View Full Version : 135mm lens?

17-Feb-2008, 16:07

I took a look at the 5x7 lens comparison chart hoping to find a newer 135mm lens that covers. None of the lenses listed cover. Might there be one that does cover?



Sheldon N
17-Feb-2008, 16:38
Maybe an older single coated Fuji W 135mm lens would work. They were spec'd at 80 degrees and a 228mm image circle.

Steve Goldstein
17-Feb-2008, 16:43
I think the Kodak Wide-Field Ektar will also cover, it has about the same image circle as the Fujinon-W. If you go for the Fujinon, make sure you get the one with the lettering visible when you look into the lens, not the one with the engraving on the barrel.


Bernard Kaye
17-Feb-2008, 18:20
Steve is correct: 135mm. f 6.3 Wide Field Ektar should cover 5 x 7" Without Swings, 4 x 5" With Swings. (from Kodak brochure)

Jim Noel
17-Feb-2008, 19:53
Is is not easy, but if you can find a 135 (5 1/2") Dagor, it will cover when stopped down.

David A. Goldfarb
17-Feb-2008, 20:26
Most likely places to find short focal length Dagors in New York, I've found, are Photo Gizzmo (call, because most of his stock isn't on his website, which is why he has lots of unusual things), and Lens and Repro.

Carsten Wolff
20-Feb-2008, 22:36
If you're into funky, you can find occasionally old 5x7" "Gold Rim" Conley Wide Angles. They're 135mm (actually 5 1/4"). Mine is seriously soft wide open though; it's got a weird mushy pictorial look, or perhaps is just in the wrong shutter (wrong spacing) :).....once at f11-16, it sharpens up, a lot.....

20-Feb-2008, 22:42
Why not go to 120mm? The Nikon SW would be an obvious choice. Or doesn't Fuji make a 125mm SW wide angle?

Claude Sapp
20-Feb-2008, 23:14
The Dagor is a good suggestion, I have a 4 1/8" Dagor and have used it on 5x7, so a 5 1/4 inch should work great. The two lenses I carry with my 5x7 are the 240 Fujinon and the 120 Angulon; I like the 120 very much in 5x7.

Really Big Cameras
20-Feb-2008, 23:34
If you can stand to move up to 150mm, there are a couple of great, multicoated, 80-degree lenses from the late 1980s and early 1990s that cover 5x7 with movements. They are the 150mm f5.6 APO Sironar-W and the 150mm f5.6 Super Symmar HM. I happen to like the 150mm focal length on 5x7 as it's comparable to a 110mm on 4x5, which is my favorite wide angle on that format.

If you don't mind older, single coated lenses, the already mentioned 135mm f6.3 WF Ektar is a nice, classic lens. The Supermatic shutter, when properly CLAd is dependable and rugged. However, it is not compatible with any modern/recent shutters should it fail and need replaced.

Other choices in classic wide angles include the 130mm f12 Rodenstock Weitwinkel Perigon. This is a coated lenses that was made during the late 1950s. It's absolutely tiny, fits in a standard Copal No. 0 shutter and has gobs of coverage - enough for 8x10 with movements. So, 5x7 would be no problem. However, finding one might prove problematic.

The 133mm f6.5 Cooke Series VIIb is another classic that will cover 5x7 with room to spare (it was originally intended for the 6.5" x 8.5" Whole Plate format). Early samples of this lens date back to the 1920s and all pre-WWII samples are uncoated (and tend to be rather flare prone). This lens was made up until the early 1960s. So, you might be able to find a later coated sample. However, I don't think it's a direct fit in ANY shutter.

The 135mm f6.3 Meopta Largor is a bit of sleeper and a real bargain. They were made for the 13x18cm Meopta Magnola during the early to mid 1950s. They are absolutely tiny and came in a Prontor shutter originally - which means the cells are a direct fit in a modern Copal No. 0 shutter (not that there's any problem with the Prontor shutters). They are single coated and they show up on eBay on a fairly regular basis and rarely fetch more than $100.

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras

Really Big Cameras
20-Feb-2008, 23:36
Two other tiny, modern 150mm lenses that cover 5x7 are the 150mm f9 G Claron and the 150mm f9 Germinar-W. Both cover about 80 degrees stopped down to f32 and both are a direct fit in a Copal or Compur No. 0 shutter. The G Claron is single coated and the Germinar-W is multicoated.

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras

Carsten Wolff
21-Feb-2008, 04:58
My prevoius post was a tad "out there", sorry. :)
One (rare) great lens is the Cooke WA Anastigmat Series VIIB though; I've got two 108mm's... and a 159mm coming (Thanks, Don). They were also made in 135mm (5 1/4"/f6.5). It'll cover 5x7 with ease and the (single coated) optics are among the best. Then there's also the 110 SS XL....and you could just crop a bit...... (BTW: My lens line up in 5x7 is now: (75) 108 159* 254 450) .....*was 165 Angulon, not a bad lens either.

21-Feb-2008, 13:25
Why not go to 120mm? The Nikon SW would be an obvious choice. Or doesn't Fuji make a 125mm SW wide angle?

Badger lists a Fuji 125mm SW on their site. Of course the W or CMW 125 wouldn't work as they just cover 4X5, but the SW would cover. There is also the 120 f8 Super Angulon out there.

I would have to think the difference between 135 and 125 or 120 or even 110 would be very minor in terms of field of view, especially on a 5X7.

And then like Kerry mentioned, the 150 options are out there too, and the field of view difference between 135 and 150 can't be too great either. I'd guess only 3 or four degrees.

Hope you find what you are looking for.

Bob Salomon
21-Feb-2008, 13:32
Cover or cover with movements?

The 135 Apo Sironar S just covers 57 but would not allow movements at infinity.

21-Feb-2008, 20:47

Thanks for all your responses.

Here's my problem. When shooting 4x5 I was ok with a 150, not happy with a 135 and extremely happy with a 125. I've been looking for the equiv to a 125 on 5x7. I thought that a 150 would be close but after trying a g-claron for a week I'm not too stoked on it. I put my Fujinon CM-W 125 on the 5x7 and its just slightly too wide for me (and doesn't cover fully). I figured a 135 would be the optimal choice.

Unfortunately, I really want/need a multi-coated lens since I'm currently shooting directly into the sun for an extended amount of time. (http://anti-aesthetic.net/sunrise.html)

Dunno, I'll figure something out. Maybe I'll try out a 180 instead.

Ron Marshall
21-Feb-2008, 22:32
Maybe I'll try out a 180 instead.

The horizontal angle of view of a 135mm on 4x5 is 49 degrees, that of a 180 on 5x7 is 51 degrees; about as close as you can get, and lots of coverage with most 180s.

22-Feb-2008, 07:00
Really? Awesome... those are affordable (the 150--except for g-claron--are not).

When I took a look at the lens chart it said a 125 on 4x5 is the equiv of 31mm lens. on 35mm. Then when I looked at the 5x7 chart it said 150 or 135 was the equiv of the 31mm. I guess now I'm kind've confused.


Ole Tjugen
22-Feb-2008, 07:48
The aspect ratios of those three formats are so different that it's difficult to compare directly.

But if you compare focal lengths in relation to the long side of the negative, you may get a useable comparison - that is, if your taste runs to "landscape orientation":

31mm on 135 film is about 15% less than the 36mm long side.

That corresponds to about 150mm on 5x7", or 110mm on 4x5" - compared to the long side.