Lenses that cover 14x17 wider than 450mm

[Scott Davis]

I'm looking for something wider than 450 that covers 14x17. I'm especially open to classic lenses, anything that's in a #5 or smaller shutter. I've been looking for a Dagor, but I get confused as to which specimens cover what formats, as there are so many flavors out there - Zeiss Jena Dagors, Goerz Dagors, American Optical Dagors, B&L Dagors, Schneider Kern Dagors. I also know the 12" and 14" Dagors came in a range of f-stops, both f6.8 and f7.7, so I'm never quite sure which ones have better coverage. I saw somewhere that someone alleged that my 14" Commercial Ektar would cover, but then someone else told me that it would most likely miss the corners, noticeably, wide open, and illuminate but not cover stopped down past f32. Any feedback at all would be greatly appreciated. Having recently moved into the ULF family, it still feels a little wierd to be thinking of a 14-16" lens as "wide-angle".

[Phil Hudson]

My Schneider 355/9 G-Claron covers 14x17 with a little to spare at smaller apertures.

[Darren Kruger]

I'm looking for something wider than 450 that covers 14x17. I'm especially open to classic lenses, anything that's in a #5 or smaller shutter.

How wide do you want to go? According to the catalog at cameraeccentric a Wollensak 11x14 f12.5 Extreme Wide angle will cover 14x17 at small apertures. Focus is ~9" and the one I have is in a Betax #4.

I'm sure there would be some type of Protar that would work but I don't know much about them.

-Darren

[Scott Davis]

I don't need extreme wide. Moderate wide would do - something in the equivalent of 90-110mm range for 4x5.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Will the Symmar Convertible 360/5.6 cover? I don't know for sure, but it does well on 11x14 with tons of room. It is a great lens and (relatively) fast, although quite big. The 300/9 Computar will certainly cover, if you can find one. Regarding Dagors, I think any of the older ones 14"f7.7 ones should cover, but it is always a crap shoot with Dagors. The gold dots or f8 will not.

[Michael Jones]

I don't need extreme wide. Moderate wide would do - something in the equivalent of 90-110mm range for 4x5.

While I don't know what the conversion formula from 4x5 to 14x17 is, I can tell you a 300mm/12" Dagor (older, not Gold Dot) covers at f45. And it's real w-i-d-e...

I doubt a 14" Ektar will cover; it was designed to max out at 11x14. The older 360mm f5.6 Symmars are very nice to use on 14x17 (assuming your front standard can support it). Huge coverage and they have an f5.6 aperture for "old eyes" focussing.

Good luck.

Mike

[Michael Jones]

I've been looking for a Dagor, but I get confused as to which specimens cover what formats, as there are so many flavors out there - Zeiss Jena Dagors, Goerz Dagors, American Optical Dagors, B&L Dagors, Schneider Kern Dagors.

You want an pre-war Dagor, doppel anastigmat, or whatever and in a 12" length, the aperture is 6.8. (f7.7 is for longer Dagors.) The "best" ones for huge coverage will be mounted in a factory compound shutter. The newer ones, especially Gold Dots, have lesser coveage.

Mike

[Scott Davis]

If it fits in a Copal 3, my front standard can handle it, depending on how big the rear element is. I might have to do the "take off the rear element, mount the lens, re-attach the rear element through the bellows" boogie to make it fit.

[Michael Jones]

If it fits in a Copal 3, my front standard can handle it, depending on how big the rear element is. I might have to do the "take off the rear element, mount the lens, re-attach the rear element through the bellows" boogie to make it fit.

Be careful what you ask for. The later 360 Symmar (not "Symmar S") came in a copal 3and weighed 3.8 pounds. :eek: The ones in Ilex #5 are a bit lighter.

Mike

BTW, the rear element diameter is 100mm as I recall.

[sanking]

Will the Symmar Convertible 360/5.6 cover? I don't know for sure, but it does well on 11x14 with tons of room. It is a great lens and (relatively) fast, although quite big. The 300/9 Computar will certainly cover, if you can find one. Regarding Dagors, I think any of the older ones 14"f7.7 ones should cover, but it is always a crap shoot with Dagors. The gold dots or f8 will not.

The 360/5.6 Symmar Convertible covers 14X17 as well as the 355 G-Claron, at about half the cost on average. Plus, you get a real bright view with the large aperture.

Sandy King

[Dave Wooten]

Scott,
I have the 355 G. It is good and wide. You really have to make sure you want all that foreground in the photo. In landscapes i often have to get extra elevation, use ladder or get in bed of truck, to get the scene I stopped for...I don t go far from the truck! I really like the 450 mm focal length on the 14 x 17.

[Scott Davis]

Dave- shooting in the urban landscape, I often need the width to get all the building in. Sidewalks aren't terribly wide here so sometimes I don't have much room to back up to get my shot. Streetscapes are most of the time all foreground with a little middle thrown in for good measure.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

The two most likely candidates have already been discussed - the 355mm G Claron and the 355mm/360mm convertible Symmar. You can read more about these two and some other possible candidates in this thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=29734).

The 355mm/360mm focal length on 14x17 is equivalent to a 100mm lens on 4x5. Wide, but not extremely wide.

If you want something even wider, the 305mm f9 Computar covers 14x17 and is equaivalent to an 85mm focal length on 4x5.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Be careful what you ask for. The later 360 Symmar (not "Symmar S") came in a copal 3and weighed 3.8 pounds. :eek: The ones in Ilex #5 are a bit lighter.

Actually, the 360mm f5.6 Symmar in the Ilex #5 shutter is even heavier than the 355mm f6.8 version of this lens in a Coapl No. 3 shutter. I seem to recall it's over 4 lbs. I'll weigh mine tonight to check. Trust me, it's heavy.

The version that is lighter is the 360mm f5.6 Symmar in the Compound No. 5 shutter.

This lens came in three different factory supplied shutters:

360mm 5.6 Symmar Compound No. 5 Shutter - 1555g
360mm f5.6 Symmar Ilex #5 Shutter - 1880g
355mm f6.8 Symmar Copal No. 3 Shutter - 1740g

It also came in barrel mount and possibly the Compur 5FS Electronic Shutter.

Kerry

[Dave Wooten]

Dave- shooting in the urban landscape, I often need the width to get all the building in. Sidewalks aren't terribly wide here so sometimes I don't have much room to back up to get my shot. Streetscapes are most of the time all foreground with a little middle thrown in for good measure.

Got it...:)

[erie patsellis]

Kerry, have you ever compared the performance of the 360 Symmar to the Componon? My limited informal experiments have indicated that it's pretty much neck and neck performance wise, especially when contact printing.

[Dave Wooten]

The two most likely candidates have already been discussed - the 355mm G Claron and the 355mm/360mm convertible Symmar. You can read more about these two and some other possible candidates in this thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=29734).

The 355mm/360mm focal length on 14x17 is equivalent to a 100mm lens on 4x5. Wide, but not extremely wide.

If you want something even wider, the 305mm f9 Computar covers 14x17 and is equaivalent to an 85mm focal length on 4x5.

Kerry

Kerry,

Will any of the Kowa lenses cover (in the 300 mm range)?

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Kerry, have you ever compared the performance of the 360 Symmar to the Componon? My limited informal experiments have indicated that it's pretty much neck and neck performance wise, especially when contact printing.

Erie,

I've never used a Componon as a taking lens.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Kerry,

Will any of the Kowa lenses cover (in the 300 mm range)?

Not that I know of, but there are many variations.

For the standard taking lenses the progression was: Computar, APO-Kyvytar, Graphic-Kowa. I have a Kyvyx Korporation Katalog around here somewhere from 1980 that shows less coverage for the longer focal length lenses (305mm, 360mm and 480mm) at that time. Since the Graphic-Kowa post dates the APO-Kyvytar, it seems likely that it would also have the reduced coverage in the 305mm focal length.

Kerry

[neil poulsen]

One could consider a 16 1/2" Dagor f7.7.

If you can find one, the de Golden Busch wide field lenses. They don't come up for auction very much, though. They go for high prices.

[John Bowen]

It sure is nice to see Kerry posting again. Welcome back!

[Steve M Hostetter]

hypergon

[Diane Maher]

Will a 69 cm CZJ Protar VII (with two 69 cm cells) cover that format? Oh, but it's mounted in a fairly big compound shutter (which actually works).

[Dave Wooten]

300 mm pinhole should cover with movements :)

[Michael Jones]

Actually, the 360mm f5.6 Symmar in the Ilex #5 shutter is even heavier than the 355mm f6.8 version of this lens in a Coapl No. 3 shutter. I seem to recall it's over 4 lbs. I'll weigh mine tonight to check. Trust me, it's heavy.

The version that is lighter is the 360mm f5.6 Symmar in the Compound No. 5 shutter.

Kerry

I agree. My 360 in Ilex #5 weighs 1954 grams (with flange & caps). The compound shuttered version is the way to go for weight and coverage.

Mike

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Actually, the 360mm f5.6 Symmar in the Ilex #5 shutter is even heavier than the 355mm f6.8 version of this lens in a Coapl No. 3 shutter. I seem to recall it's over 4 lbs. I'll weigh mine tonight to check. Trust me, it's heavy.

The version that is lighter is the 360mm f5.6 Symmar in the Compound No. 5 shutter.

This lens came in three different factory supplied shutters:

360mm 5.6 Symmar Compound No. 5 Shutter - 1555g
360mm f5.6 Symmar Ilex #5 Shutter - 1880g
355mm f6.8 Symmar Copal No. 3 Shutter - 1740g

It also came in barrel mount and possibly the Compur 5FS Electronic Shutter.

Kerry

Almost forgot. For those with a Sinar shutter, there is also a barrel version of this lens (and a special Sinar extension board that allows the rear element to clear the Sinar behind-the-lens shutter).

360mm f5.6 Symmar Barrel Mount - 1540g

As you can see, those old Compound No. 5 shutters were amazingly light for such a big shutter. This lens in a Compund No. 5 barely weighs more than the barrel mount version.

The barrel mount version has a beautiful 18-bladed diaphragm that produces a very circular aperture all the way down to f64.

The Ilex No.5 Universal shutter has a 12-bladed aperture and the Copal No. 3 of that vintage has a 10-bladed aperture (compared to the 7-bladed aperture of current Copal No. 3 shutters).

For those who want something even wider than 305mm, in theory, the 270mm Computar should cover 14x17 with a little to spare. I haven't personally tried one, but there may be some noticeable field curvature at the corners of 14x17 with a Computar this "short" (equivalent to a 75mm on 4x5).

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

I agree. My 360 in Ilex #5 weighs 1954 grams (with flange & caps). The compound shuttered version is the way to go for weight and coverage.

Mike

The weights I listed included the mounting flanges, but not the caps. That big, blue velvet-lined leather front cap is a thing of beauty.

Kerry

[John Schneider]

Great to see you posting again, Kerry. Your replies were some of the most thoughtful and best researched.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

For what it is worth, the 360/5.6 Symmar came in a compound no. 4 shutter, not a number 5, or at least the two I have owned did.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

For what it is worth, the 360/5.6 Symmar came in a compound no. 4 shutter, not a number 5, or at least the two I have owned did.

Jason,

You are, of course, correct. That's the one version of this lens I haven't owned.

That helps explain the relatively "light" weight of this lens in the Compound shutter.

Kerry