Portrait lenses

[Califmike33]

I would love to know what all you portrait photographers use on your 4x5, do you use a 210mm ? do you use a 240mm ?. Tell my what particular lens and brand you love for portraits and show me some of you work with that lens, i would love to see it.

[Ulophot]

I have never had anything for portraits but a 210, supplemented about a year ago with a 135. The 4x5 portraits in the Portraits Album on my Flickr page were made with it, which is all except for My Mentor, Dr. Wills, Pierre, My Daughter, and the self-portait, the first two of which are 35, the last three 645.

[Califmike33]

I have never had anything for portraits but a 210, supplemented about a year ago with a 135. The 4x5 portraits in the Portraits Album on my Flickr page were made with it, which is all except for My Mentor, Dr. Wills, Pierre, My Daughter, and the self-portrait, the first two of which are 35, the last three 645.

Nice work Philip, really like the ballerina shots.

[xkaes]

This question has been discussed a lot lately -- so you should search this FORUM. The answer is that everyone has their favorite, and it's a personal decision -- just like what camera, film, developer, paper, etc. to use.

I personally like a 25r0mm unless I need a wider angle.

[BrianShaw]

My two personal favorites for portraiture: Fujinon SF 250 and Kodak Commercial Ektar 12 inch.

Edit: I could post an example of each but they are really lousy scans (probably of proofsheet/prints) and i'd probably be completely embarrassed for the rest of my life if I did. Edit2: Okay, I'll live with the embarrassment... these are really ugly scans but you should get the point. :)

233624

Kodak Commercial Ektar, 12-inch. 4x5 Cambo. Natural light from South-facing window

233625

Fujinon SF 250 (Yellow disk). 4x5 Cambo. Natural light from South-facing window

"Modern" plasmat lenses are much too clinical of a look for me. But if I did, it wouldn't matter whether it was a 210 or 240 as the biggest difference would be a bit of working space between camera and sitter.

[Daniel Unkefer]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52477312100_19187654ca_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nXeWB7)Low Key Portrait Tim Kelly portrait lighting (https://flic.kr/p/2nXeWB7) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

Robert needed a strong "head shot". Low Key Tim Kelly lighting. 4x6 foot Chimera Softbox Broncolor Impact 41 monolight 90 left degrees to the set, lighting everything. A smaller Chimera 3x4 Softbox Impact 41 monolight 45 degrees camera left one stop brighter in closer as a main light. A passive fill panel right, just right out of the frame 4x8 foamcore hinged together. A standard reflector raw hard light camera back left, creating the rimlight from the backline. Dark Grey Muslin behind. A successful head shot low key. 4x5 Sinar Norma, 240mm F9 Norma Apo Ronar gives an almost clinical look. Ilford HP5 D76 1:1 8x10 fibre print on Fortezo #2 silver gelatin paper Dektol dev Omega DD laser aligned 180mm black Rodagon

[Scott Davis]

On 4x5 I've shot a lot of 210 for portraits - mostly a Sinaron 210 f/5.6. Any modern 210 f5.6 plasmat lens will do just fine, regardless of brand. A 10" Kodak Commercial Ektar also makes a very nice option, if your camera has enough bellows to focus it at portrait distance. What camera do you have? That will guide recommendations as much as anything else... well, that and the kind of portraits you want to make. If you want sharp, clear, highly detailed portraits, then one of those aforementioned 210 plasmats in a Copal 1 shutter will do just fine, and work very nicely as a general purpose lens as well. If you want expressive, soft-focus portraits, that is an entirely different animal.

Also, do you have a budget in mind? If you have a limited budget, then a modern lens is your best option. If you have a flexible budget, there are a lot of mid-century lenses (like those Commercial Ektars) that will be great options. If you have a very generous budget, then you can start looking at some more exotic glass like a Cooke Series II in the 8-12" range or a Dallmeyer lens, or one of the 305mm Kodak Portrait lenses.

[xkaes]

You can also make your own -- in any focal lengths you want.

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/softfocus.htm

[Hugo Zhang]

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/portrait-lenses/

[Ulophot]

Nice work Philip, really like the ballerina shots.

Thank you. They are all 35mm of course, made during studio and dress rehearsals.

[Jim Noel]

My two personal favorites for portraiture: Fujinon SF 250 and Kodak Commercial Ektar 12 inch.

Edit: I could post an example of each but they are really lousy scans (probably of proofsheet/prints) and i'd probably be completely embarrassed for the rest of my life if I did. Edit2: Okay, I'll live with the embarrassment... these are really ugly scans but you should get the point. :)

233624

Kodak Commercial Ektar, 12-inch. 4x5 Cambo. Natural light from South-facing window

233625

Fujinon SF 250 (Yellow disk). 4x5 Cambo. Natural light from South-facing window

"Modern" plasmat lenses are much too clinical of a look for me. But if I did, it wouldn't matter whether it was a 210 or 240 as the biggest difference would be a bit of working space between camera and sitter.

I agree with Shawn. Modern lenses produce too much of a cut & paste look. The newest lens i like for 4x5 portraits is an uncoated 12" Velostigmat.

[Bernice Loui]

This article should be used as a guide only, not absolute. Having been and done this same group of lenses discussed in this article, there are agreements and dis-agreements with what was written/shared.

Generally true, modern plasmas work for portraits, Tessar formula lenses Do have smoother into out of focus rendering, Heliar effect is good at full aperture to about f11 where it become most like any other similar lens, APO Lanthar is over rated, Dagor remains one of the best overall view camera lenses for a long list of reasons. APO artar, APO ronar, APO nikkor are essentially identical, If multi-coated contrast rendition will change. In to out of focus rendition is also affected by iris shape, Shutter mounted versions of these APO process lenses tends to produce non-round out focus products due to the limited number of iris blades in modern shutters.. exception are the ones mounted in vintage shutter with a round iris..

All that verbiage done. The long standing faves remain:

Kodak f4.5 Ektar, the 12" 4.5 Ektar remains one of the all time faves for head/shoulder on 5x7.
Kodak f6.3 Commercial Ektar, is a very similar alternative, real difference is in full aperture. This previously posted image was made using a 4x5 Sinar F (circa 1970's production) using a 8 1/2" Kodak Commercial Ektar..
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?163638-Once-upon-a-LF-wedding

Schneider Xenar, the f4.5 variety.. Fujinar SC, f4.5 or f4.7 variety, Fujinon L, f5.6 variety.

Ilex Paragon, Boyer f4.5 Saphir, Rodenstock-Ysarex, Zeiss Tessar and a vey long list of other Tessar formula view camera lenses that have been designed/produced for over a century.

Turns out the 180mm f4.8 Zeiss Sonnar makes a dandy portrait lens on 6x7 or 6x9..

Planar or Double Gauss lens formulas for view camera portrait lenses remains Meh due to their in to out of focus rendition.. While they offer big lens full apertures of f2.8 to f3.5 their in to out of focus rendition remains ... Meh.

Typical 5x4 focal lengths ~200mm to ~300mm or ~8" to 12"... Keep in mind there Must be sufficient distance between portrait sitter to camera for lighting..
Putting the camera/lens real close to the portrait sitter often results in a less than comfy portrait sitter that can bend the expression potential of the portrait sitter.

Previously discussed on LFF (8x10, very similar applies to 5x4):
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?163239-Suggest-a-12-quot-(300mm)-lens-for-portrait-work-on-8x10

~Lighting remains one of the most important aspects of portrait fotos as does expression and pose.. IMO, expression followed by pose/composition is what most portrait image viewers respond to, the other aspect are often not as important.

~Then there is the universe of Sorta-Focus or soft focus view camera lenses..
Bernice




https://www.largeformatphotography.info/portrait-lenses/

[Califmike33]

Thanks everybody for all your replies and information this is fantastic I love your shots too love the portraits.

[Tin Can]

Thanks to all who posted and started thread

I have seen Hugo's extensive treatise before

I now avoid anything smaller than 8X10 for people

4X5 is carry

[Bernice Loui]

Opinion remains, 8x10 contact printed portraits are special...
Not fully appreciated until properly done.


Been there, done this.
Bernice




I now avoid anything smaller than 8X10 for people

[Mark Sawyer]

This article should be used as a guide only, not absolute. Having been and done this same group of lenses discussed in this article, there are agreements and dis-agreements with what was written/shared.


I'll echo Bernice's caveat. When that article came out, it was heavily criticized and full of errors. Other forum members corrected many of the errors, but some remain, and the moderators had to delete many of the comments because they were so critical. Personally, I think it is an embarrassment to the forum. The only true "portrait lens" tested was the Heliar. The others are a mishmash of general-purpose lenses, process lenses, and press/Polaroid lenses.

For what it's worth, there have been multiple generations of lenses designed specifically for portraiture, changing as technology and aesthetics evolved. There's much more to it that just the right focal length.

[Bernice Loui]

Lens choice is only one aspect of developing an image maker's individual style. There is no easy or simply route or "follow this formula" ideal solution that works for all.

The difficult reality is, the need and must try out lots in order to figure this out.. Lenses are only part of this, lighting, pose and all those other ingredients that makes the art of portrait making individual and special takes great dedication, great effort and resources to develop.. This is the harsh reality of excellence in portrait making.

For those curious, there is a Pile of portraits made over the decades, vast majority of these cannot be shared for a long list of reasons (sadly legal).. for those who are wondering..


Bernice




For what it's worth, there have been multiple generations of lenses designed specifically for portraiture, changing as technology and aesthetics evolved. There's much more to it that just the right focal length.

[Tin Can]

I just got done mounting my Cooke Knuckler 10.5" f4.5 3 click SF as first lens on 8X10 Intrepid III

no shutter

strobes or flash bulbs

It is so light when compared to the 14.5" version which will never work

[Mark Sawyer]

Lens choice is only one aspect of developing an image maker's individual style. There is no easy or simply route or "follow this formula" ideal solution that works for all.

The difficult reality is, the need and must try out lots in order to figure this out.. Lenses are only part of this, lighting, pose and all those other ingredients that makes the art of portrait making individual and special takes great dedication, great effort and resources to develop.. This is the harsh reality of excellence in portrait making.

For those curious, there is a Pile of portraits made over the decades, vast majority of these cannot be shared for a long list of reasons (sadly legal).. for those who are wondering..


Bernice

Agreed. For all the worrying we do about our optics, we'll never live up to the potential of our worst lenses. Still, it's nice to work with some we can truly appreciate.

[Tin Can]

My hobby used to be old motorcycles

I still have one I will never ride again

I like collecting ANYTHING

on desert isle, I would collect sand

[Alan Klein]

Currently I'm shooting 75, 90, 150, 300 in 4x5. I shoot landscapes mainly but would like to get one portrait lens that I can also use for landscape. What would be good for both and that has good bokah as well.

[BrianShaw]

Currently I'm shooting 75, 90, 150, 300 in 4x5. I shoot landscapes mainly but would like to get one portrait lens that I can also use for landscape. What would be good for both and that has good bokah as well.

Consider a 10-inch Ektar or Commercial Ektar. Will do what you want and fills in a gap in your FL lineup.

[jnantz]

modernish lenses I enjoy using a 21cm tessar and a 10"veritar for long lens work, or if I am on location doing an environmental sort of thing I'll use a 90(chrome barrel) SA.
sorry I don't have images to upload.. since my website was changed around some of the portraits were swapped out..

[Califmike33]

I agree with Shawn. Modern lenses produce too much of a cut & paste look. The newest lens i like for 4x5 portraits is an uncoated 12" Velostigmat.

Nice work.

[Califmike33]

The Ektar lenses sound very interesting to me.

[Califmike33]

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/portrait-lenses/

Great link lots of information.

[Califmike33]

On 4x5 I've shot a lot of 210 for portraits - mostly a Sinaron 210 f/5.6. Any modern 210 f5.6 plasmat lens will do just fine, regardless of brand. A 10" Kodak Commercial Ektar also makes a very nice option, if your camera has enough bellows to focus it at portrait distance. What camera do you have? That will guide recommendations as much as anything else... well, that and the kind of portraits you want to make. If you want sharp, clear, highly detailed portraits, then one of those aforementioned 210 plasmats in a Copal 1 shutter will do just fine, and work very nicely as a general purpose lens as well. If you want expressive, soft-focus portraits, that is an entirely different animal.

Also, do you have a budget in mind? If you have a limited budget, then a modern lens is your best option. If you have a flexible budget, there are a lot of mid-century lenses (like those Commercial Ektars) that will be great options. If you have a very generous budget, then you can start looking at some more exotic glass like a Cooke Series II in the 8-12" range or a Dallmeyer lens, or one of the 305mm Kodak Portrait lenses.


Midrange budget.

[Kiwi7475]

This article should be used as a guide only, not absolute. Having been and done this same group of lenses discussed in this article, there are agreements and dis-agreements with what was written/shared.

Generally true, modern plasmas work for portraits, Tessar formula lenses Do have smoother into out of focus rendering, Heliar effect is good at full aperture to about f11 where it become most like any other similar lens, APO Lanthar is over rated, Dagor remains one of the best overall view camera lenses for a long list of reasons. APO artar, APO ronar, APO nikkor are essentially identical, If multi-coated contrast rendition will change. In to out of focus rendition is also affected by iris shape, Shutter mounted versions of these APO process lenses tends to produce non-round out focus products due to the limited number of iris blades in modern shutters.. exception are the ones mounted in vintage shutter with a round iris..

All that verbiage done. The long standing faves remain:

Kodak f4.5 Ektar, the 12" 4.5 Ektar remains one of the all time faves for head/shoulder on 5x7.
Kodak f6.3 Commercial Ektar, is a very similar alternative, real difference is in full aperture. This previously posted image was made using a 4x5 Sinar F (circa 1970's production) using a 8 1/2" Kodak Commercial Ektar..
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?163638-Once-upon-a-LF-wedding

Schneider Xenar, the f4.5 variety.. Fujinar SC, f4.5 or f4.7 variety, Fujinon L, f5.6 variety.

Ilex Paragon, Boyer f4.5 Saphir, Rodenstock-Ysarex, Zeiss Tessar and a vey long list of other Tessar formula view camera lenses that have been designed/produced for over a century.

Turns out the 180mm f4.8 Zeiss Sonnar makes a dandy portrait lens on 6x7 or 6x9..

Planar or Double Gauss lens formulas for view camera portrait lenses remains Meh due to their in to out of focus rendition.. While they offer big lens full apertures of f2.8 to f3.5 their in to out of focus rendition remains ... Meh.

Typical 5x4 focal lengths ~200mm to ~300mm or ~8" to 12"... Keep in mind there Must be sufficient distance between portrait sitter to camera for lighting..
Putting the camera/lens real close to the portrait sitter often results in a less than comfy portrait sitter that can bend the expression potential of the portrait sitter.

Previously discussed on LFF (8x10, very similar applies to 5x4):
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?163239-Suggest-a-12-quot-(300mm)-lens-for-portrait-work-on-8x10

~Lighting remains one of the most important aspects of portrait fotos as does expression and pose.. IMO, expression followed by pose/composition is what most portrait image viewers respond to, the other aspect are often not as important.

~Then there is the universe of Sorta-Focus or soft focus view camera lenses..
Bernice

Why is the APO Lanthar over rated? Overpriced for sure but I was curious about where it falls short…

[Scott Davis]

Midrange budget.

Define midrange- $500-$1K?

If that's the range, then a Commercial Ektar is a great option.

[Daniel Unkefer]

The Repair Guru Ken Ruth (Photography On Bald Mountain), always had the back cover of Shutterbug for decades. He received an uber uber rare 150mm Apo Lanthar, in Plaubel Makiflex Automatic Iris Mount, which came all the way from Milan, Italy to his place in the Pacific Northwest. . He could not make the lens sharp, he returned it as such. He warned me not to buy one with shooting with it first. Apparently the elements are glued in, and can move around? Very sage advice before making a major purchase. By the way, I've only seen exactly -one- which was part of a Makiflex oufit in Germany. The Holy Grail of Makiflex.

[cuypers1807]

For 4x5 portraits in that focal range, I use a 240mm Technika Heliar. I used to use a 240mm Rodenstock Sironar which was also excellent.

[Bernice Loui]

Previously discussed on LFF, not gonna re-do this again..
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?151926-Advice-on-Apo-Lanthars-needed

~APO remains a worthy marketing moniker to this day, Cosina (Japan) markets "APO Lanther" lenses for digital cameras to this day.
Yet, there has yet to be a photography industry agreement/metric/standards for the absolute definition of "APO"..

~Lanthar also remains a worthy marketing moniker rooted back to the APO Lanthar myth & legend.
Lanthanum optical glass, invented in the USA circa WW-II in response to Germany's Schott cutting off the supply of optical glass to the USA.
Lanthanum optical glass began with George W. Morey in the late 1920’s at the US Geophysical Laboratory, ended up being mass produced at Eastman Kodak's Hawkeye optical division.. Kodak used LOTs of Lanthanum optical glass in their lenses, yet made little mention of this fact..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpziDTklPs0

Prof. Arne Cröll wrote a paper on Voigtländer Large Format Lenses from 1949-1972:
https://www.arnecroell.com/voigtlaender.pdf


Take in this info and previous stuff on LFF, then decided.

Bernice





Why is the APO Lanthar over rated? Overpriced for sure but I was curious about where it falls short…

[Bob Salomon]

Previously discussed on LFF, not gonna re-do this again..
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?151926-Advice-on-Apo-Lanthars-needed

~APO remains a worthy marketing moniker to this day, Cosina (Japan) markets "APO Lanther" lenses for digital cameras to this day.
Yet, there has yet to be a photography industry agreement/metric/standards for the absolute definition of "APO"..

~Lanthar also remains a worthy marketing moniker rooted back to the APO Lanthar myth & legend.
Lanthanum optical glass, invented in the USA circa WW-II in response to Germany's Scott cutting off the supply of optical glass to the USA.
Lanthanum optical glass began with George W. Morey in the late 1920’s at the US Geophysical Laboratory, ended up being mass produced at Eastman Kodak's Hawkeye optical division.. Kodak used LOTs of Lanthanum optical glass in their lenses, yet made little mention of this fact..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpziDTklPs0

Prof. Arne Cröll wrote a paper on Voigtländer Large Format Lenses from 1949-1972:
https://www.arnecroell.com/voigtlaender.pdf


Take in this info and previous stuff on LFF, then decided.

Bernice

Schott not Scott

[Bernice Loui]

Heh, auto spell correct as no clue of "Schott"..
Schott optical glass has a very interesting history:
https://www.schott.com/en-gb/about-us/company/history/corporate-history



Bernice



Schott not Scott

[xkaes]

Yet, there has yet to be a photography industry agreement/metric/standards for the absolute definition of "APO"..

Bernice


Just as there isn't, and never will be, a definition of "multi-coating". It can pretty much be whatever a manufacturer wants it to be.

[Bernice Loui]

Or why "APO" and other marketing monikers, branding sells "stuff"... Much about projected perception, lesser about actual content or value to the specific need.

Bernice



Just as there isn't, and never will be, a definition of "multi-coating". It can pretty much be whatever a manufacturer wants it to be.

[Corran]

Why is the APO Lanthar over rated? Overpriced for sure but I was curious about where it falls short…

It doesn't and IMO it's not over-rated at all. Of course this is my opinion but I think they are phenomenal lenses. In contrast, the oft-suggested Tessar I find to have poor out-of-focus rendering at wider stops.

Lots of options and even run-of-the-mill Symmar lenses can make fine portrait lenses. What's more important is the photographer, sitter, and everything related to portraiture beyond the basic camera/lens/operation.

[Mark Sawyer]

Apochromatic lenses bring three colors into sharp focus on the same plane, typically red, blue, and green. Achromatic lenses focus only two colors on the same plane, typically red and blue. Most modern (post-WWII) lenses are pretty darn close to apochromatic anyways. And of course, "sharp focus" is in the eye of the beholder, or in this case, the manufacturer.

[Scott Davis]

For 4x5 portraits in that focal range, I use a 240mm Technika Heliar. I used to use a 240mm Rodenstock Sironar which was also excellent.

The Heliar is another great option - I keep forgetting about those even though I have a 240mm Heliar. That's about the largest you'll find in a shutter - the 300 on up are too big to fit in most leaf shutters, and certainly the 360, 420 and 480 are waaaay too big for any Ilex or Betax #5. You'll need a big Packard shutter to go behind one of those - at least a 7" if not 8" shutter, with an opening bigger than 3.5". So you're not putting one of them on a 4x5 anyway.

[Alan Klein]

Apochromatic lenses bring three colors into sharp focus on the same plane, typically red, blue, and green. Achromatic lenses focus only two colors on the same plane, typically red and blue. Most modern (post-WWII) lenses are pretty darn close to apochromatic anyways. And of course, "sharp focus" is in the eye of the beholder, or in this case, the manufacturer.

Do you assume that lenses marked as APO are also coated?

[Mark Sawyer]

Do you assume that lenses marked as APO are also coated?

No, coating didn't become practical until WWII, and apochromatic lenses go way back before that. There are lots of uncoated early Apo-Artars out there.

[Ulophot]

Heh, auto spell correct as no clue of "Schott"..
Schott optical glass has a very interesting history:
https://www.schott.com/en-gb/about-us/company/history/corporate-history



Bernice

That's different from shot glass, right?

[Bernice Loui]

Would that be a "shot" for two?

Bernice




That's different from shot glass, right?