Mine is Average (I think) - How Big Is Yours?

[Andre Noble]

I am referring to large format lens lineups.

Mine is at three: 90, 120, 150

[Graeme Hird]

Five:

75mm, 90mm, 150mm, 210mm, 300mm

(Guess I'm just a little bigger than average ..... :))

[Vick Vickery]

8...including the focal lengths of 2 convertibles:

90...100...135...160...200...275...350...462

[Ralph Barker]

Just for kicks until Ole comes along: 65,75, 90, 110, 150, 150, 210, 240, 300, 300, 12", 360T, 375, 16 1/2", 450, 610. ;)

[David R Munson]

Heh. The minimalist here with my 210mm Nikkor-W. One is enough for me. :)

[Brian Vuillemenot]

Currently, its a 75, 110, 150, 300, and 450- not too shabby, but I'm thinking of having it enhanced with a 58, 210, and why not a 600 tele? And perhaps a more compact 300 that doesn't weigh half as much as the camera! Of course, by the time I figure out which lens to use, the light will be gone, and I can go home empty handed! ;)

[Hugo Zhang]

110, 130, 150, 180, 210, 9 1/2", 10 3/4", 12"(3), 14"(7), 16 1/2", 420, 480, 19", 24", 610(2), 35". Enough is enough, but more keep coming.

[Ole Tjugen]

Just for kicks until Ole comes along: 65,75, 90, 110, 150, 150, 210, 240, 300, 300, 12", 360T, 375, 16 1/2", 450, 610. ;)
Thank you Ralph...

90, 90, 120, 121, 121, 135, 135, 150x6, 6", 165, 180x3, 7 3/4", 8", 210x3, 240, 270, 300, 305, 12", 355, 14", 500, 640, 720 - plus a Vademecum set from 150 to 750 elements.

So what do I use of all this? That depends on the film size: The 120mm is a Heliar, which lives on my Bergheil 6.5x9cm. On 9x12cm / 4x5" I use 90mm Angulon, 135 Eurynar, 150 Heliar (another Bergheil), 150 APO-Lanthar, 180, 240 and 300 Symmar, and 355 G-Claron.

5x7" gets 90mm and 121mm Super-Angulon, 165 Angulon, and the longer ones from the list above. On 18x24cm I drop the 90mm SA, and use 121, 165, 240, 300, 355 and some odd Aplanats and such in various "calibre" as well as a 210 Angulon for extreme movements. Next is 24x30cm - 150mm WA Aplanat, 210 Angulon, 300 Symmar, 355 G-Claron, and the really huge Aplanats. 30x40cm (which is too heavy to use IMO) takes the 210 Angulon and the 640 and 720 Aplanats.

Some of these lenses (especially the really long ones) are without shutters, which limits the usability a bit. But that's all right, since they usually end up being used on big heavy plate cameras. :)

All in all, I might have got one or two brand new lenses for what I've paid for all this!

[Patrik Roseen]

I think I did well with only one lens a Wollensak Raptar 135mm for a while.

But for flexibility I added lenses as they sort of became available to me.
I now have two parallel gears for 4x5":
75, 105, 121, 180, 240/420, 300/500 (monorail)
90, 135/235, 150/265, 240, 360mm (Technika III)

and for some strange reason the number of lenses is constantly increasing but with slower pace.
I tend to use mostly the lenses in the shorter region, i.e. 75,90,135,180.

(Then there are the macro lenses: 17mm, 50mm 75mm.)

[Eric Leppanen]

For 4x5: 80, 110, 150, 240
For 8x10 (hiking kit): 150, 240, 450
For 8x10 (near the car): 210, 300, 360, 480, 600/800 convertible

I damn near fill up the car with all this stuff, but it beats the heck out of cropping.

[Capocheny]

Some of you guys with your biggies make me feel inadequate!

90, 150, 210, 240, 360...


Ole,

You must have stamina! :)


Eric,

What 150 is that that you're using for your 8x10 hiking kit? Is it the S?

Thanks

Cheers

[Alan Davenport]

90, 150, 254.

I also have a 75mm Tominon, but since it doesn't cover 4x5 at infinity it doesn't really count.

How about a pinhole? Focuses (as best it can) to infinity at any number of focal lengths!

[Amund BLix Aaeng]

4x5: 150mm
8x10: 250, 305, 420, but I use the 250mm 99.9% of the time..

[David Martin]

90, 240. I'd like a 135/150 and something over 400. I have an unapetured 300/4.5 that I have yet to use.. I might turn it into a fixed focus box for astro photography.

..d

[Joseph O'Neil]

90, 105, 135, 161, 180, 209, 270 and 380. The 135 and 180mm are used 90% of the time, but my new 270mm is seeinng a lot of use in the past three weeks since I bought it.
In the "got it, but don't use it/doesn't count" deparment are two process lenses and three aerial camera lenses that all cover LF, including one of those radioactive Aero Ektars. NO, I don't go hiking with the Ektar. :)

joe

[Ron Marshall]

How many millimeters is that?

75 110 150 210 300 450. Just traded a 180 for a 150 and a 210. For many of my compositions the 180 was a bit too long or a bit too short. I expect to be using the two new lenses the most, followed by the 110.

[Matt Miller]

I have one lens, a 210 Angulon, that I use for 8x10.

[Dan Fromm]

Ok, and remember that I shoot 2x3 which some contend isn't LF.

Travel kit: 38, 47, 65, 80, 100 (macro only), 101, 4", 4.75", 127, 135 (converts to 235 but I don't shoot it that way), 150, 6", 160, 180, 210x2, 10.16", 260 (actual 266, engraved 260), 305, 360, 420, 480.

Usually left at home: 58, 5.375"x2, 150x2, 6.25", ~7", 210, 12"x2, 450. I really should leave one of the 6" and 150 and 10.16" and 266 at home. But the 6" and 10.16" are tiny. Gonna replace the 100 macro with a 4", I think, and leave the 100 at home.

En route, candidates to replace some of the above: 95, 105, 300.

And then there are the ones I prefer not to use and won't mention. And the ones I've temporarily forgotten.

[Bill_1856]

A few years ago, I purchased from Dagor77 a Dr. Staeble Polyplast Combi-Satz, which is a tiny little casket set of five lenses fitted into an incredible small Compound shutter. There's only one rear element (used at all times), but the interchangable front elements are bayoneted into the shutter, and produce 105mm, 135mm, 165mm, and 195mm. The rear element used alone gives 220mm. The set includes three filters (25mm?) which screw into either the front or rear of every lens. The entire set with box and Busch lensboard weighs 15.25 oz! The only drawback is a focus shift when stopping down of +0.25" for the 4 combined lenses, and -0.25" for the rear element alone.

[Aender Brepsom]

I can't compete with most of you here (and it is not my intention), as I only use a 2x3" Ebony with the following lenses: 47-55-65-100-150-210.
I purchased the 55mm only a few weeks ago and hope that it might replace the 47 and 65 to slim down the amount of gear to take when backpacking. I am still hesitating though.
On my 6x17 camera, I only use a 90mm SA.

[darr]

65, 90, 100, 120 macro, 135, 180, 229 (Cooke PS945), 240
I received the 65 & 100 with a recent 6x9 Arca purchase and haven't tried them on the 4x5 yet.

[Danny Burk]

For 4x5 (and the occasional 5x7 + 617 with rollfilm back) - 47, 72, 80, 90, 110, 150, 210, 300, 450, 720. All carried in the pack; I use mostly 150 and up, with 300 being the most-used. I've used the 47 exactly once in 6 years and probably shouldn't bother to carry it!

[David A. Goldfarb]

25mm Luminar, 35mm Canon Macrophoto, 55 Apo-Grandagon, 65 Super-Angulon, 75 Grandagon, 90 Super-Angulon, 90 Angulon, 105 Xenotar, 120 Perigraphe, 135 Planar, 135 Caltar II-N, 150 Xenar, 168 Dagor, 180 Caltar II-N, 210 Symmar convertible, 210 Xenar, 6x8 Tessar (8.75"), 10" WF Ektar, 10" Petzval, 11.5" Verito, 12" Dagor, 360 Tele-Xenar, 360 Heliar, 14.5" Verito, 19" Apo Artar.

Formats: 2x3, 4x5, 5x7, 8x10, 11x14

[John Kasaian]

I thought this thread was going to be about bellows extension!

Oh well, here goes:

4x5--127 Kodak/165 Ilex/168 Wollensak/203 Kodak

5x7--6"? Darlot/7-1/2 Kodak/215 Ilex-Calumet/ 9-1/2"? MacIntosh/13" Cooke/
14" Goerz/15" Wollensak*

8x10--159 Wollensak/240 Schneider/250 Kodak/270 Gennert/300 Goerz/300 Nikkor*/
305 Kodak*/14" Kodak/19" Goerz/600 Goerz

12x20--450 Nikkor/19" Goerz

The ones with asterix are attached to aerial cameras
Way too many lenses for a photographer, not nearly enough lenses for a collector!

[paulr]

below average: 2 lenses, a 210 and 120.

for years it was just the 210. i got the 120 when i started seeing wider.

[Jack Flesher]

Current, but it changes weekly: 55, 90, 105, 120, 135, 150, 229, 300.

What I usually carry: 55, 90, 120, 150, 229, 300

What I actually use for 90% of my images: 90, 120, 229

[Christoforos Giatzakis]

Very average.... 80, 150, 210... I'll add a 110 soon tho..

[JasonC]

90mm Angulon, 90mm Super Angulon, 150mm G Claron, 150mm Germinar, 150mm convertible Symmar, 210mm G Claron, 240mm G Claron, 270mm APO Gerogon S, 305mm G Claron, 355mm convertible Symmar, 16.5" APO RD Artar, 19" APO Artar, Vitax #2.

Format: 4x5, 8x10, 7x17

[FRED COLE]

Mine Is Average -how Big Is Yours!
75,90,110,150,210,240,300 But Still Unsatisfied At 84!

[Eric Leppanen]

Eric,

What 150 is that that you're using for your 8x10 hiking kit? Is it the S?

My 150 for 4x5 is an APO Sironar S.

My 150 for 8x10 is a Super Symmar XL.

[Scott Davis]

for 4x5 - 75 Rodenstock f6.8, 90 Rodenstock f6.8, 4 3/8" W.A. Dagor f8, 150 Sinaron f5.6, 210 Sinaron f5.6, 300T Fuji F8

for 5x7/8x10 - 159 Wollensak f12.5, 210 Wollensak f6.3, 240 Nikkor f5.6, 12" Ektar f4.5, 14" Commercial Ektar f6.3

For (still under construction) 12x20 - 600mm Apo-Germinar f9

[Steven Barall]

This brings up an interesting question. Is it more important to have a plethora of lenses or to learn to see in just one or two focal lengths? I'm sure that many people would view a limit of available lenses as a restriction but many would see it not as a restriction at all but rather as a sort of freedom, a freedom from complications.

Also, if you view photography as the construction of your own world and not merely a reflection of everyone elses then you might think that your one lens represents the one discrete vision or view that makes that new world of your creation specifically yours.

Personally, I generally like simplicity better. I just like the whole idea of a photographer setting out with a camera, a lens and some film and thats it. I want to see that persons photos. Very romantic and brave also I think. Good luck to everybody.

[CXC]

65-90-159-180-240-355-450-600; bottom 2 for 4x5 only, top 1 for 8x10 only.

The 240 is probably my most used lens in both 4x5 and 8x10, oddly enough. So of course I want to replace it (and the 180) with a 210.

The 355 is by far the least used, just because it is a behemoth in a #3 (G-Claron).

[Dan Fromm]

This brings up an interesting question. Is it more important to have a plethora of lenses or to learn to see in just one or two focal lengths? I'm sure that many people would view a limit of available lenses as a restriction but many would see it not as a restriction at all but rather as a sort of freedom, a freedom from complications.

Also, if you view photography as the construction of your own world and not merely a reflection of everyone elses then you might think that your one lens represents the one discrete vision or view that makes that new world of your creation specifically yours.

Personally, I generally like simplicity better. I just like the whole idea of a photographer setting out with a camera, a lens and some film and thats it. I want to see that persons photos. Very romantic and brave also I think. Good luck to everybody.Steve, I use just a handful of the heap of lenses I tote around much, but on a week-long excursion I'll use most of them. The longer the lens, the less often I use it.

Which lens I use is pretty much determined by how I see the scene and how far from it I can/must stand.

[bruce terry]

8x10. An unbig two.

9.5" works for me nearly ten times in ten.

Still, I drag-along the 19" just in case.

[paulr]

This brings up an interesting question. Is it more important to have a plethora of lenses or to learn to see in just one or two focal lengths? I'm sure that many people would view a limit of available lenses as a restriction but many would see it not as a restriction at all but rather as a sort of freedom, a freedom from complications.

i'm sure different people learn in different ways, but in general i've seen more people do better with fewer choices. epecially in the beginning, when they are especially susceptible to the distractions of gear. there's something to be said about eliminating as many variables as possible besides your vision, in order to really see the progress of that vision, and to focus on it rather than on tools.

and some do great work for whole stretches of their lives without needing more choices to express themselves. for decades weston just made 8x10 contact prints, using mostly the same lens; cartier bresson used a 50mm lens on a leica his whole career; the only kind poetic form shakespeare ever used was the sonnet.

of course some people do great with giant trick bags brimming with gear. especially in the commercial world, where more often than not you're being hired to realize someone else's vision, not your own. more kinds of clients can equal more piles of gear. just don't be fooled into thinking more piles of gear equals more ability to express yourself.

[David Karp]

For 4x5: 75, 90, 125, 150, 210, 300, 450.

The 75 is used for interiors/architecture, otherwise it usually stays home. The rest are carried in my backpack. Someday if/when I succumb to the urge to get an 8x10, I will look for a 210 with enough coverage, and combine those with my 300 and 450.

[Slade Zumhofe]

I keep getting junk emails telling me how to increase my....."lens collection" size:D

Mine is pretty basic--90mm, 120mm, 150mm, 210mm. Just sold a crappy 75mm but really did enjoy the focal length--this is one lens where less expensive is just plain......crappy.

[Donald Brewster]

4x5: 90mm, 135mm, 210mm, and 63mm Luminar
8x10 (and 11x14): 6.25", 10", 12", 14", 19", 24", and various pinholes

Believe it or not, I'm a firm believer in less is more. The 210mm lens was my one and only 4x5 lens for years, though I always seemed to have 3 or 4 lenses for the old Deardorff floating around. I'll second paulr that "people do better with fewer choices." Of course, when you see a bargain . . . .

[Armin Seeholzer]

Hi
47 XL, 55 , 75, 90, 120 Macro, 135mm, 2x 150mm, 155mm, 3x210mm, 240mm, 2x 250 mm, 260mm, 300mm, 2x 360mm, 480mm, 610mm
The shorter then 155 are only for 4x5 and the 155 and longer are for booth formats!
3 Are very old with much charakter!
Greatings Armin

[SAShruby]

Mine is

Nikkor 120SW
Schneider 210 super Angulon
Fujinon 210W old
Fujinon 300W old
Fujinon 360W old
Aiming for Fujinon C600 or A600....

All for 8x10.
Peter.

[Richard Kelham]

Oh well, if we must....

90, 150 (2), 210, 300mm – all post-war/coated/in shutters and shared between 3 cameras in 2 formats (5x4 and 10x8).

And that's probably one too many.


Richard

[CXC]

The best photographer I personally ever met owned only two lenses, a 90 and a 210. I'm not that good, so I need more (7).

[Tom Westbrook]

I'm at 7 (for 4x5): 55, 72, 90, 110, 150, 210, 300. Mostly I use the bold ones, though.

[John Jarosz]

4x5 -- 135,270,360,500

8x10 - 305, 420

John

[fourbyfive]

Wow! I used to think I was average. Now I think I'm kinda small. Only a 75, 125, and 210 here.

I'd like to make up some great "photographic visionary" story as to why I only have 3 lenses, but unfortunately, the truth is that I have a hard enough time making up my mind, and only having 3 lenses helps narrow my choices. And to be honest, I really have been able to do just fine with those three.

[Graeme Hird]

I also agree with those who say less is more, and most of the time I only use two of my lenses (the 90 and the 150mm). In fact, for the first 3 years of my LF existence, I only had a 90mm lens to use.

But this is a pissing contest: Rational thinking be Damned!!!!

I bow to Ole, who seems to have the biggest we've seen. However, they reckon it's not the size that counts, but how you use it - that's my excuse, anyway. I'll take any comfort that's offered, even if I am fooling myself .... ;)

Cheers,
Graeme

[John Berry]

90,121,135,153,210x3,240,300,420,480,600

[Capocheny]

Eric,

Nice! :)

I'll have to keep an eye open for an XL since I just picked up an 8x10!

Cheers

[Mark Stahlke]

This brings up an interesting question. Is it more important to have a plethora of lenses or to learn to see in just one or two focal lengths? I'm sure that many people would view a limit of available lenses as a restriction but many would see it not as a restriction at all but rather as a sort of freedom, a freedom from complications.
I cut my teeth on 35mm with zoom lenses and then started LF with only two focal lengths (90 and 150). I found it very restrictive and quickly built up a shamefully large lens collection (and a shamefully low bank balance).

55 75 90 105 125 150x2 180 210 240x2 270 300 355 400T 450 and I'm planning to add a 600. And maybe a 65. And maybe a 135. And maybe....It never ends does it?


Wow! I used to think I was average. Now I think I'm kinda small. Only a 75, 125, and 210 here.
That's interesting. Those are my most used lenses. In fact, that is the kit I usually take backpacking.

[jnantz]

65mm SA; 90mm SA; 127 Tominon; 6" Ilex Seminat 135 Xenar; 14cm Protar; 150 Symmetrigon; 150 G Claron; 203 ( dedicated to a rb series d ); 210/370 Symmar; 10” Tele Optar; Veritar 10" 15” Tele Optar; Vitax 13 1\2"; Verito 14”; Veritar 14"; Velostigmat 13-20-25; Velostigmat; Darlot (Leverstop); Morrision 6x8

... AND
2 meniscus lenses i harvested off of 19th century cameras

[Richard Ide]

My favourite but not used for a long time is a 24 lb 1200mm Apo Tessar. Not conducive to being carried around.

Richard

[Joe Forks]

I have 6 lenses, if I buy any more it will be a 75 or 80mm.

110 SS XL
150 Germinar
165mm Ilex Caltar (my sleeper lens - was gonna sell it but the more I use it the more I LOVE it)
210 Symmar S MC
240 Germinar
300mm APO Germinar

Forks

[palantiri7]

Geez. I have only one: I'm poor. Fujinon 240mm f9.0 A lens which does double-duty for 4x5 and 8x10.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Regarding the aesthetic question of whether it's better to have lots of lenses or a simple kit with one or two lenses--

I think that for Cartier-Bresson the lens was transparent, and the camera was just a device for framing objects in the world and capturing their forms at a moment in time. The lens just had to be consistent and good enough.

I'm kind of interested in lenses and the way things look through them. Part of the reason to photograph something might be to see how it looks through a certain lens. I don't want the lens always to seem transparent.

[Capocheny]

Palantiri7,

Aye... but that's a fine piece of glass! :)

Sometimes, less is more!

Cheers

[Gregory Gomez]

Originally, I was going to say I had no lens at all, but only a Coke bottle. (If you were to see some of my photos, you might agree that they were made with a bottle.) When I was a kid, a Coke bottle attached to a cardboard box was all I had, and of course no film. I guess I had an active imagination!

This is what I now have:

35mm

20mm; 28mm; 35mm; 55mm; 105mm; 180mm; 35-70mm Zoom

All Nikon manual focusing lenses.

4x5

90mm; 120mm; 150mm; 210mm; 300mm; 360mm

All Nikon; Schneider Super Angulon for the 120mm lens.

11x14 (Future Acquisition?)

305 G-Claron; 450-M Nikkor; 600-C Fujinon

I have other mint condition lenses that I will be soon selling. So the above list is what will stay for the remainder of my days.

[Jeremy Moore]

90mm f/5.6 super angulon, 150mm f/5.6 fujinon (older 46mm filter ring which covers 5x7), 6.5" f/8 WA Dagor, 250mm f/6.7 fujinon, 355mm f/9 g-claron, 19" f/11 red dot artar

165mm f/3.5 zeiss, 9" verito, 9.5" heliar, 16" petzval

I'm complete.

[David G. Gagnon]

For a "short" time ;) , these are mine, as, sadly, I'm getting out of LF :( . 90 Angulon, 90 Super Angulon, 127 Ektar, 138 B&L Zeiss Anastigmat Series V, 150 Symmar (convertible), 159 Wolly Ex W.A., 210 Caltar, 210 JML, 250 Commercial Astragon, 300 Apo-Nikkkor, 12" Turner Reich Triple Convertible, 305 Apo-Nikkor,
480 Apo-Nikkor. Anyone interested in enlargement of their kit and the reduction of mine can PM me.

DG

[Diane Maher]

90 Nikkor, 150 APO-Symmar, 159 Wollensak, 203 Kodak, 210 G-Claron, 210/370 Symmar convertible, 240 G-Claron, 240 Germinar, 300 Fujinon-C, 355 G-Claron, 420 Repro-Claron, 450 Nikkor-M, 19 in. APO Artar. A brass lens maybe 8" (not sure), casket set is on the way to me.

[CXC]

OK, somebody add these up. I bet 90mm is the winner...

[Leonard Metcalf]

80, 110 180 300 & 400 (recently sold the 57 as I had only used it twice)

[Salty]

I have 75, 90's, 110, 115, 135, 150's, 159, 180's, 210's, 215, 240's, 250's, 254, 300's, 305's, 355's, 360, 375, 420's, 450, 508, and 610. They're broken up into Modern and "Classic" (Kodak and Goerz). I think it's more of a detriment to have so many because I'll never learn each one's "quirks" and exercising all the shutters takes a lot of spare time.

[Robert Skeoch]

Just shoot 8x10 and carry 3 lenses... 240, 300, 450.... I think I would like a 150 and a 600 but I'm not sure I would be willing to carry them.
-Rob Sekoch

[Dominique Labrosse]

Just one.

150mm Symmar (convertible to 265mm).

[Doug Dolde]

For 4x5: 110mm, 210mm, 305mm

[Hany Aziz]

75, 90x3, 110, 120x3, 125, 135x2, 150x3, 180, 210x4, 300, 305, 450 mm. Admittedly some have never been used.
40-50% of my images are taken with the 135 mm Caltar II N.
Any psychiatrists speciallizing in Gear Acquisition Syndrome?
Extra lenses and gear are definitely a distraction for someone starting out. I have been at this for only 2 years. Ouch!!!

Sincerely,

Hany.

[Michael Daily]

4x5: 90,135,180
5x7: 210, 240
8x10: 9" Versar, 240, 13 3/4 Commercial Ektar

I really only use:
4x5-135 Apo Sironar
5x7-210 Apo Symmar
8x10-13 3/4 Comm. Ektar
I started LF in 1971.
Michael

[medform-norm]

75, 90x3, 110, 120x3, 125, 135x2, 150x3, 180, 210x4, 300, 305, 450 mm. Admittedly some have never been used.
40-50% of my images are taken with the 135 mm Caltar II N.
Any psychiatrists speciallizing in Gear Acquisition Syndrome?
Extra lenses and gear are definitely a distraction for someone starting out. I have been at this for only 2 years. Ouch!!!

Sincerely,

Hany.

Well, you seem to be doing a lot better (or worse) than we for having been 'at this' for only two years as well; I don't think we have quite that many lenses, although I'm afraid to start counting - but maybe we have more cameras than you do - which could be an altogether new thread...

[LH1H17]

I'm a nikon man, I loved my 35mm nikon kit so I've been slowly amassing the Nikkor catalog. I currently have:

SW: 65, 75, 90 f8, 90 f4.5, 120, 150
W: 105, 135, 150, 180, 210, 240, 300
AM: 210
T: 360, 600 rear piece

16 down, 10 to go!

oh, I haven't been 100% faithful as I also have the fujinon SF 180 and 250, as well as an old carl zeiss 135mm f3.5 T*

[Uusilehto]

Just a bunch of old worthless lenses.

90, 125, 135, 150, 180 x2, 210, 240, 360

90mm and 135mm are Optars, the 125, 150 and 180 are Dagors, the 180 and 240 are convertible Symmars and the 360 is a Berthiot f/4.5 Tessar that weighs a ton.

[Gordon Moat]

Currently 135mm, 180mm, and 21cm, though I rarely carry the 21cm any more. I was thinking of adding a 75mm at some point, though I am not sure how much I would use it.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)

[roteague]

80, 135 and 210. I may replace the 135 with a 110, but I don't care to use more than 3 lenses (I do have a 90 that I may sell, someday).

[David Millard]

In 2x3 format, I use a 53mm Biogon, 100mm Planar, 100mm Sironar-S, 120mm Macro-Sironar, 180mm Fujinon A, and 270mm Nikkor tele, plus a few Luminars and Photars for higher magnification. I'm very pleased with the performance of all of these lenses, but for the last few months my number of lenses has greatly exceeded the time I've had available to play with them!

[Dave_B]

47, 65, 72, 75, 90(6), 105(2), 120(4), 121, 127, 135, 150/265, 150(6), 155, 165, 180(2), 190, 200, 210(8), 240(4), 270(3), 300(3), 305, 355, 360(3), 450(2), 500, 600(2), 720, 760, 800(2), 1200

[Ole Tjugen]

47, 65, 72, 75, 90(6), 105(2), 120(4), 121, 127, 135, 150/265, 150(6), 155, 165, 180(2), 190, 200, 210(8), 240(4), 270(3), 300(3), 305, 355, 360(3), 450(2), 500, 600(2), 720, 760, 800(2), 1200

Thank you. I feel almost sane now...

BTW - I notice you have quite a big gap between 360 and 450mm - there should be room for a 410mm in there? :D

[David Luttmann]

Currently, just a 75, 90, and 150.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

"BTW - I notice you have quite a big gap between 360 and 450mm - there should be room for a 410mm in there? "

Well, they did make Heliar and Dogmar in 420mm. Both have a very nice 'look' to them.

I don't want to count, I'd have to do an inventory.

[Dave_B]

"BTW - I notice you have quite a big gap between 360 and 450mm - there should be room for a 410mm in there? "

Well, they did make Heliar and Dogmar in 420mm. Both have a very nice 'look' to them.



You guys are bad. It's like telling an alcoholic about a great cherry brandy that you recommend they try........

[Ken Lee]

I am referring to large format lens lineups.

This article (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/01/health/webmd/main2876963.shtml) may be relevant.

[Ole Tjugen]

Just a bunch of old worthless lenses. ...

That's a way to summarise my lineup too - at least the part of it I didn't mention originally in this thread: Lots of old barrel lenses...

My most modern lenses are a 210/6.1 Xenar, a 150/9 Germinar-W, and the 120 macro Nikkor that it seems that everyone bought. The rest of the lenses go way back - all the way back to before 1860.

I've added a 65mm too, after discovering that I used the 90mm Super-Angulon far more on 5x7" than on 4x5". And I've got some really nice negatives from a 3 1/4" "Optimus Portable" WA Rectilinear, and from a really weird Thompson Bros. casket set - one of the cells has a third lens element, which must have been introduced to cause lots of aberrations! The rest of the set (two front cells, two rear cells) are "normal" RR cells, and gives stunningly sharp negatives. Put cell no. 3 in, and everything goed "starburst" as opposed to "swirlies".

[C. D. Keth]

One 150mm Geronar.

[Gene McCluney]

65mm, 75mm, 90mm (5), 125mm, 135mm (4), 150mm (2), 180mm (2), 200mm, 210mm (2), 250mm (3), 300mm (4), 340mm (2), 450mm, 500mm, 600mm, and others.
Note..the duplicate focal lengths above are not all the same lens designs.

[Geert]

OK:

4x5": 90, 120, 150, 180, 210 and a handfull of older lenses that don't get used.
8x10": 240, 300, 360, 600 and a few brassies from 410 to 460
7x7": 213, 300, 360, 600. The 213 doesn't cover on infinity but I use it for close views.

G

[neil poulsen]

75, 90, 100, 120, 121, 150, 180, 240, 250, 355, 380.

Will soon get rid of the 355. The 100, 120, and 240 are for roll film.

I'd like to add a 47 for roll film, 58, 65, 90 double gauss for roll film, 105, 305, and a 450 or a 480. All in good time, though.

[Robert Hughes]

I'm a Wollensak Raptar guy by default: 101, 135, 10 1/2". But 90% I use the 135 and move forward or back.

[Ron Marshall]

This article (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/01/health/webmd/main2876963.shtml) may be relevant.

Now I understand what my wife meant when she told me "You really don't need all of those lenses to satisfy me."