. But if the plunger cable of the shutter release goes too far, the shutter will hang up. So I think it is closed when it's not. That kind of thing is a huge pain when photographing people. So I don't use the lens. If I did use it for portraiture, I'd use it with my Sinar shutter to avoid those issues, but that's not a "just getting started" solution.
mdarnton
3-Jul-2020, 12:14
Well, basically I agree with Bernice. . . if you were doing anything but portraits. Everyone has a default, and his is plasmats--there's nothing "neutral" about that recommendation, either.. Mine is anything but plasmats, and the last one of those I bought was when I bought my first Tessar, so there you go. I do agree with Peter, though, and that is that they are all different. And that goes for plasmats, too.
But lens families have commonalities in general that can get you pointed at least in the right direction. Ultimately you have to choose one, and when you said Karsh is your guy, then I think the logical thing to do is start with what he chose as the best lens for what he wanted to see.
I wish people filled out their profiles. For all you know you live next to someone here who would be happy to lend you things to compare so you can see for yourself.
Thanks very much. I am leaning toward the more modern lens.
Just completed my profile. Sorry about that.
Daniel Unkefer
3-Jul-2020, 12:58
The 210mm and 240mm Xenars are lovely lenses if in good condition and very underrated. If you like the "look" of your 150 Xenar they might be great choices............
I think getting the shot is most important
Meaning a sitter won't wait forever
Have everything ready, lights, backdrop, chair. camera, focus almost right tested on a dummy
Test the whole system way before sitter arrives
I talk too much when nervous, as with a sitter
If any element fails your sitter is gone and the capture
shutter must work when you need it
get a shutter you trust
then worry about glass
Bernice Loui
4-Jul-2020, 10:10
Suggestion, place FAR more concern with lighting, pose and being able to capture an expressive moment with your portrait sitter than obsessing over 210mm or 240mm lens and which lens brand, type and all that to purchase.
Think finished print and what that might be.
Bernice
Suggestion, place FAR more concern with lighting, pose and being able to capture an expressive moment with your portrait sitter than obsessing over 210mm or 240mm lens and which lens brand, type and all that to purchase.
Think finished print and what that might be.
Bernice
Good point. I’m trying to focus on all of that.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.