PDA

View Full Version : 15-inch lens recommendations ?



Ken Lee
15-Jul-2008, 13:22
I already have a 300 and a 450, and would like to find a lens which is mid-way between them, for use with 5x7 and 4x5.

The midpoint is 375mm, or 14.7 inches.

I don't want a 355 or 360, and I don't want a portrait lens. The lens can be in shutter, or in barrel.

Thanks as always for your help !

erie patsellis
15-Jul-2008, 15:12
Ken, have you looked at the Apo Artars? I use both the 16 1/2" and 19" RD quite a bit lately.


erie

Paul Fitzgerald
15-Jul-2008, 15:29
Ken,

There are plenty of 14" or 16" but 15" is a bit limited:

381/5.6 (15") Tele- Optar
15" f/10 APO Raptar
375 /6.3 Ilex Paragon

Why the specific focal length?

Ken Lee
15-Jul-2008, 15:32
I already have a 300 and a 450, and would like to find a lens which is mid-way between them, for use with 5x7 and 4x5.

Paul Fitzgerald
15-Jul-2008, 15:49
Ken,

the 'angle of view' does not step off in a linear fashion, sorry but I don't have a formula for this. You could doodle it out on paper and see it if you wish.

Oren Grad
15-Jul-2008, 16:26
I already have a 300 and a 450, and would like to find a lens which is mid-way between them, for use with 5x7 and 4x5.

The midpoint is 375mm, or 14.7 inches.

I don't want a 355 or 360, and I don't want a portrait lens. The lens can be in shutter, or in barrel.

Thanks as always for your help !

If you want the angle of view to be halfway in between, and if this gentleman got his trigonometry right (http://www.imaginatorium.org/stuff/angle.htm), the desired focal length will actually come out around 362. ;)

Nothing wrong with going longer, of course, if you've tried 360 and it doesn't appeal...

Ken Lee
15-Jul-2008, 16:39
Aha ! You really gotta ask "them that knows" !

Wikepedia has a nice article which discusses the geometry entitled Angle of View (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view).

So when choice of lenses is discussed, and people tell us that they like to space them out according to some ratio, like 150/300/450 or 120/240/360... those are nice numbers, but they aren't really linear in terms of coverage. They're linear in terms of focal length only.

To what extent does this matter ?

Turner Reich
15-Jul-2008, 16:49
Ken, you are looking for a 14" Kodak Commercial Ektar lens.

Oren Grad
15-Jul-2008, 16:53
To what extent does this matter ?

Not at all. Any trick that helps you find the lenses that best suit the way you see is fair game.

neil poulsen
15-Jul-2008, 17:50
I have a Wollensak 15 inch Raptar telephoto f5.6 single-coated lens. I believe the flange focal length is about 9 inches.

I haven't used this lens yet, but plan to. Check out the following link for more information.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=26489

Toyon
15-Jul-2008, 17:52
Feebay #320274233354 . Wollensak's legendary 15" raptar.

Ken Lee
15-Jul-2008, 18:24
Does the 15" Raptar provide generous coverage for 5x7 ?

Bill_1856
15-Jul-2008, 19:19
LOVE your song on Youtube!

Ken Lee
16-Jul-2008, 02:19
Ah yes... my song :cool:

Carsten Wolff
16-Jul-2008, 04:08
MPEX has a 15" f9 Process Paragon for 99 bucks. Probably uncoated and a barrel lens...but ask anyway. Nothing wrong with Paragons in general....I have had a couple of the shorter lengths in shutters. Other than that: You could also search for e.g. the rather nice 375mm/f6.3 Ilex Caltars.

Toyon
16-Jul-2008, 06:01
Does the 15" Raptar provide generous coverage for 5x7 ?

The Wollensak catalog of 1957 says that the Raptar will cover 5x7? Is it generous? That's not specified.

Paul Fitzgerald
16-Jul-2008, 07:29
Ken,

"Does the 15" Raptar provide generous coverage for 5x7 ?"

not really generous and it's a tele so movement can drive you crazy. The 'APO Raptar 15" f/10' and the 'Alan 14 f/9' both cover 8x10 at inf. with some movements, both are ruthlessly sharp and fairly high contrast and both are fairly small and light. The 14" f/6.3 Ektars are high up there also. They each have 15 - 20 blade irises for smooth OOF renditions, they all have a nice 'look' to them.

Have fun with the hunt.

John Bowen
16-Jul-2008, 08:35
Ken,

I hate to sound like a wise ass, but if a 355/360 doesn't work for you then use the 450 and take a step back or use the 300 and take a step forward.

I have a 300 Symmar, a 305 G Claron, a 355 G Claron, a 360 Symmar and a 450 Nikon. The Symmars came with cameras I purchased, but they are the size and weight of small cars. For 4x5 & 5x7, where coverage isn't a factor, the 355/360 doesn't get used much unless I am someplace (like the middle of a stream or the edge of a cliff) where the ability to move a couple feet forward or back just isn't going to happen. The same goes for the Symmars. They have been collecting dust until I realized that the 1/2-1 stop gain in speed would be beneficial when shooting moving water on an overcast day. So now the Symmars get at least a little exercise every once in a while.

The 355 G Claron gets used a lot with my 7x17.

Any how, good luck in your quest. I hope you find the perfect lens for your purposes.

Ken Lee
16-Jul-2008, 15:35
if a 355/360 doesn't work for you then use the 450 and take a step back or use the 300 and take a step forward.

I may just do that. I just lost an eBay auction on a nice-looking 14" Commercial Ektar.

Mark Tweed
16-Jul-2008, 22:38
Ken, I have one of those Ilex 15" f9 Process Paragons Carsten was talking about. Mine is single-coated, mint condition and mounted in a Copal #3 shutter. It's extremely sharp and handles the 5X7 format with coverage to spare. It's a dialyte design with 4 air-spaced elements identical in construction to the Red Dot Artar, Schneider's Repro Claron or Rodenstock's Apo Ronar, all of which I own so I'm able to make a fair comparison. I've seen the Ilex's surface on ebay from time to time in shutters.

I hope this is helpful.


Mark

Ken Lee
17-Jul-2008, 06:51
As a process lens, does it need to be used at a small f/stop, at distances beyond 1:2, etc. ?

While we're on the subject, is the same required for a 360mm F9 Red Dot Apo Artar, as mentioned by Erie ?

E. von Hoegh
17-Jul-2008, 11:47
14" gold dot MC Dagor.

I know it's an inch short but one hell of a piece of glass.

Terence McDonagh
17-Jul-2008, 12:29
I'd agree that the 14" Commercial Ektar is the way to go. A tad heavy, but plenty of coverage and usually cheaper than a 355mm G Claron.

erie patsellis
17-Jul-2008, 13:15
Ken, I use the 16 1/2" (420) and 19" (480), I know that there were other focal lengths offered, see: http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerz/p1.html

My experience has been quite positive, the Artars are scary sharp from f16 onward, as good as many other lenses from wide open to f16. I tend to use mine for product work, with a scan back, when I cannot have a reflection of the camera in the subject, they're long enough that you'd need a magnifying glass to make out the camera reflection. My 19" is planned as a wide lens for the 16x20 as well, if I can find the time to finish it.

erie

Jim Galli
17-Jul-2008, 23:57
I would think the 375mm Caltar would be the best and least expensive solution. Now if you come to Nevada and lady luck smiles you might consider the Hermagis Eidoscop No. 2 which is a perfect 14 3/4" iirc. A protar Series VIIa with 2 27" elements is 15 1/2" f6.3 combined, but no one is giving them away. The lovely B&L Portrait Unar is 14 3/4" but you said you didn't want a portrait lens. Meanwhile, take the front group out of any old 210mm Symmar and see if you really like the length very much. OK, it's late and I'm done being a smart a$$. I know whatever you end up with you'll make lovely photos with.