Seeking Advice For 11x14 Lens

[EmoryJustice]

I am moving up to 11x14 and I am looking for a good starter lens that is readily available and not too expensive.

Any suggestions?

Something in the standard focal length range should be a good place for me to start.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Emory

[Luis-F-S]

355 G Claron in Copal 3! Best bang for the buck!

[EmoryJustice]

Thanks Luis, I will check that lens out.

[Tin Can]

Read this

https://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blog?first=84078028

[EmoryJustice]

Thank you, good info there.

[cuypers1807]

It really depends on what you want to shoot. I use a Nikon Nikkor M 450mm f/9 as my modern normal lens.

[Duolab123]

It really depends on what you want to shoot. I use a Nikon Nikkor M 450mm f/9 as my modern normal lens.

I've got one of these too. Great lens, not really hard to find. It's got a modern shutter that's a plus. Budget options are any number of great process lenses with a Packard shutter.

[EmoryJustice]

Thank you


It really depends on what you want to shoot. I use a Nikon Nikkor M 450mm f/9 as my modern normal lens.

[Jody_S]

My first 11x14 lens was a Fujinon-W 300mm f5.6. Cost was the major factor, plus I wanted a modern shutter with flash sync.

[Vaughn]

My first 11x14 lens was a Fujinon-W 300mm f5.6. Cost was the major factor, plus I wanted a modern shutter with flash sync.

Mine does not seem to really cover 11x14 well...but I also have a Fuji W 360mm/6.3 that covers well enough closed down to f22 or smaller aperture. Quite a lot of glass, though.

[diversey]

I use Nikkor M 450mm f/9 and TTH XVa triple convertible.

[Jody_S]

Mine does not seem to really cover 11x14 well....

I have the one with inside lettering, it covers. But it's also an odd filter size that's not in any of the lists.

[Vaughn]

I have the one with inside lettering, it covers. But it's also an odd filter size that's not in any of the lists.

Might be an odd beastie then. I do not believe the 300mm or the 360mm changed design much and kept their same image circles when Fuji Ws went from inside to outside writing. My 300 is outside lettering and the 360 is inside. Fuji gives the W 300mm an image circle of 420 which is the bare minimum for 11x14. This is from Fuji info after the lettering all went to the outside. Focusing near infinity and needing slight tilt, I can get light to the corners on an 11x14, but not sharp. The Fuji W 360mm has a circle of 485mm, and I still have to be careful with movements and try to get to f16 or smaller aperture -- I'm contact printing, so don't mind f64.

The Fuji W 300 and the Fuji A 300 are given the same image circle (420mm). The Fuji A 360 (f10) jumps up to an image circle of 504mm, which should make it a fine 11x14 lens.

[John Layton]

Responding to the OP's request for a not too expensive "starter lens" of appx. normal focal length - something like a 19" Eastman Anastigmat (in barrel), which was my own start with this (11x14) format years ago. Set me back about 150.00 if I remember correctly...with very good coverage and performance.

I then added a 12" Series 3 Dagor (in compound shutter) to the above, a fine performer which addressed my need to add something a bit wider. Again, about 150.00 I think (its been awhile).

As I embraced this format a bit more - I went for an "upgrade" with a like-new condition, latest edition (Kern Swiss) 14" Goerz Blue-Dot Trigor (in Copal #3 shutter). Still mildly wide for 11x14. Astounding optic which I paid dearly for.

Sadly sold the Trigor and currently use a late edition 305mm G-Claron (in Copal 1)...which I find very useful, handy, and high-performing for a number of formats: 4x5 (definite long focus), 5x7 (mildly long focus), 8x10 ("normal"), and 11x14 (wide).

[Vaughn]

I have the 19" and 24" Red Dot Artars (both barrel). Good starter lenses, also. Got them as long lenses for the 8x10, but use them with the 11x14, also. My first 11x14 images were with a loaner, home-made 11x14 with a 355 G-Claron. Pretty sweet.

[Jody_S]

Might be an odd beastie then. I do not believe the 300mm or the 360mm changed design much and kept their same image circles when Fuji Ws went from inside to outside writing. My 300 is outside lettering and the 360 is inside. Fuji gives the W 300mm an image circle of 420 which is the bare minimum for 11x14. This is from Fuji info after the lettering all went to the outside. Focusing near infinity and needing slight tilt, I can get light to the corners on an 11x14, but not sharp. The Fuji W 360mm has a circle of 485mm, and I still have to be careful with movements and try to get to f16 or smaller aperture -- I'm contact printing, so don't mind f64.


The Fuji W 300 and the Fuji A 300 are given the same image circle (420mm). The Fuji A 360 (f10) jumps up to an image circle of 504mm, which should make it a fine 11x14 lens.



I just looked it up and found my lens in a list (http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm). I have the original 300mm with 86mm filter ring, inside writing, in Copal 3s. You are correct, the listed image circle is still 420mm. However the same website has a graph where they list lenses by image circle, the 300WS is listed as 720mm, which is the spec I originally saw when I bought the lens. I only ever used it for a few tabletop shots on 11x14, I never hauled the beast outside or used significant movements. But it had very very wide coverage.



W S 300mm 292.9mm 5.6-90 6/4 80 420 C3s 86mm SINGLE


An apparent early version of the 300mm f5.6 was marked "W S" and has an 86mm filter thread, like the 360mm W S. It also might have been sold with a Copal #3s shutter. The other lens features could possibly be different as well.

[Vaughn]

Oh, yes, for head&shoulder portraits (but a little sharp!) or at tabletop distances, the 300 should cover 11x14 with no problem! Which I will keep in mind if the occasion arises.

I had not heard of the Fuji SW 300/f9 lens...weighs 7 pounds and only 3 made...a rare beastie indeed!

[neil poulsen]

Does anyone know the coverage of a Nikon 450 Q, the single-coated version of the Nikon 450 M? If about the same, then this would be a budget conscious lens for 11x14. (Since a 450 M covers 11x14.)

[MAubrey]

Might be an odd beastie then. I do not believe the 300mm or the 360mm changed design much and kept their same image circles when Fuji Ws went from inside to outside writing. My 300 is outside lettering and the 360 is inside. Fuji gives the W 300mm an image circle of 420 which is the bare minimum for 11x14. This is from Fuji info after the lettering all went to the outside. Focusing near infinity and needing slight tilt, I can get light to the corners on an 11x14, but not sharp. The Fuji W 360mm has a circle of 485mm, and I still have to be careful with movements and try to get to f16 or smaller aperture -- I'm contact printing, so don't mind f64.

The Fuji W 300 and the Fuji A 300 are given the same image circle (420mm). The Fuji A 360 (f10) jumps up to an image circle of 504mm, which should make it a fine 11x14 lens.
For what its worth, the 300mm W with inside lettering may get a listing of 420mm IC, but it also gets a angle of view for coverage 80° vs. the 70° of the 300mm W with writing on the outside ring.

Fuji's literature was really ambiguous about coverage in his the inside ring W series literature. The AoV coverage never matches the IC in mm coverage.


Does anyone know the coverage of a Nikon 450 Q, the single-coated version of the Nikon 450 M? If about the same, then this would be a budget conscious lens for 11x14. (Since a 450 M covers 11x14.)
Everything I've ever seen about it says that the Q is just a single coated version of the same design of the M. Another option is a APO-Ronar 420mm or APO-Ronar 480mm. I picked up the latter a year ago for ~$350.

[Vaughn]

Yes...difficult to tell which is correct ...the 80 degrees or the 420mm image circle. Jody's link suggests that the AoV is incorrect and it is actually 70 degrees. But it does not seem that real solid info/specs abounds. The same happens with the 360mm...versions have significantly different AoV but the same IC. I could be wrong about the IC of the 300mm not changing significantly with a new design...might only apply to the 360mm.

A question arises -- when determining the AoV and IC, are they computed individually? For example, with a lens design that has a focal length and AoV which should generate a specific size IC, can there be some mechanical vinetting happening that reduces the actual IC?

[MAubrey]

Yes...difficult to tell which is correct ...the 80 degrees or the 420mm image circle. Jody's link suggests that the AoV is incorrect and it is actually 70 degrees. But it does not seem that real solid info/specs abounds. The same happens with the 360mm...versions have significantly different AoV but the same IC. I could be wrong about the IC of the 300mm not changing significantly with a new design...might only apply to the 360mm.

A question arises -- when determining the AoV and IC, are they computed individually? For example, with a lens design that has a focal length and AoV which should generate a specific size IC, can there be some mechanical vinetting happening that reduces the actual IC?

Yeah. I've always wondered if they were measured at different f-numbers, but I've never had an inside writing Fujinon W to play with and test.

[barryjyoung]

I was a teacher before I retired in September 2020. That means I had NO money. So I made the best of things. I restored a beat up old Packard shutter and installed it on my 11x14 Korona camera which I repaired heavily and restored. Then I found barrel lenses that were good that I could afford. A Carl Zeiss 300mm f4.5 for wide work with quite a bit of movements, an East German 375mm f9 for normal lens use with some movements, a 19 inch (482mm) f11 Red Dot Artar for long use with absolutely no movements and barely perceptible vignetting. Fairly effective kit for such an inexpensive outfit.

Barry Young
Young Camera Company
youngcameracompany.com