8X10 Wide Angle Choices: Schneider SA's, Nikkor 120, Grandagon 115mm?

[audioexcels]

I'm likely going to end up here in the whole plate format by which all of these lenses will cover excellently. I am very tempted to have 8X10 due to the availability of film and accessories. But the 8X10 system is flawed in weight and lens choice vs. whole plate, though the flipside is having a full 8X10 image that can always be cut or framed to whatever size is preferred...and again, the format having been accepted and having tons of expired, but fine film on the cheap, along with the accessories, scanning, and simply not having to worry much about anything but the weight and also lens choice factor...which brings me to what I love shooting the very most=WIDE.

I have a 115mm Grandagon right now...I'm looking at getting a modern multi-coated Schneider 120 F8, but I also know there are others out there like the SA 121mm, Nikkor 120SW, and of course the 110XL that as much as I'd love to have, just cannot see myself affording and costing twice the rest of my kit.

Questions:

1) Of these lenses listed above, which are the best ones to fill the 8X10 sheet?

2) If there are lenses that just barely do not cover, what will the "effect" turn out to be like on the sheet of film? In other words, could I cut out the bad parts of the results or will a lot of the negative be destroyed due to vignetting/light falloff/distortion/etc.?


Thanks all!

[Ron Marshall]

Have you seen this chart:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html

[Walter Calahan]

My Nikkor 120mm covers 8x10 just fine. Wasn't expensive used.

Can't speak about the other lenses on your list simply 'cause I can't afford to own more than the Nikkor. My photography has not suffered.

[audioexcels]

Have you seen this chart:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF8x10in.html

I have, but there's been users of lenses not shown on the chart that cover the format which his why I want to know more about personal users of these specific lenses.

I've got these lens charts along with the IC charts of various other lenses/websites all in my "favorites" list:)!

Best

[audioexcels]

My Nikkor 120mm covers 8x10 just fine. Wasn't expensive used.

Can't speak about the other lenses on your list simply 'cause I can't afford to own more than the Nikkor. My photography has not suffered.

Walter,

How difficult is it to use the 120SW vs. your other lenses and do you happen to have any photos in your portfolio or elsewhere to show some shots made with it?

Thanks Walter!

[Nick_3536]

Define excellent coverage? My 150mm Fuji-W lights an 8x10 ground glass. I'm thinking for contact printing it would be reasonable. But excellent? Not my idea of excellent in the corners. But I'd rather have a fuzzy corner then a dark one. OTOH others might have higher standards and need those corners good enough to enlarge.

I've got the 120mm Nikon. It has no trouble covering 8x10 to my standards at least. Of course my 8x10 can't be pushed very hard with an 120mm lens on it. Certainly no vignetting. How much movements does your 8x10 allow with a lens that wide?

[Ole Tjugen]

I would say the 121mm f:8 Super Angulon is marginal. With very exact centering it just clips the corners - that part of the film which is shaded by the film holder anyway. Get a millimeter off center, and you get a millimeter of clipping.

The image is tack sharp all the way out though - and the light falloff is nice and even.

I'm in the process of scanning a whole pack of 8x10" film, including several shot with the 121 SA. Examples will follow - soon(ish).

[Oren Grad]

The 115 Grandagon is not intended for 8x10. In tinkering with mine I've found that it's workable stopped way down and focused short of infinity to gain a bit of image circle. By "workable", I mean gives me a B&W negative that's optically clean corner to corner, without obtrusive falloff. But if usability on 8x10 is an important criterion, it wouldn't be my first choice.

Of the ones you list, my understanding is that the 120 Nikkor-SW is the only one for which the manufacturer claimed 8x10 coverage, and which delivers it reliably.

[turtle]

I have not tried the 120 Nikkor SW but have read heaps of users saying that this lens covers pretty well. Seems to crop up in this context quite a bit. I have heard some of the same users claim that the 120 Super Angulon does not cover as well but have no idea if this is reliable info or not. For full plate there should even be some movement. It does sound a wonderful format. I have a 150XL on the way and when I need a slightly longer FL (say of about 180mm, as per 90mm on 5x4) I will just crop to full plate or so.

[Armin Seeholzer]

My vote is for a 150-165mm Nikkon SW or Grandagon 155mm or the Super Angulon 165mm or the Schneider XL 150mm.
I have a 155mm Grandagon f 6.8 which is a very sharp lens and it has really covering power for 8x10!
My 2 cents, Armin

[SAShruby]

I have 120SW and I advise to keep one thing in mind...If you want to use any filters make sure you have at least 112mm ones toi avoid any physical vigneting. 120SW covers 8x10, no movements, must be stopped down to f22 to control falloff.

Other consideration... from all lens I have, I use 120 on less than 5% of all shots. So if you have more important priority what you need I would suggest to buy other types and go for this one at the end.

Chees,

[turtle]

does Clyde Butcher use the Nikkor 120SW on 10x8 for a lot of his very wide Florida shots?

[Jim Noel]

Modern lenses are not always the answer.

If you really want wide, look into a Goertz Hypergon. The 90 mm covers 10x12".

[turtle]

just seen the Nikkor 120 SW f8 at $775 brand new from B&H.....thats not far off used prices...

[Michael Jones]

does Clyde Butcher use the Nikkor 120SW on 10x8 for a lot of his very wide Florida shots?

Turtle:

Clyde uses really wide lenses. The last time I shot with him he was excited about a 38mm on his 5x7...

Go to:

http://www.clydebutcher.com/

and click on the photo journal section for lots more detail and information.

Mike

[Robert Fisher]

Mike, a 38mm???



Turtle:

Clyde uses really wide lenses. The last time I shot with him he was excited about a 38mm on his 5x7...

Go to:

http://www.clydebutcher.com/

and click on the photo journal section for lots more detail and information.

Mike

[Michael Jones]

Yes; he took a 5x7 back and (I'm not kidding) duct taped a plywood spacer across it to which he mounted a 35mm Rodenstock (I was wrong on the 38mm earlier). It was his point and shoot...

That is not to say it completely covered the format, but Clyde is into "wide" and using his horizontal copy camera/enlarger to blow images up to the width of whatever roll stock he could get.

His web site, museum/gallery and workshops are well worth the time to view or attend.

Mike

[turtle]

Turtle:

Clyde uses really wide lenses. The last time I shot with him he was excited about a 38mm on his 5x7...

Go to:

http://www.clydebutcher.com/

and click on the photo journal section for lots more detail and information.

Mike

Thats nuts. I had not even seen reference to a 72mm on 5x7 so 35 is something else. Than again he has BIG skies to deal with!...and I got excited about a 150XL for 10x8.....

[audioexcels]

Turtle:

Clyde uses really wide lenses. The last time I shot with him he was excited about a 38mm on his 5x7...

Go to:

http://www.clydebutcher.com/

and click on the photo journal section for lots more detail and information.

Mike

LOL...a 38mm on 5X7???? WOW!!!!! Just went to his site...he has some seriously crazy wide stuff on it...amazing...