extra wide angle lens for 8x10

[david@bigeleisenlaw.com]

I'm planning a road trip with my 8x10 Tachihara. I would like to take some landscape photos with an extra wide angle lens. If a normal lens is 300mm, then I'm thinking of a focal length of about 150mm or so. What do people suggest; what is available. I prefer Japanese or U.S.A. made lenses.

Thanks in advance.

David

[Dugan]

6.25" Wollensak Raptar Series III. f/9.5
Also known as Extreme Wide Angle Velostigmat Series III

[ic-racer]

150 is pretty wide. Thing is with the 8x10 format, so much sky and foreground get included with wide lenses. Having mentioned that I use 210, 180, 125 and 75mm lenses on my 8x10. I'd probably recommend a 210mm. It is pretty wide and there are a lot of options.

[Lachlan 717]

Try searching for this - it’s a topic that has been covered ad nauseam over the last few decades here…

[ic-racer]

This is an example of a 210mm on a tripod at about eye level. Lots of sky and foreground. That is the effect I wanted here.

246596

[ic-racer]

This is a 125mm. One needs the right subject matter for it to work.

246597

[paulbarden]

I have the 190mm Wide Field Ektar (Kodak) for 8x10, and I find it extremely wide - often too much so (https://flic.kr/p/26S2RZP). A really wide lens is great for certain situations, where you need to stuff every inch of the vista into the frame (or indoor architecture), but extreme wide angle lenses can be a disappointment.

If you’re certain you want something wide, the 190mm Ektar is an extremely good choice.

[Mark Sampson]

I love my Wide Field Ektars (although I've never used the 190). The 250/6.3 WFE has been preferred by many fine photographers, Ansel Adams and Joel Meyerowitz among them. I found it to be a near-perfect match for the way I saw things when I was working in 8x10. A lens that I regret selling.
It may not be wide enough for you, though; in that case I'll recommend the Schneider 165/8 Super-Angulon. It's a real howitzer of a lens... but then you're carrying an 8x10 anyway. It's very sharp and has plenty of coverage, and is *very* wide on 8x10. I used one on the job, occasionally, in the 1980s and 90s; that was for industrial images in small spaces, where having it made 8x10 images possible and kept my customers happy.

[Mark Sampson]

(off-topic) but ic-racer, that's a marvelous photo. Thanks for sharing it.

[Vaughan]

A lot depends on the amount of movement you require, and how wide you want. Before you get too carried away with wide, consider whether your camera bellows will compress and if it does, whether the front bed will be in the image.

Nikkor SW 120mm f8 -- FFE 18mm ultra wide, just covers with minimal movement, reasonably cheap
Nikkor SW 150mm f8 -- FFE 24mm very wide, loads of movement, big, heavy, very expensive
Fujinon W 180mm f5.6 -- FFE 28mm wide, just covers with minimal movement, cheap (single-coated version only)
Fujinon W 210mm f5.6 -- FFE 33mm wide, modest movement, cheap (single-coated version only)
Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 -- FFE 40mm short normal, good movement, cheap (single-coated version only, not the newer f6.3 version)

There are similar lenses from other manufacturers but only the old single-coated Fujinons have enough coverage for 8x10 in those focal lengths, they are common to see in "best lenses for 8x10" lists.

If your Tachihara has rear focussing then it should be good for the 120mm as long as the bellows can compress enough.

[pau3]

I have the f12.5 version of the Extreme Wide Angle Velostigmat Series III, 6 1/4. It is tiny and very wide, for my tastes. Sometimes, however, it has been useful. The following image has been taken with it:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49321074782_146bfac2bd_b.jpg ("[url=https://flic.kr/p/2i9kpdj)

It allows some movements on 8x10. I don't enlarge my 8x10 negatives, but the image quality is really good enough for contact printing. With movements, though, the image degrades on the outer parts of the field.

Since it is so tiny, it can stay, reversed, in my Wehman camera when folded. I always carry it with me.

[John Brady]

I photograph regularly with the nikkor 120sw and the 150sw. Lately the 150 has become my most used lens, lots of movement, extremely sharp, but very expensive. Here is an example of the Nikkor 150sw.
246598

[Corran]

Nice one John.

I am sad I didn't buy the 150SW back when they were $1500 all day long...

But the 120SW is still an extreme bargain - and makes a great medium wide 4x5 lens to boot with tons of movement available.

[Tin Can]

Try wide Pinhole

I also find the 150SW too too

[Scott Davis]

The 190 Kodak Wide-Field Ektar JUST barely covers 8x10 - it vignettes the corners a little unless stopped all the way down. I use mine more with 5x12, and with zero movements or it will vignette the corners at f/16.

[paulbarden]

The 190 Kodak Wide-Field Ektar JUST barely covers 8x10 - it vignettes the corners a little unless stopped all the way down.

I have not found that to be the case. True, it barely covers 8x10, but I haven't observed any vignetting.

[ic-racer]

I have briefly used the massive Nikkor 150 and I applaud John Brady for using it in the field (magnificent image!).

[Maris Rusis]

The old Schneider Super Angulon 121mm f8 lens is often available at a low price and it does cover 8x10 with a millimetre to spare when straight on and centred.
I used it when working in a forest where the trees prevent stepping back to get a subject in the field of view.

https://live.staticflickr.com/1611/25362353300_5d2eb638cf_c.jpg
Giant Trees, Snow Gum Grove.

[Scott Davis]

I have not found that to be the case. True, it barely covers 8x10, but I haven't observed any vignetting.

If you use any movements more than a few millimeters of rise/fall or a few degrees of swing/tilt it will.

[peter brooks]

Here's a very light weight option... barrel TTH Cooke VIIB 133mm f6.5 (at f32), paper negative, 'top hat' exposure. Home made 8x10 box camera.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47953150161_f4c1348f28_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2g4sqT4)
Ramson path 2 (https://flic.kr/p/2g4sqT4) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

[mhayashi]

Dear Peter,
Wow, I didn’t know 133mm VIIB covers 8x10.
Very nice picture!

[arri]

Not Japanese and not USA made but a perfect choice for 8x10" is the Schneider Angulon 165mm f/6.8
It has a large angle of view and is realy sharp. I used one of this lenses for years and I were always pleased with the results.
It is small and light weight, small filter thread of 58mm and used a Compur II shutter with speed of 1-1/200 sec.
It is available for moderate prices.
It were made unoated and coated. I used both versions of it. The uncoated Angulon is my choice when I use x-ray films or paper negatives.

[MAubrey]

This is a 125mm. One needs the right subject matter for it to work.

246597

What 125mm are you using?

[Fred L]

I have the inside lettering Fuji 210 and the Nikkor 120SW. Use both with 5x7 and 8x10. Haven't shot much with the 8x10 and 120 combo but the few I did showed minimal if not zero movements. Believe there was very slight vignetting but I'm ok with that. I like wide so that's how I lean.

[Jim Andrada]

Wollensak 159mm f 12.5

Really nice lens, reasonable size & weight.

[ic-racer]

What 125mm are you using?

Fujinon 125mm. To get clean borders on the prints, the image overlaps the easel blades a little on all sides. Call it cropping if you wish, but in my darkroom the lens covers the format when I print. No shift available during negative exposure, but my enlarger lets me correct converging lines when needed.

246747

[John Kasaian]

How much weight can you hang on the snout of your Tachi?
How much moo-lah do you want to spend?

I have a 159mm Wolly EWA, but I'm cheap.
I'd love to get a 165 Super Angulon or a Nikon 120 SW, but I doubt my old camera could take the abuse, tthose suckers are heavy!
Realistically though, a 10" WA Ektar or 240 G Claron are the wide angle weightlifters in my stable.

[angusparker]

150mm is very wide on 8x10 as has been mentioned numerous times. However, if you want something that wide in a modern lens with some movement then I recommend the 150mm 5.6 Super Symmar XL. With B&W film you don’t need a center filter, but some people would say it is needed with color. Those center filters are very hard to find however.

[MAubrey]

How much weight can you hang on the snout of your Tachi?
How much moo-lah do you want to spend?

I have a 159mm Wolly EWA, but I'm cheap.
I'd love to get a 165 Super Angulon or a Nikon 120 SW, but I doubt my old camera could take the abuse, tthose suckers are heavy!
Realistically though, a 10" WA Ektar or 240 G Claron are the wide angle weightlifters in my stable.

The Nikon 120SW's weight isn't bad (610g) when you consider that the 165mm Super Angulon is 1605g. Of course, 610 is still about double your G Claron.

There's always the regular Angulon 165mm, which is about 310g and will cover straight on with good resolution/contrast and with plenty of movements with a slow, but progressive fade in resolution the further out you go—the circle of illumination goes to ~425mm, it just gets mushier. I've been thinking about putting it on my 11x14 and stopping it down to f/90 and seeing what it looks like on a contact print, but haven't gotten a chance.

[Kiwi7475]

The Nikon 120SW's weight isn't bad (610g) when you consider that the 165mm Super Angulon is 1605g. Of course, 610 is still about double your G Claron.

There's always the regular Angulon 165mm, which is about 310g and will cover straight on with good resolution/contrast and with plenty of movements with a slow, but progressive fade in resolution the further out you go—the circle of illumination goes to ~425mm, it just gets mushier. I've been thinking about putting it on my 11x14 and stopping it down to f/90 and seeing what it looks like on a contact print, but haven't gotten a chance.

Wait, what?! I thought the regular Angulon 165mm only covers 300mm at f16.

[Chauncey Walden]

That's all mine covers. Gets pretty nasty after that.

[david@bigeleisenlaw.com]

Thank you to all who replied. This was very helpful.

David

[Andrew O'Neill]

I use the Nikkor SW 120 for extra wide angle on 8x10. I also use a Nikkor W 210.

[Mark Sampson]

David, since you've excited all this interest, please let us know what you decide to do- and eventually share some pictures with us.

[Robert Opheim]

Wide angle lenses for 8x10 are a little bit unusual. The more expensive and the newer the lenses are (that have more coverage for movements) then they are really big and heavy. Such lenses: 155mm Grandagon, 165mm Super Angulon, 150mm Nikor SW etc. The camera needs to be matched with these lenses for their weight and size. I would be very careful with them - I broke the front standard on an old tailboard camera many years ago with a big lens. If you don't need a lot of movements / or you are taking images focusing closer to the camera (so you don't need so much coverage from the lens) the previous generation of lenses (or other current lenses) work quite well: 165mm angulons, 190mm wide field ektars, 6 1/2 inch dagor WA, 8x10 Protar V, 210mm Dagor, 210mm Kowa Graphic (Computar). These are just a few of the older possible lenses. The equipment depends on what you are intending to use if for. And the forever comparisons of: portability vs stability vs weight vs cost vs availability.

[John Layton]

As Robert's post above reiterates...wide angle lenses for 8x10 are indeed "unusual," in that there are basically no choices to be had for anything of recent design and manufacture which would truly rise to the performance levels of more current (but physically heavy and huge) offerings, but which could also be defined as being "compact." This is really too bad.

[paulbarden]

As Robert's post above reiterates...wide angle lenses for 8x10 are indeed "unusual," in that there are basically no choices to be had for anything of recent design and manufacture which would truly rise to the performance levels of more current (but physically heavy and huge) offerings, but which could also be defined as being "compact." This is really too bad.

I use the 190mm Wide Field Ektar and it’s a superb lens. I have no complaints whatsoever about it.

[John Layton]

Paul, are you making contact sheets or enlargements from 8x10?

I ask this as my "negative" comment on the state of affairs respective of "modern" lens design is more related to the ability to hold detail out to the edges of significant (say 30x40 inches and larger) enlargements.

[paulbarden]

Paul, are you making contact sheets or enlargements from 8x10?

I ask this as my "negative" comment on the state of affairs respective of "modern" lens design is more related to the ability to hold detail out to the edges of significant (say 30x40 inches and larger) enlargements.

I make contact prints from my 8x10 negs, but I also scan and make large prints up to 17X22 inches.

[Robert Opheim]

I have been researching the issue of another camera and/or wide angle lens for a while for 8x10 format. With the nature of 8x10 having less depth of field as a format because the lenses are a longer focal length for the format coverage than 4x5. Currently I use a: 6 1/2" WA, 8 1/4 Dagor and a 240mm Nikor W lenses for wide angle. Sadly, there are almost no 180mm focal length lenses that work with the 8x10 format. Typically printed onto 16x20" sometimes 20x24" (now) Arista variable contrast paper. I have noticed there is some more detail in the prints of the 8x10 negatives than the 4x5 negatives that I enlarge. So for some subject matter the 8x10 format works better (clouds, and driftwood in the details as an example). I have found that not all subject matter works any better with 8x10 format.

[Thom Bennett]

Fujinon 180mm f5.6 single coated. Sweet little lens. 58mm front filter thread.

247177

palladium toned Kallitype.

[Greg]

Also use a 180mm single coated inside lettering FUJI W on my 8x10. I believe it to be one of the first versions of the optic. Never measured its coverage, but I will go out on a limb and say it allows me about 15mm of rise. I once read that there were several versions of the 180mm W with inside writing, possibly in an article in VIEWCAMERA magazine. I'll try to find the article to confirm that.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I just snagged an older Fujinon W 180 from Japan. It'll be nice having something that will cover 8x10, between my Nikkor 120 SW, and Nikkor W 210 :)

[Jeff Keller]

Early (inside lettering) Fujinon W 180mm is reported to have an image circle of 305mm. Since most scenes don't require corner-to-corner sharpness, it will likely make most people happy even when applying some shift for most scenes. http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm

Compared to most wide-angle 8x10 lenses, it is small and lightweight, which is a real plus.

[dave_whatever]

I'm sure I've seen reference to the earlier (dagor type) 150mm G Claron covering 8x10", which makes sense since the plasmat type *almost* covers, and the dagor types are reputed to have a little more coverage. Can anyone confirm this from experience? I've got the 210mm dagor type which also seems cover more than you'd expect based on reports of users of the plasmat type.