Are there alternatives for Schneider Super Angulon XL 210mm to cover 11x14"?

[erian]

The title says it all. XL 210mm is the king but what can get close to it with its own compromises of course?

[brighamr]

HGi

i have a Schneider Super Angulon f8 210mm that covers 11x14

[Dan Fromm]

200/6.8 Grandagon-N, claimed coverage 495 mm @ f/22. 5 mm < 210/5.6 SAXL

edited to correct an err0r (210) kindly pointed out by Oren Grad, to whom all credit is due

[Oren Grad]

Dan, just to pick a nit, the Grandagon is 200mm, not 210 - Rodenstock made a point of having its big wides be just a bit wider than Schneider's (115 vs 120, 155 vs 165, and 200 vs 210).

Unfortunately, the 200 Grandagon is more or less unobtainium, turns up *very* uncommonly. The 210 SA is much easier to find.

Both of 'em need a forklift to move, and a very robust front standard with a large opening.

The old 210 Angulon (non-Super) may be a more practical possibility if you don't mind stopping way down and intend to contact print.

[Dan Fromm]

Dan, just to pick a nit, the Grandagon is 200mm, not 210 - Rodenstock made a point of having its big wides be just a bit wider than Schneider's (115 vs 120, 155 vs 165, and 200 vs 210).

Unfortunately, the 200 Grandagon is more or less unobtainium, turns up *very* uncommonly. The 210 SA is much easier to find.

Oren, thanks for the correction. I've edited the original post to remove the error.

There's unobtanium and then there's unobtanium. I wish the OP luck in finding a 200/14 Perigraphe VIa.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

The 210mm f9 Computar just barely covers 11x14 and could be used as a last resort. Its been a while since I have attempted, but as I recall to get it to cover at infinity you need to remove the hood as well as the spacer ring(s) between the element and shutter. I found it was adequately sharp for a contact print and illuminated to the corners at f32 and beyond.

[Bernice Loui]

~210mm Super Angulon

~210mm Super Symmar XL

~200mm Grandagon.

~Then it gets exotic

Others might illuminate 11x14 stopped down, but does not have optical performance designed to cover that film size properly.
11x14 film would be contacted printed? If yes, that reduces the optical performance demands on the optic-lens.


Reminder of wide angle lens difficulty as film format size goes up.


Bernice

[Dan Fromm]

Reminder of wide angle lens difficulty as film format size goes up.

Bernice, they're quite rare, but Berthiot made f/14 Perigraphes in focal lengths up to 800 mm. That's a #14. The 200 I suggested above is a #5.

I have #s 1, 1bis and 2. They give away little to modern extreme wide angle lenses except maximum aperture.

[Greg]

Highly recommend an 8 inch Series VII B f/6.5 TAYLOR-HOBSON WIDE ANGLE ANASTIGMAT. Acquired the optic from a FORUM member and had S K Grimes mount it into a COPAL 3. The f/6.5 aperture is for focusing only. Useable apertures start at f/11 and end at f/64, but the aperture does stop down to an unmarked f/90. I contact print my 11x14s, and for me the optic's sweet f/stop is f/64. The optic more than covers an 11x14 negative, and sharpness is uniform right up to the corners of the negative. I've even been able to raise up the front standard a bit.

[Bernice Loui]

Got to wonder how many of these 800mm f/14 Perigraphes were made.

Once the film size is up to 11x14, they are often contact printed, not projected. This significantly alters the requirements for lenses and what is an acceptable working aperture or f64 being quite reasonable for making contact prints.


Bernice




Bernice, they're quite rare, but Berthiot made f/14 Perigraphes in focal lengths up to 800 mm. That's a #14. The 200 I suggested above is a #5.

I have #s 1, 1bis and 2. They give away little to modern extreme wide angle lenses except maximum aperture.

[Luis-F-S]

Alternatives yes, cheap alternatives no.

[Hugo Zhang]

Protar V 212mm f/18 and Zeiss Dagor 21cm F/9 lenses both cover at f/32.

[Greg]

Just remembered that several years ago sold a Jos. Schneider & Co. Kreuznach Weitwinkel Anastigmat Dasykar f:12.5 F-18cm lens to a forum member.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?136633-FS-18cm-Schneider-Daystar-f-12-5-WA-for-11x14&highlight=dasykar

Quote from that post from VM: "Dasykar f12.5 It was made in 60, 90, 130, 155, 180, 220, 255, 320, 440mm Layout Q7.It covered 90-110° and dated from the earliest production items. Use 180mm for 18x24cm at full aperture, 130mm at small stops. It was for Architecture, Interiors, Panoramas, and photogrammetry and seems to have sold quite well for a small new firm. The example seen was a small lens in a black finished brass barrel mount at No234,76x (c. Sept 1928) and showed the required (unlike) 2 bright and 1 faint reflexions front and rear. Dasykar would be replaced by the Angulon in 1930 approx. It should still be really usable today however. The barrel has a 32mm thread on the rear, to match a Compur 0 flange and the cells have the same thread as a dial set Compur, but the barrel is near 12mm deep while a d/s Compur was nearer 18mm, so there is no real compatibility with the normal Compur, but a wide one might be adapted. In use it gave good contrasty results, with improvement on close down- it might be regarded as f12 to compose and f16 or f22 to shoot, but actually f12 might give very attractive results on some subjects. In comparison the Angulon was to offer more speed and easier focusing. Fig 005 021 Schneider lenses: front (l) Dasykar, and (r) Rapid Aplanat and rear 3 prewar Xenars (f4.5 as (l) 210 and (m)165mm and (r) 75mm at rear. (above) [It was placed side by side with a Ross-Zeiss f12.5/98mm Anastigmat which had very small glasses in comparison: 7.5mm dia for Anastigmat compared with the Dasykar's 12mm. In both these the front cell is of almost infinite focal length and did not throw a visible image, the rear being of about the overall focal length of the combination. The Rodenstock Perigon f12/90mm at No2,369,41x ctd was superficially like the Daystar, but differed in that the front cell seemed to have measurable power, casting an image at about 5x the focus of the rear. The internal glasses were also really much smaller than the Dasykar ones. Thus here are 3 lenses of much the same apparent layout, but with real individuality. It shows the value of having several types to
compare.]"

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. I love obscure old lenses as much as the next photographer, but they're all hard to find and are often expensive. Expensive modern lenses are usually easier to find.

[Greg]

Hmm. I love obscure old lenses as much as the next photographer

It's my belief that there are some rather exotic and rare unbranded lenses out there. Case in point is a photograph of a bank building in our town. Was probably taken around 1900. Print definitely from a LF negative. None of my LF lenses came close to being wide enough to take the same image until I acquired a 11mm IRIX for my FX camera. The IRIX's angle of view is listed as 126 degrees.

[Bill Rolph]

It's my belief that there are some rather exotic and rare unbranded lenses out there. Case in point is a photograph of a bank building in our town. Was probably taken around 1900. Print definitely from a LF negative. None of my LF lenses came close to being wide enough to take the same image until I acquired a 11mm IRIX for my FX camera. The IRIX's angle of view is listed as 126 degrees.

It could have been a hypergon - 135 degree coverage, and created around 1900.

[Greg]

It could have been a hypergon - 135 degree coverage, and created around 1900.

Very well could have been a Hypergon.

Sometime between 1880 and 1900 our town's major employer back then (we were totally a factory town back then) hired a photographer to shoot various buildings (and possible other scenes) in the factory complex. Unfortunately till 2 years ago only one print from the series was known to still exist. It is displayed in our town's Museum. Then another print from the series was purchased off ebay by one of the Museum's members. All I am able to determine is that the glass plate format was 18x22, and that a rather wide angle lens was used that allowed the photographer to raise the front standard quite a bit for one of the two images. Images on both prints are impeccably sharp, even in the corners. Based on using my 5.9” No. 5 Gray's Extreme Angle Periscope on my 11x14, I have come to believe that the photographer could have used a No. 8 10" Gray's Extreme Angle Periscope on his 18x22. The No 8 Gray covers 20x24 and its image Bokeh looks to be identical to my 5.9" lens. To the OP, if you should come across an old very wide angle optic, go for if you possibly can. I took a big chance on acquiring my 5.9" Gray. It was purchased from a seller in the United Kingdom who was not a photographer and could only minimally describe the lens, and the lens was absolutely non-returnable. Good luck.

[miloniro]

Here is an example with a Schneider Angulon 210mm f/6.8 on my 11x14:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/miloniro/48720857433
Was created at f32. The corners may be sharpened by further stopping down and slightly shifting downwards.

[Lachlan 717]

Filters are a pain for the big 210mm’s.

I have 2 Polarisers for my 210mm SA, but have not seen any contrast filters available (127mm).

Would love a deep yellow or orange filter....

[Robert Opheim]

There is a 210mm Super Angulon for sale on E-bay $2,250. My 8x10 doesn't have the movements to use one of these.

[Greg]

Paraphrasing Paul Lipscombe in his book The use of Historic Lenses in Contemporary Photography on pages 63 & 64. Angulons did apparently vary slightly in their construction and quoted coverage over the years they were made, although this is not obvious in optical diagrams of the lens. If one intends to use this lens on an 11x14, Paul recommends that you test it before purchase.