Scheinder super WA lenses for 8x10

[Steve Cohen]

I've got a 8x10 C-1 outfit+recessed lens board. Is the Super-Symmar XL 150mm f/5.6 better than the older 165mm f/8 Super Angulon for outdoor/landscape color & B+W work? I've heard the XL is a bit smaller and a better performer (but more expensive) vs. the 165. What about need for center filter on either lens? Thanx!

[Steve Hamley]

Can't comment on the comparison. Center filters are a matter of taste and no one can tell you if you need one or not, at least on formats for which the lens was intended to be used. Other factors might be whether you're shooting B&W or color, or how much even-toned sky you have in a given composition.

That said, I typically use a center filter on 8x10 with the 150mm SS XL and I'm pretty tolerant of fall off. My advice is try it without a CF and if you think you need one, get it.

Steve

[Mark Stahlke]

The size difference between the 150 SSXL and the 165 SA is substantial. Copal 1 vs. Copal 3, 1.63 lbs. vs 3.54 lbs., 95mm filters vs. 110mm filters. The 165 has a slight edge in coverage at 395mm vs. the 150 SSXL's 386mm. The 150 SSXL, with it's maximum aperture of f/5.6 will be slightly brighter than the 165 SA's f/8.

Since I have never used a 165 SA I can't compare performance but I can say that the 150 SSXL is an amazing piece of glass.

Another option to consider is a Nikon SW 150/8. In terms of size and weight it seems to fall between the 150 SSXL and 165 SA. You can often find them used for reasonable prices. It has better coverage (400mm) to boot.

Cheers,
Mark

[Michael S. Briggs]

With the Super-Angulon you will be less likely to want to use a center filter, for two reasons. First, because it is a longer focal length. Second, unlike the Super-Symmar-XL, it uses the tilting pupils method to improve the uniformity of illumination. Schneider's current datasheets include curves of relative illumination. The Super-Angulon series have illumination going as approximately cosine to the third (better), the SS-XL series pretty accurately follow cosine to the fourth (worse).

See http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=14644

[duckarrowtypes]

I also have a black-beast C-1 and I have been drooling over the SS-XL 150mm for a few weeks. Will I need a recessed lens board to use this lens? At what point would I need a bag bellows?

[Jim Rice]

Duck, a bag bellows is not available for the C-1. Calumet recomended the recessed adaptor (6"x6" to 4"x4") for wide lenses that cover 8"x10". For smaller formats (with reducing backs) they advised the recessed 4"x4" board with the recessed adaptor. As a general rule the tailboard sticking into your neck becomes an issue before the bellows does.

[erie patsellis]

IF you are somewhat handy (a skill needed to truly enjoy and use a black/green monster) making a bag bellows is trivial, I"m working on a quick release for the bellows attachment, though there is still the issue of minimum focusing distance.

erie

[Eric Leppanen]

One more thing to keep in mind: the SS150XL's circle of illumination is larger than its rated image circle (it reportedly covers 7x17). So if you don't mind the edge of the image getting soft (e.g. for an area of open sky, etc.), you can get significantly more movement out of it than its specs suggest. I find this additional capability useful on occasion, and it pretty much eliminates any coverage concern with the SS150XL versus the larger Nikkor SW150 (which I also used to own). However, if your camera does not support a bag bellows, then you may not be able to achieve such movement with a recessed lensboard alone, rendering the point moot. I would suggest setting your camera's extension to 150mm plus the depth of the recessed board (10mm?), and seeing how much front rise you can get.