Nikkor 150mm F8 SW Lens Opinions/Comments

[audioexcels]

I have noticed there's a few options around the 150-165mm range that provide a handsome amount of movements as a wide angle lens for 8X10 and even larger sheet film. I cannot afford the 150XL so that one is out. Does anyone have any comments regarding the performance, weight, and general things to know about the Nikkor 150 F8Sw lens (aside from IC obviously)? Also, if anyone can post or provide links to some images taken with this lens on "any" format, that would be great.

I am mostly concerned about weight, something I didn't really think was a big deal with the Schneider 90XL lens which weighs 1.46lbs, though the Nikkor is 2.3lbs, or 57%heavier than the Schneider. I have owned the beastly Schneider 360mm F6.8 lens and THAT was a beast at 3.28lbs. I never ended up using it due to shear size, though it is ~70% heavier than the Nikkor.

The lens would be mounted on an ~6lb camera.

Thanks!

[Eric Leppanen]

I briefly owned the Nikkor 150 SW, and currently own a SS150XL. Performance-wise I found the two lenses to be fairly similar; the SS150XL might have had a smidge more contrast, and some have argued that its edge sharpness is a bit better, but based on my brief experience neither lens had a definitive performance edge over the other.

Here was my evaluation of the Nikkor 150 SW versus the SS150XL:

Nikkor advantages:
- Cheaper.
- Less light falloff at the edges (did not need a CF in my opinion except when applying significant movements with chrome film, whereas the SS150XL in my opinion almost always requires a CF).
- Has a slightly larger image circle, which was nice.
- The Nikkor has a 95mm front filter size and 100mm front outer barrel diameter, which means that the Lee FK-100 press-on filter holder will fit on it. I don't recall specifically anymore, but I suspect that the FK-100 could be configured with two filter slots without causing vignetting with this lens. This of course is only relevant if you use the Lee filter system!

Nikkor drawbacks:
- Heavy.
- f/8 maximum aperture versus f/5.6 on the SS150XL (if your 8x10 camera has a fresnel then this is probably not an issue. Mine did not, and I found the lens usable but a bit dim).
- Rear element is relatively large, precluding use of smaller lensboard sizes such as that of the popular Linhof Technika (it could work, but only if you first unscrewed the rear element, mounted the lens into the camera, then reattached the rear element through the back of the camera. This was way out of the question as far as I was concerned. I used a larger Sinar lensboard, which worked well but made this large lens even more difficult to pack).

If you have a large backpack, or plan to transport the lens in some other way (I ended up toting it around in its own separate camera bag), then it should work just fine.

I ultimately switched to the SS150XL not because of any performance issues. I just got tired of the bulk.

[audioexcels]

Thanks a lot Eric for your rundown on the lens. It is greatly helpful, especially comparing it to the 150XL which is another I am very interested in. I would like to use the lens on a Tech type board, but one that is customized so that it fits properly and is still very strong/sturdy.

Out of curiousity, how much heavier does this lens "feel" by comparison to the 150XL, both in the bag, and simply holding it and placing it onto the camera?

What camera do you use and did you feel the front end standard was safe with it mounted to it?

Thanks Eric!!!

[Eric Leppanen]

Out of curiousity, how much heavier does this lens "feel" by comparison to the 150XL, both in the bag, and simply holding it and placing it onto the camera?

What camera do you use and did you feel the front end standard was safe with it mounted to it?The Nikkor weighs roughly 2/3's of a pound more than the SS150XL, and most of this additional weight is in the rear element. I don't remember the Nikkor feeling that much heavier than the SS150XL, just that it felt big. I did not have any difficulty or inconvenience mounting or unmounting it onto the camera using its Sinar lensboard. Ironically the Nikkor's large rear element made that lens feel a bit more balanced when mounted in the camera; most of the SS150XL's weight is concentrated in the front element, making it a smidge front-heavy (but not disconcertingly so).

I used an Ebony SV810U, which is significantly heavier than your six pounder. I have no idea how the Nikkor would handle on such a light platform. Fortunately both of these lenses use Copal 1 shutters, so you don't have to deal with the "kick" of a Copal 3.

[Eric Leppanen]

I would like to use the lens on a Tech type board, but one that is customized so that it fits properly and is still very strong/sturdy.Offhand I don't see how this could work. Technika lensboard dimensions are 96x99mm, and of course the actual opening that a lens rear element would fit through would be smaller than that. The diameter of the Nikkor 150 SW's rear element is 100mm, see:

http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/436/specifications.html

[audioexcels]

Offhand I don't see how this could work. Technika lensboard dimensions are 96x99mm, and of course the actual opening that a lens rear element would fit through would be smaller than that. The diameter of the Nikkor 150 SW's rear element is 100mm, see:

http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/436/specifications.html

I should have been more thorough...it would/will be a thin type metal based Tech-like board, but obviously larger than the regular sized Tech board, and stronger. In other words, not the thick type of Sinar board, not the dimensions of the Tech, but something close to the Tech's dimensions and as slim-line as possible for both durability and keeping things compact enough. This may be the only lens I use on 810, though I am highly considering 711 since I do not care for the Square look of 810.

Thanks again Eric. I truly appreciate your comments.

[audioexcels]

If you have a large backpack, or plan to transport the lens in some other way (I ended up toting it around in its own separate camera bag), then it should work just fine.

I ultimately switched to the SS150XL not because of any performance issues. I just got tired of the bulk.


Hi again Eric,

One quick last question for you or anyone around here (maybe Don Hutton) familiar with the lens. If you could take one lens for shooting wide angle on 6X10, and maybe 7X10 (I know, strange sounding formats), would you take the 120SW w/center filter, or the 150SW? I wish I had an 8X10 camera right at this very moment so I could get a perspective to see what exactly I feel about this. 2.3lbs vs. 1.3lbs is a huge difference in weight between the 120SW and 150SW, but the advantages of 150SW are the ability for it to be used on larger formats, but not the 120SW (for larger formats) should I decide to move up further.

Best,
Mike

[Nick_3536]

Both the 120 and 150 cover 8x10. The 150mm misses 11x14 doesn't it? Even if it did cover it would be WIDE on 11x14. So I can't see the odd chance you might move up in format being a real issue.

Pick the one that works for you now. Of course the 120mm is a lot more common and cheaper.

[audioexcels]

Both the 120 and 150 cover 8x10. The 150mm misses 11x14 doesn't it? Even if it did cover it would be WIDE on 11x14. So I can't see the odd chance you might move up in format being a real issue.

Pick the one that works for you now. Of course the 120mm is a lot more common and cheaper.

Actually...it misses 11X14 by 32mm's since 11X14 needs about 432mm's to cover according to my calculations. It will cover 10X12 with about 19mm's to spare, so if one is into the more square look of 8X10, it would be a "huge" step up in a contact size over an 8X10, just as 11X14 would be quite a step up over 10X12. Not too bad at all. Of course, 8X10 is really 7 5/8" by 9 5/8" when you do not include the film holder grips and the cutoff of the long side (10") of the holder. So a 7 5/8" X 9 5/8" contact vs. a 9 5/8" X 11 5/8" one.

However....

It would be a great wide lens for a ratio of a true 8X12 shot (meaning, what you have without the film grips and the long end cutoff of the holder/film). It would be a 1.5 ratio=right between 57 and the Golden Mean and plenty large enough, IMHO, to be a great looking size on the wall.

One could even come up with a dandy looking panoramic size with 400mm's of IC as well;).

All would involve custom holders w/exception of 10X12, but that's not a hurdle to shoot what one wants to shoot. In my eyes of LF, there's no standard size if one is ok shooting with something that can convert different sizes such as monorail cameras or if one knows the size they will shoot, prefers to have say, a wood based cam, and can have someone like Ritter do a custom camera for the size/s they will shoot.

[John O'Connell]

Actually...it misses 11X14 by 32mm's since 11X14 needs about 432mm's to cover according to my calculations.

The 150 SW apparently covers 11x14, albeit just barely:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/cameras/hand-held-11x14.html

[Don Dudenbostel]

I've used my 121 SA on my 8x10 and it just odes cover. Have you given any thought to a 165 WA Dagor or Angulon? I use the 165 WA Dagor on 8x10 and love it. It won't have the movements of the 150 SW but does a great job and would excell for a wider aspect ratio like 6x10. My WA Dagor is in an Ilex #3 and the front and rear elements are about 3/4 of an inch in diameter. The WA Dagor is F8 and the Angulon is F6.8. The WA Dagor is very small and light compared to the 120 and 150.

[audioexcels]

I've used my 121 SA on my 8x10 and it just odes cover. Have you given any thought to a 165 WA Dagor or Angulon? I use the 165 WA Dagor on 8x10 and love it. It won't have the movements of the 150 SW but does a great job and would excell for a wider aspect ratio like 6x10. My WA Dagor is in an Ilex #3 and the front and rear elements are about 3/4 of an inch in diameter. The WA Dagor is F8 and the Angulon is F6.8. The WA Dagor is very small and light compared to the 120 and 150.

What is the IC of the Angulon and same for the WA dagor? What is their typical selling price?

Thanks for the input!

[Eric Leppanen]

Mike,

Regarding 120mm vs. 150mm, here's still another option: the SS110XL actually covers 8x10 (barely). It needs a CF (even with neg film) and gets a bit soft at the edges, but nothing that would be noticeable in contact prints IMHO. It would be strictly a "straight through" lens and you'd have to limit yourself to rear movements (creating some interesting distortions along the way). I'm not sure I could recommend it as a workhorse lens in this application since it's coverage is so tight and angle-of-view so wide, but it would be cheaper than a SS150XL and lighter and brighter (f/5.6 vs. f/8) than the 150 and 120 SW. Just a thought...:)

[audioexcels]

Mike,

Regarding 120mm vs. 150mm, here's still another option: the SS110XL actually covers 8x10 (barely). It needs a CF (even with neg film) and gets a bit soft at the edges, but nothing that would be noticeable in contact prints IMHO. It would be strictly a "straight through" lens and you'd have to limit yourself to rear movements (creating some interesting distortions along the way). I'm not sure I could recommend it as a workhorse lens in this application since it's coverage is so tight and angle-of-view so wide, but it would be cheaper than a SS150XL and lighter and brighter (f/5.6 vs. f/8) than the 150 and 120 SW. Just a thought...:)

Hey Eric,

Got my hands on a Nikkor 150/8 and it is one fine piece of glass. It is interesting because it doesn't feel all that heavy, but it looks ENORMOUS compared to my Nikkor 120/8!!! Lifting both, the 120/8 is obviously lighter feeling, but it's not something like a deadweight vs. a lightweight. It's more of a, you can tell a difference, but nothing so substantial IMHO. Now my recollection of the Schneider 360/6.8 lens was that it was a dead weight. That thing was simply "crazy" huge. I do not recall the lenses I had around at the time, but I know with certainty, that the Nikkor 150/8 gives me zero impression of some "huge" piece of glass if comparing to that Schneider 360 or assuming any of the Rodenstock 360's, etc. These pieces of glass (Nikkors) are, in a way, similar to the 72/90XL's where you have a lens spec'd at such and such a weight, but when you hold them, they do not feel nearly as heavy as they are spec'd to be. I think the Nikkor is a bit more "dense" feeling than the Schneider 72/90XL's, but they have that similar feel, likely due to having the similar sized front/rear elements. I can understand and even appreciate what you mentioned about the balancing act. Looking at, say, the Schneider 150XL, it has all of its weight/bulk on the front element from what it looks like by eye. Obviously, it's a superb lens and I certainly wouldn't mind having it to have a lighter bag, but this Nikkor 150/8 is something very special. It's obvious why they are so rare to find on the used market. I think I've seen a handful at most in the last year.

You are very right about the Tech boards...100mm front caps says it all;):):)...

Cheers and thanks a lot for your input. It's a fabulous piece of glass and I'm looking forward to seeing just what it can do, especially with all but 400mm's of IC (yummy!).