PDA

View Full Version : Which Lenses would you buy for 12x20



Steve Beyer
2-Apr-2006, 20:40
I am interested in a 210, 550, 1100 for a 12x20 that I am about to purchase. I would only be able to afford 2 of these 3 lenses to start. I am having a hard time deciding so I would like your input. Which would you go with?

John Kasaian
2-Apr-2006, 21:16
If you have the bellows for it a 24" RD Artar (600mm) would be a good choice. My 12x20 Folmer Schwing dosen't have the bellows for it so I use a 450 Nikor M and a 19" Goerz Dagor----yes, similar focal lengths but each lens has an entirely different 'feel' and both cover 12x20 with more than enough wiggle room for pc.

I could be talked out of my 24" RD Artar barrel lens if you're interested ;-)

Michael Kadillak
2-Apr-2006, 21:57
I would purchase one lens to start with 12x20. The Nikkor 450M. The main reason for this lens is that it is about as long as you can still reach the aperture control to watch the ground glass while you are stopping down to check DOF. There is a lot of glass to evaluate and nothing is more frustrating than finding less than optimal DOF or some other less than desirable condition somewhere in your image area. Second reason is that it covers the format nicely and is a very high quality multi coated lens. For 12x20 I consider this lens to be standard issue.

I find that 300mm is nearly to "wide" for my taste let along 210mm.

A 42" (1100mm lens) is a lot of bellows racked out and requires a field assistant (if you are fortunate enough to find one) to adjust the aperture ring on command while you are evaluating the ground glass.

I can't wait for the TMY to arrive in the larger ULF sizes. This is going to be a very marvelous spring and summer for all of us!

Cheers

Ole Tjugen
2-Apr-2006, 23:28
A 210mm for 12x20" is wide - very, very wide. I have used a 210mm on 30x40cm, or about 12x16", and there are very few lenses that can cover even this. The 210mm Super-Angulon barely covers 30x40cm, and is a big heavy beast. Pre-WWII Angulon covers too, and are much lighter and smaller. But old and uncoated.

There's a partial list of ULF lenses on www.mamutphoto.com, one of the few "dedicated" ULF sites.

Donald Hutton
2-Apr-2006, 23:43
I'd strongly recommend you get just one lens to get you going - a 450mm M Nikkor. I'd suggest that you don't consider a 210mm until you are 100% certain you will need one. The only 210mm that covers is the 210 Super Symmar XL - they retail for around $3000 and on 12x20 you definitely need the CF - another $1000. I've actually just sold mine - I just never used it on 12x20 - even on 11x14 it was an "ultra wide". It's a very specialized lens on 12x20. The 450mm Nikkor is a really nice "medium" wide lens and has plenty of coverage as well. I'd stay away from long lenses initially - you will find the depth of field issues challenging when you start out in 12x20 (I'm presuming you are starting out...). It's tricky enough with a 450...

GPS
3-Apr-2006, 01:57
You cannot go wrong with the 550 mm. Consider it a normal lens for this format. You will find more occasions to take pictures with this focal length than with 1100 mm (which is not bad at all either).

sanking
3-Apr-2006, 06:17
I also recommend the 450 Nikkor-M as the single most useful lens for 12X20.

In the 210mm range, only the Schneider SSXL will cover 12X20, outside of some very exotic old glass.

In 550-600 mm, my favorite is the 600mm Fujinon-C. The 24" Red Dota Artar would also be a very good lens for this format,.

Forget the 1100 mm unless you have plenty of bellows draws and a very specific need for this lens.

Oren Grad
3-Apr-2006, 06:22
Another moderately-priced lens for 12x20 is the 355 G-Claron.

Scott Davis
3-Apr-2006, 08:04
If you can get your hands on one, the 600 f9 Apo-Germinar is another really good lens for 12x20. Mine is spoken for and not going on the market any time soon :) It is a massive beast - around 4lbs in barrel! If you mount it in a shutter, you lose at least a half stop, so go with a Packard shutter for it - you'll need about a 4" diameter shutter aperture for it.

Michael Mutmansky
3-Apr-2006, 08:34
Steve,

A lot of this will come down to what you want/need to to with the cameras. If you favor wide angle inagery, then you will probably be best suited with the 550mm and a wider lens, like the 355 G Claron or a less common 305 Computar possibly.

The 210 is a very wide lens, and won't find too much use for most people because it is so wide. it is comparable to about a 52.5 mm lens on 3x5 (4x5 with 1/2" cropped off the top and bottom, 3x5), so if you have used a 55mm grandagon or 58mm SA, you can get a sense for where the 210 will fit, as it will be a little wider. It also won't afford you any movements.

The 550mm XXL simply blows away either the Fuji 600C or 24" Artar. It's a much larger lens than the Fuji, but it affords so much more sharp movement that it really is not even a fair comparison. If I had to travel very light with a 12x20, I'd probably go for the 600C, but otherwise, I think the 550 XXL is absolutely the right lens to use. I wrote a review of this lens that is schedulled for the May/June issue of View Camera Magazine, and there was a review of the 1100mm last fall sometime as well.

Most people seem to presume that everyone who uses a camera like this wants to shoot grand scenics. That is simply not the case, and if you have the interest in extracting details from a larger scene (something I like to do a good bit), the 1100 will do that for you. You need to work with it a certain way, since the front standard is going to be well out of reach from the back, but anyone serious about the use of a focal length like this will work out a method to using it that involves setting up the camera, extending the front standard, and then doing most of the final adjustments with the rear standard where possible. It's more cumbersome, but is definately a viable approach with a lens this long.

Most of the lenses recomended are not purpose-built for shooting 12x20, but they will cover the format. People recommend them because they do cover, and can be made to work with the proper approach (normally, you have to stop fairly far down, and you may not have much, if any movements). That is a fine approach, but the 550XXL lens does give you the opportunity to use a lens that was actually designed for pictorial work with a ULF format, and it opens up shooting opportunities that are simply not available with the other lenses suggested.

---Michael

Christopher Perez
3-Apr-2006, 09:47
If you decide that 600mm or 750mm might work for you, check over on APUG. Kerry Thalmann has several Docter Optic focal lengths for sale. A couple of them are bound to cover 12x20.

If you have a 450 Fuji C f/12.5, it just barely hits the corners of 12x20 at f/45.

I can't imagine a 1000mm lens on that format. 24inch Artar was all my old Folmer and Schwing could handle without "schwinging" in the wind. As it were.

Steve Nieslony
3-Apr-2006, 10:56
355 G- Cloaron

450 Nikkor M

24"/610mm Red Dot Artar

355 has little room for movement, while the 450 has more and the 610 has plenty. I have a 30" RD Artar that I would like to get mounted in a shutter... I just haven't found the need yet.

Steve

Rob Vinnedge
3-Apr-2006, 11:25
Michael,

I'm very happy to hear your opinion of the 550XXL lens. I almost committed to a Fuji 600C but think I will wait until the review. The coverage alone was reason to consider the Schneider for the larger formats, but to have sharpness too - that's great news.

Dean Cookson
3-Apr-2006, 11:41
It's worth mentioning that at the prices listed on Badger's site for both lenses ($1425 for the Fuji and $5495 for the 550XXL) the Scheider is almost 4x as expensive. The price difference represents more than 320 sheets of 12x20 HP5+, which is a lot of film...

sanking
3-Apr-2006, 11:45
"The 550mm XXL simply blows away either the Fuji 600C or 24" Artar. It's a much larger lens than the Fuji, but it affords so much more sharp movement that it really is not even a fair comparison. If I had to travel very light with a 12x20, I'd probably go for the 600C, but otherwise, I think the 550 XXL is absolutely the right lens to use. I wrote a review of this lens that is schedulled for the May/June issue of View Camera Magazine, and there was a review of the 1100mm last fall sometime as well. "

Michael,

I look forward to your review. My iniitial reaction to this lens on readings its specifications was that it was overkill for the 12X20 format since the 600 Fujinon-C and 600 mm process lenses such as the Red Dot Artar give excellent sharpness and quite a bit of movement on 12X20 when stopped down, but of course you do have to stop them down.

BTW, what is the retail price of the 550 XXL, and is it available off-the-shelf or by special order only?

Sandy

Michael Mutmansky
3-Apr-2006, 12:11
Rob and Dean,

The 550XXL is not an inexpensive alternative to a Fuji 600C (which I own and use extensively on my 7x17), so that has to be weighed in a decision like this.

320 sheets of HP5 represents many years of shooting if you are a 25-sheet-per-year shooter. But if you are using the camera seriously, that does not represent that much film at all, and it will enable you to get shots that you couldn't otherwise. Is it a worthwhile tradeoff? In my opinion, it would be.

Sandy,

I don't think it is an off-the-shelf product from anyone. These are very small production lenses, and they will actually engrave the name of the buyer in the lens.

I'm very pleased that Schneider is making lenses specifically for ULF shooters. I think it bodes very well for product availability in the future from them.

---Michael

Dean Cookson
3-Apr-2006, 12:38
Michael,

Don't get me wrong, I'm also very pleased that Schneider is making ULF specific lenses and I'm absolutely certain that there are ULF photographers out there for whom the 550XXL is the right lens. But I'm also quite certain that *my* photography would benefit more from shooting 320 sheets of film than it would from the difference between the Fuji and the Schneider. I just hope they're still making them when the balance tips the other way for me...

Oren Grad
3-Apr-2006, 13:16
BTW, what is the retail price of the 550 XXL, and is it available off-the-shelf or by special order only?

Sandy, Badger is listing it for $5495, and, amazingly, although the 1100 is tagged as special order, the 550 is not. I wonder if that's an oversight...

Steve Beyer
4-Apr-2006, 14:44
Thanks to all for your input. I did not realize that the depth of field was so much more a problem on the larger lenses. I am purchasing a 355 G-Claron on your recommendation and will see where we go from there. Again many thanks for taking the time to respond.

GPS
5-Apr-2006, 05:46
You're very much mistaken if you base your decision on a dof consideration. With this kind of lenses you usualy take pictures at a great distance and there the dof is enough for most of the pictures. Calculate the dof at for ex. the distance of 300 m and you will see that for yourself. And very often you take pictures at even a greater distance. I cannot imagine somebody will go out with 1100mm lens to take pictures of landscape 50 m ahead of him...

Michael Kadillak
5-Apr-2006, 10:06
And just as soon as you think that you will not use a lens for a specific application it will be staring you in the face begging to be photographed.

Case in point. I saw a 300mm lens cover a 12x20 macro shot of a weathered stump on the ground glass about 2 feet from the lens that was simply marvelous.

Cheers!

John D Gerndt
7-Apr-2006, 18:03
This is a very late weigh-in but if cost is an issue (I am Mr. Cheap trying to shoot 12x20 and thus I'm inventive and struggling) a Kodak 21 and 1/4 inch copying lens covers nicely as does their 18 inch wide field copying Ektar. Even a brand spnaking new packard shutter is a cheap add on compared to most of what goes into shooting 12x20 and will allow experiments in barrel lenses.

Good luck!