PDA

View Full Version : Wide Angle Lenses for 8x10? - Lots of Questions!



Mark_S
21-Oct-2008, 06:06
I shoot mostly 4x5 landscapes, and my lens kit for that includes 75mm, 90mm and 150mm lenses, of which I find that I use the 90mm more than anything else. I also have an 8x10 camera, which I don't use a lot, but would like to start using more. The one lens that I have for it is not a great lens, it is a triple convertible with the shortest focal length being 12". I would like to get a decent lens for the 8x10. If I assume that I will shift my shooting from 4x5 to 8x10, then that would imply that I would want to start with the lens which would be the equivalent to my 90mm for the 8x10 - which would be a 180mm, or thereabouts. In looking around, it doesn't seem like there are many lenses in this focal range which will cover the 8x10 negative - am I missing something?

Does anybody know why this is the case?

There seems to be a 210mm Super Angulon, (my 90mm and 75mm lenses are both S.A., and I like both lenses) - they seem to have good coverage.

Is there a lens which is in the 150mm range which would cover 8x10, and if so, would it make sense for me to use this both for a wide angle lens on the 8x10 and as my normal lens when doing 4x5 (no honey, I didn't buy another lens, I just swapped this one for that one :) )

Peter K
21-Oct-2008, 06:30
Why not a Super-Angulon 1:8/165mm. With it's image-circle of 394mm it covers 8x10", 310mm, well. But with 1400 grams it's a heavy lens and not for all 4x5" cameras.

Here http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=41749 you can see this lens. The SA 210mm is larger and heavier. So it needs filters with M 127 x 1 mm diameter, compared with the smaller M 105 x 1 mm for the SA 165mm.

Jiri Vasina
21-Oct-2008, 06:48
It could also be the old Angulon 1:6,8/165mm, which is smaller and lighter (I have not used it myself, have only read about it...). It's declared coverage is 300mm, but judging from the smaller ones, some people are using the shorter Angulons well above their stated coverage (one example could be Ole Tjugen's Angulon 90mm shot on 5x7, which he has shown several times on such coverage questions).

Capocheny
21-Oct-2008, 06:53
Hi Mark,

The Nikkor 150SW and the SK 150XL Super-Symmar will both fit your bill... the 155 Grandagon will also work.

I can only speak to the Nikkor 150SW. Despite the shutter size being a Copal 1, the front and rear elements are huge. At 2.3 lbs and a 95mm filter size, it's far from being a light-weight! But, it has a huge IC of 400 at f22. It's a gorgeous chunk of glass!

Other lenses that would work as a wide on 8x10 are the Nikkor 120SW and the SK 110XL.

Lastly, the amount of bellows compression will also determine how much movement you have with the 110XL. I can't use the 110XL on my Dorff 8x10 and attain ANY movements. (No wide-angle bellows for it... and the bellows on my camera seem to be made with a thicker, less flexible material. YMMV.)

Lastly, if you can locate one... a 210 WF Raptar also works and is much, much less costly that any of the above-mentioned lenses.

Hope this helps in your decision.

Cheers

Gem Singer
21-Oct-2008, 06:54
The Nikon/Nikkor f8 150SW is a great wide angle lens for 8X10, if your camera can handle it. Even though it is mounted in a Copal 1 shutter, it takes a 95mm screw-in filter on the front and has an even larger diameter rear element. No longer manufactured, good used ones are scarce and usually demand higher prices.

The Nikon/Nikkor f5.6 240W is my favorite lens for 8X10 landscape photography. It is also a large, heavy lens, mounted in a Copal 3 shutter, and takes an 82mm screw-in filter. However, it is readily available on the used market at a more reasonable price.

If you want a smaller size, lighter weight lens, look for a Fujinon f6.7 250W. It's no longer in production, but sometimes comes up on the used market. It will cover 8X0.

Gem Singer
21-Oct-2008, 06:56
Capocheny types faster than me.

John Kasaian
21-Oct-2008, 07:29
150mm is very wide on an 8x10. Also these lenses can get very expensive and heavy as well, taxing both wallet and front standards. I have a 159mm Wollensak WA which is inexpensive and diminuative (at the cost of being slow: f/9.5, and having minimal coverage) but I don't use it all that much.
How robust is your camera? A 168mm SA is a formidable hunk of glass! How much do you want to spend? IMHO the Grandagon is a really impressive lens when it comes to wide angles.

I find that the 240mm-250mm "normal/wide" is a very useful focal length on the 8x10.

Brian Ellis
21-Oct-2008, 08:03
Do you do much walking/hiking? If so you'll find any lens in a Copal 3 shutter, and especially a Super Angulon, somewhat impractical because of size and weight. The two wide angle lenses I used for 8x10 and hiking (not overnight, just day trips) were a 210mm G Claron (ignore the specs, it covers 8x10 with room for movements as long as you stop down to f16 or smaller) and the 159mm Wollensak that John mentions. The Wolly is a very small, light, inexpensive lens, one of the few like that for 8x10. However, I used mine when I was only doing contact prints, I don't know how it would be if you enlarge.

Mark_S
21-Oct-2008, 08:43
OK - Lots of good info - THANKS!

If I am going to be doing any significant hiking, then it will probably be with my 4x5 kit, I don't imagine a lot of long hikes with the 8x10 - so weight is not a major issue there.

On the flip side, my camera is a Century Universal, which, although not flimsy, is also not the most robust camera that I have seen, so it might pay attention to the weight of the lens - Bellows compression would probably be an issue with some of the really wide lenses that I would like to use, so I am probably going to be hunting for something which is ~200mm, and not too heavy.

aduncanson
21-Oct-2008, 09:05
Kodak 190mm Wide Field Ektar?

eddie
21-Oct-2008, 09:44
15- wollensak and the 7 ish inch radar both cover 8x10. very very small lenses. they do not have huge circles though.

i have just used the 159 on my 8x10.....i will process the sheet soon.

i use this lens on my 4x5 very often as it is very small and i get huge movements with it on 4c5 (would be a great 5x7 lens too....but you already know that)

eddie

Eric Leppanen
21-Oct-2008, 09:48
Unfortunately, as has been already mentioned, "light" and "wide angle 8x10 lens" are generally a contradiction in terms. The closest options that I am aware of in the 200-210mm focal length would be a 210mm Computar or Graphic Kowa; I believe these are f/9 lenses so they are relatively light and have decent coverage, but are single-coated, hard to find, possibly expensive (particulary in the case of the Computar), and the Graphic Kowa also has no front filter thread (a filter holder will have to be manufactured which clamps to the front barrel). There are additional threads discussing these lenses here in the LF forum archives.

Walter Calahan
21-Oct-2008, 10:34
So many choices, so little time.

Here's my kit for wide. Take it or leave it.

Nikkor 120 mm; Super-Angulon 165 mm; Nikkor 240 mm. Secondary lens with no image circle, Fujinon-W 180 mm, but useful from time to time.

Good luck with whatever you end up using. Most of all, make exciting images.

Kevin Crisp
21-Oct-2008, 10:43
Mark: If the camera is a Century Universal, and if the gear and track are in decent shape on the front standard (as opposed to being chewed up) then a really heavy lens can be enough to drive the lens board down to the bottom when you take your hand away. (There doesn't appear to be any "lock" on rise or fall other than drive train friction, at least on mine.) Another consideration would be one of the wide angle protars, there is one in the 140mm range which can cover 8X10 when stopped far down. It is labeled 6 1/2 X 8 1/2 or something like that. They are typically not in shutters but are inexpensive. It would not be my choice for a standard lens for 4X5.

The wide angle Wollensack lenses are variable but some are decent and the slower f:12.5 version can give you a little movement.

Nick_3536
21-Oct-2008, 10:49
210mm Fuji-W 1st series if you can find it. Fast and not heavy.

John O'Connell
21-Oct-2008, 11:05
I don't think anyone has really gotten across the portability issue with 8x10 wideangles. The 210 Super Angulon weighs 3065 grams---almost 7 pounds---sans lensboard. The size of those things really has to be seen to be appreciated, and to carry one you need some kind of padded support box or bag dedicated to it. I have similar issues with my 600/800 Nikkor T: you need the lens, a special padded case for it, and a bigger backpack to carry everything in.

Search the archives: this is an issue every 8x10 user has to wrestle with eventually.

Drew Wiley
21-Oct-2008, 11:24
I use a 250 G-Claron and a similar 240 Fuji A as my "normal" lenses on 4x5, but as a
moderate wide angle on 8x10. Optically excellent with a reasonable amount of movement on 8x10, plus very compact and lightweight.

Jiri Vasina
21-Oct-2008, 11:24
I don't think anyone has really gotten across the portability issue with 8x10 wideangles. The 210 Super Angulon weighs 3065 grams---almost 7 pounds---sans lensboard. The size of those things really has to be seen to be appreciated, and to carry one you need some kind of padded support box or bag dedicated to it. I have similar issues with my 600/800 Nikkor T: you need the lens, a special padded case for it, and a bigger backpack to carry everything in.

Search the archives: this is an issue every 8x10 user has to wrestle with eventually.

Yes, I agree with that very much. One example of my own from the other end of the focal length spectrum: my brother-in-law was looking for a longish lens (over 300mm) for 5x7, I recommended the 375 f:6.3 Calumet Caltar in Ilex #5, saying that it was large, and showed him my Symmar 300mm (in Compound #3) and my Apo-Ronar 480mm in barrel. To give him the scale. When the Caltar came to him, he was :eek: stunned. Even I was not prepared for the size of it, and I was expecting quite a lot... (and there was a 20" f:7.7 Caltar on the Bay recently, that must be some piece of glass yet)

Don Hutton
21-Oct-2008, 11:53
210 Kowa is a real gem on 8x10 - very sharp, tiny and room for plenty of movement.

gary alessi
21-Oct-2008, 12:33
here is a vote for the 210 graphic kowa.....covers 8x10 with 45mm movement....the 210 computar/ kyvytar is nice too...has 460mm i.c....goes for 1000.00 used....so the kowa is 1/2 that. in a #1 shutter....if you find one in a barrel...where both elements unscrew, then it will fit right into a #1 shutter....beware of some of the 210 kowas in barrel..where one element group does not unscrew....it has the same coverage, but won't go into a shutter.... the older 210 fujiW ...single coated ...will cover 8x10 with movement..and is in a #1 shutter.......210 dagor...if you stop way down...210 g claron stopped way down... 240 and 270 g claron have enough movement , especially for landscape work..and fit into #1 shutters....for a cheap and light 150, the konica g r 2 process lens can be made to just cover 8x10...if you focus in at 6 feet, and stop down to f 45....use a the old black hat for a shutter... or front mount on an old alphax #3 i think....good luck, G

Darren Kruger
21-Oct-2008, 14:03
The Fuji 240A I have is nice and small with a #0 shutter. Makes a nice slightly wide angle for 8x10 and a long lens for 4x5.

I have a Wollensak 6 1/4" f9.5 lens. very light lens and wide for 8x10, but hardly any wiggle room. I've been getting vignetted corners on my negatives since my camera doesn't rest at a vertical center of the ground glass and I haven't paid enough attention to the corners.

According to Wollensak literature, the f/12.5 version of the lens will increase coverage as it is stopped down (from 90 to ~100 degrees)

-Darren

John Kasaian
21-Oct-2008, 14:14
A 210 G Claron will give you considerable wiggle room on an 8x10 when stopped down, is quite lightwieght in a modern copal and is single coated. It would make a nice WA on 8x10 and plenty useful on a 4x5 as well.
Maybe Mr Galli can dig one up out of that lens mine he's got hidden away in Area 51 :D

erie patsellis
21-Oct-2008, 14:22
I don't think anyone has really gotten across the portability issue with 8x10 wideangles. The 210 Super Angulon weighs 3065 grams---almost 7 pounds---sans lensboard. The size of those things really has to be seen to be appreciated, and to carry one you need some kind of padded support box or bag dedicated to it. I have similar issues with my 600/800 Nikkor T: you need the lens, a special padded case for it, and a bigger backpack to carry everything in.

Search the archives: this is an issue every 8x10 user has to wrestle with eventually.

But, the 210 angulon is diminutive in comparison, and though not easily found, they do show up fairly regularly, and not terribly expensive as well. And as a bonus, a well cared for Compound shutter will outlast every single one of us on the board.

erie

Jan Pedersen
21-Oct-2008, 14:42
Maybe Mr Galli can dig one up out of that lens mine he's got hidden away in Area 51

Just pure self promotion and a little bit of coincindense i actually have one for sale and it does not even have any of that dirty dust from the lens mine on it. :D

Maris Rusis
21-Oct-2008, 15:23
I've just tried a Wollensak 159mm f9.5 on my Tachihara 810HD.

With the camera in it's ordinary configuration, that is with the lens holder engaged in the vertical guide of the front standard, I can't force a movement, rise, fall, or swing that gets the image off the ground glass at any point. The bellows run out of give before the lens runs out of image.

With the lens holder disengaged from the front standard vertical guide and by straining the bellows I can JUST get some vignetting. The movements needed to achieve this are grossly in excess of anything I have used in the field.

For a clean lens in a good shutter that cost me only US$150 and that swallows 8x10 the Wolly 159 was my best ever lens buy.

Armin Seeholzer
21-Oct-2008, 15:25
My wide lenses for 8x10 are the 120 SW Nikkor, the 155 Grandagon, the 210 mm Konica Gr II, and the last and smallest one is the G-Glaron 240mm!
I'm thinking about selling the Konica 210mm because I used it only 1-2 times the last 4 years!

Cheers Armin

Kevin Crisp
21-Oct-2008, 16:06
Maris: Image circle illumination can be something very different from usable image circle. Try an inch of rise with film, I think you will be less impressed. A 90mm Angulon will illuminate an 8X10 ground glass. But there is no aperture at which the edges will be sharp.

Vaughn
21-Oct-2008, 16:26
My little Wollie Graphic Raptar 210mm/f6.8 wide field lens (barrel) covers 8x10 easily and lately seems to have become my second lens (after the relatively huge Fuji W 300/5.6). Vaughn

erie patsellis
21-Oct-2008, 16:35
Maris: Image circle illumination can be something very different from usable image circle. Try an inch of rise with film, I think you will be less impressed. A 90mm Angulon will illuminate an 8X10 ground glass. But there is no aperture at which the edges will be sharp.

But, with the right subject, it may be just what you need, or want.

james zhou
21-Oct-2008, 17:05
210mm Schneider Super Symmar HM f5.6, heavy but very sharp. You get the best result at f16! allows over 4cm of shift. It's like a 28mm in 35mm format

Mark Stahlke
21-Oct-2008, 19:00
There is also the Rodenstock APO-Sironar W 210/5.6. I use it's Sinar branded cousin - Sinaron WS 210/5.6. Weighing in at a modest 2 pounds, it's surprisingly light given it's physical size (105mm filters, Copal 3 shutter).

This lens is difficult to find and expensive when you do but it's a joy to work with.

Songyun
23-Oct-2008, 06:35
There is also the Rodenstock APO-Sironar W 210/5.6. I use it's Sinar branded cousin - Sinaron WS 210/5.6. Weighing in at a modest 2 pounds, it's surprisingly light given it's physical size (105mm filters, Copal 3 shutter).

This lens is difficult to find and expensive when you do but it's a joy to work with.

finally someone mentioned this lens. just a correction it has 100mm filter size which is very odd. you don't see many 100mm filters.

How about 240 Germinar W?

Don Hutton
23-Oct-2008, 07:13
I'll chime in here that IMO, a 210 and a 240 on 8x10 actually have a pretty different look. I used a 240 as a medium wide for a long time, until I borrowed a 210 and found that it really does have a completely different perspective, despite being very close in focal lengh to a 240. I still carry a 240 sometimes (the aforementioned Germinar which is an outstanding lens), but more often carry a 210. After trying just about every 210mm ever made (Sironar W, Schneider XL, G Claron, Angulon, HM and others), I finally settled on a Kowa Graphic which is an outstanding lens - plenty of room for movement, tiny, sharp etc. A friend has one for sale which I will be posting in the relevant section later today.

There are plenty of options for at all sorts of different price points for 240s on 8x10 - 210s present fewer options with more compromises.

Kirk Fry
23-Oct-2008, 22:29
141 mm Protar Series V f18 ? K

Darryl Baird
24-Oct-2008, 05:31
I'll chime in here that IMO, a 210 and a 240 on 8x10 actually have a pretty different look. I used a 240 as a medium wide for a long time, until I borrowed a 210 and found that it really does have a completely different perspective, despite being very close in focal lengh to a 240. I still carry a 240 sometimes (the aforementioned Germinar which is an outstanding lens), but more often carry a 210. After trying just about every 210mm ever made (Sironar W, Schneider XL, G Claron, Angulon, HM and others), I finally settled on a Kowa Graphic which is an outstanding lens - plenty of room for movement, tiny, sharp etc. A friend has one for sale which I will be posting in the relevant section later today.

There are plenty of options for at all sorts of different price points for 240s on 8x10 - 210s present fewer options with more compromises.

I waited until I found a deal on a 210 Fuji - W.. older version with the marking on the outside of the lens barrel. Now I carry it and the 240 G-Claron. I has a wide-angle look and coverage, image circle of 352. Both get equal use, dependent on the situation, but the Fuji filled a big need I had for interiors, without depleting my bank account much. less than $300...

John Schneider
24-Oct-2008, 09:17
finally someone mentioned this lens. just a correction it has 100mm filter size which is very odd. you don't see many 100mm filters.

The Apo-Sironar-W does indeed take 105mm filters; I have one (and have handled two others) and they all are threaded 105mm. I'm guessing the 100mm is a misprint or an early production version (I've seen that 100mm figure at B&H, among other places).

Mark, if you're interested in my 210 Apo-Sironar-W drop me a pm; I reshuffled my focal length spacing so I don't use 210mm hardly anymore.

Jan Pedersen
24-Oct-2008, 14:00
I waited until I found a deal on a 210 Fuji - W.. older version with the marking on the outside of the lens barrel.
Darryl. didn't you mean the inside of the barrel? The Fuji 210 with 352mm IC has a 58mm filter thread and inscription on the inside of the barrel.

Darryl Baird
24-Oct-2008, 19:16
Darryl. didn't you mean the inside of the barrel? The Fuji 210 with 352mm IC has a 58mm filter thread and inscription on the inside of the barrel.

doh!, yes... that's what right, but not what I said...had to go look to verify

thanks

Mark Sawyer
24-Oct-2008, 20:52
The 159mm Wollensak comes in two different models, the f/9.5 and the f/12.5, and they have pretty different designs. Both will open to about f/7 for focusing if you remove a set screw that limits the diaphragm, and every one I've ever seen has already had that minor modificaton done. I think a later (coated) f/12.5 would be the best choice.

A 158mm Cooke Series VIIb would also be a great choice, but they're hard to find, and only go into a shutter with custom machining. And they aren't coated.

The 165mm f/8 Wide Angle Dagor would work, or the 165mm Angulon.

But if you're going to have it do double duty on the 4x5, I think I'd go for a Fujinon W 180, which should be a tad sharper. The other lenses are quite sharp for contact printing or slight enlargements, but I don't know if you'd be satisfied when enlarging to a greater degree from a 4x5.

The big wide angles, like the Super Angulons, Grandagons, and Nikkor SW's would be too big and heavy for doing double-duty on most 4x5's.

Andrew O'Neill
24-Oct-2008, 21:29
I use my Nikkor 240W often on 8x10. It's a big piece of glass, mind you. I sometimes like to use my Nikkor 120SW for extreme wide angle.