Recommend me...

[Pawlowski6132]

A lens, to be used for portraits, in the 300mm range. Something that's easily mountable on a modern shutter. If you know the going price for said lens, please linclude that.

Also looking for something in the 600mm range for my 8x10.

Thanx all

[Ken Lee]

"Something that's easily mountable on a modern shutter."

Something already mounted on a modern shutter - or - currently in barrel but easily mountable on a modern shutter ?

[Pawlowski6132]

Well, you say easily mounted in a modern shutter. I have absolutely NO experience in using the old brass lenses and wouldn't even know where to start so, unless it comes already mounted, I would say I'm forced to stick with something that's already mounted.

[cdholden]

just to name a few...

Kodak Portrait in Ilex #5
Commercial Ektar in Ilex #?
Imagon in Compound or Copal shutter

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Can you be more specific? Do you want soft, sharp, or something in between? Modern? Coated? $200 or $2000? Also, 600mm is a bit long for an 8x10 portrait lens. How much bellows do you have?

[Louis Pacilla]

I would look for a 300 mm Imagon with the disks. I think this is one of the last BEST deals out there. This lens suffers from the "Kuhn Bug" when reflective surfaces are in the seen and your using the disk. If your careful you can make some stunning diffused images with the disks you just need to keep shinny surfaces and light points out of the image area.

You do NOT have to use the disks and in this case you have a achromatic soft focus lens that the diffusion can be controlled by the built in shutter iris . Much like a Kodak Portrait but more diffusion out of the gate.

The 300mm f4.8 Kodak Portrait lens is fantastic as well but it's harder to get one for under $800- $1000. You can still find a deal on the Imagon in # 5 Compound w/ disks . I just picked up a sweet 300 complete for a good bit less than $500. This was a very good price though. Usually between $500-$1000.

One the 18" portrait lens. You will need a big front board but the 18" Verito can't be beat. You could also go for the 14 1/2" Verito Which when converted gives you a 30" diffused focus lens as well as the doublet 14 1/2". It is also in a smaller( still big) #4 Studio shutter.
Any true Portrait lens of 18" FL will NOT be a modern shutter. One this one your looking at Studio shutter or a Packard shutter and lastly a large LUC shutter. The LUC shutter in the larger sizes is very hard to find.

Hope this helps

[Pawlowski6132]

Can you be more specific? Do you want soft, sharp, or something in between? Modern? Coated? $200 or $2000? Also, 600mm is a bit long for an 8x10 portrait lens. How much bellows do you have?

I'm trying to emulate portraits I used to get with my Canon 85 1.2L. I really liked the Brokeh. I really liked the speed which allowed me to use natural light. It was sharp when I needed it and I could use a diffusion filter if I had to also. I liked the focal length on 35mm film for H&S and headshots.

[johnielvis]

dude--what's the max bellows you got and what magnifications are you interested in....that will determine what you need....what is available will determine what you will use.

you want tight faces at 1:1---you'll need DOUBLE the bellows of the focal length...so if you got 30" bellows you'll need 15" lens and no more

[jp]

I like just looking through the portrait threads in the image sharing area here. Then I can go lookup the lenses at ebay or www.antiquecameras.net to learn more.

If you are not looking specifically for soft photos, any tessar will do very well. This includes the commercial ektar, B&L and Zeiss tessars, schneider xenars, fuji fujinars, These would be all pretty cheap with the com.ektars being the most expensive. I've done a bunch of portraits with 210mm lenses, which I can use on a speed graphic for lenses with no shutters. 300mm might be too much length for a speed graphic at portrait distances. 210 shuttered lenses are very common though. The 203mm optar and ektar are very nice too and may have flash sync if you use strobes.

For a tiny bit soft, but not super soft, an old triplet is good. I'm using a 210mm meyer trioplan right now on my speed graphic (as the lens doesn't have a shutter) It gets sharp if you stop it down. http://www.f64.nu/photo/tmp/lff/img428.jpg shows what you might be after; sharp eyes with hair (on the side) going out of focus. This is at 5.6

For real soft focus, I have a 300/4.8 kodak portrait which comes with a decent shutter, and works with 4x5 and 8x10. Soft focus lenses aren't cheap, and most don't come with a valuable shutter if at all. This kodak does, and it's a good lens with a good shutter for the same price or less than other soft focus barrel lenses. It gets less fuzzy as you stop down too.

You might want something longer for 8x10 individual portraits, but it's not necessary, and 600mm might be too long. Unless you are contact printing, you might find a 4x5 back on an 8x10 camera will let you do what you need. I do this when I want 4x5's from my kodak portrait as it's a little long for my speed graphic.

[Pawlowski6132]

dude--what's the max bellows you got and what magnifications are you interested in....that will determine what you need....what is available will determine what you will use.

you want tight faces at 1:1---you'll need DOUBLE the bellows of the focal length...so if you got 30" bellows you'll need 15" lens and no more

Aha. That's good information.

I knew were more than just another Chicago photographer.

;)

thanx buddy.

Can't remember what they are on my Eastman 2D but, I'll certainly check when I get home. I'm pretty certain they're over 30" though.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

From what you have said, it does not sound like you want a true soft focus lens, but rather something fast with a smooth bokeh. If this is the case, for your 4x5 I think a f4.5 Tessar/Xenar or maybe even a Heliar (slightly softer than a Tessar) would be ideal. Any of these can be found in shutter. I would guess you are looking at $400+ for a 300mm f4.5 Xenar, and maybe $700+ for a 300mm f4.5 Heliar. Both can be found in factory mounted in Compound 5 shutters, and both will overwhelm (weight, bellows, and lensboard size) a 4x5 field camera.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

"A lens, to be used for portraits, in the 300mm range. Something that's easily mountable on a modern shutter."

"I'm trying to emulate portraits I used to get with my Canon 85 1.2L. I really liked the Brokeh."

Wollensak 302/4.5 Raptar (single coated tessar) Alphax shutter
Voigtlander 300/4.5 Heliar (late models are single coated) Compound shutter

"Also looking for something in the 600mm range for my 8x10."

You might want to tone that down to 420 - 500 mm, the added bellows and distance for 600mm can be a real problem. I know it sounds stupid but in practice it's a problem.

Voigtlander Heliar 600/4.5 big barrel + packard shutter = rare and very expensive
B&L Aero-Tessar 610/6 big barrel + packard shutter = fairly common and cheap

Stepping down to 420 - 500 gives you many more choices
Heliars, Tessars, Xenars, Dogmars, Ysars, ect.

[Pawlowski6132]

dude--what's the max bellows you got and what magnifications are you interested in....that will determine what you need....what is available will determine what you will use.

you want tight faces at 1:1---you'll need DOUBLE the bellows of the focal length...so if you got 30" bellows you'll need 15" lens and no more

That makes sense. So, if I had 30" of bellows and a 30" lens, I would NOT, necessarily, get 1:1 magnification right?

I guess I'm starting to confuse magnification with angle of view in determining the correct length of lens I need for headshot on 8x10.

[Mark Sampson]

A 30" lens extended 30" is focused at infinity. A 14" lens extended out 28" will give you a 1:1 image size. The plane of focus will also be 28" from the optical center of the lens. Of course you'll lose 2 f/stops from the bellows factor, so f/8 will be actually f/16.
I remember once trying to do full head shots with a friend and his 24" Artar on an 8x10 Wisner- achieving focus and composition was damn near impossible. A big studio camera, or a monorail on a studio stand, would be the tool of choice if I wanted to try that again.

[Ken Lee]

An 85mm lens at f/1.2 has the same depth of field (or blur) as a 170mm lens at f/2.4, which is the same as a 340mm lens at f/4.8.

That's being precise. If we loosen up a little, it's basically like a 360mm lens at f/5.6 or a 300mm lens at f/4.5

Although they are large, you can find plenty of f/4.5 Tessars, Heliars in shutter, in that size. The depth of field will be rather shallow, especially at portrait distance.

[johnielvis]

RIGHT---30" lens ALL the way out to 30" get you infinity--you'd need SIXTY inches for 1:1...

now 1:1 is PRETTY tight on 8x10...but it IS a solid face closeup--you may want a 15/14" lens to do that every now and again--but general portraits you may want to be back a little further--like "bigshot" distance--get maybe 1/2 : 1 magnification (get a 16x20 field in 8x10)....this is more like the usual...

use the focal length, f, times (1+Magnification) = total bellows draw--this follows from the lens equation 1/s + 1/s' = 1/f.

so you use f(1+M) = s'

OR.... (1+M) = s'/f = (f+extension past infinity)/f = 1 + extension/f

so M = extension/(focal length)

M=1 (1:1) gives bellows draw = s' = f(1+1) = 2f...or two times the focal length

M=.5 (1:2 or .5:1--half scale) gives bellows draw = s' = f(1+.5) = 1.5f......so with 30" of bellows draw the longest lens to get 1:2 is 30"=1.5f or f= 20" focal length.

or extension = 10" for a 20" focal length gives M = 10/20 = .5 (or .5:1 or 1:2) this is 10" of extension on top of 20" for 30" total focal length.....

re-visit algebra...it's fun fun fun.

[johnielvis]

OH exposure correction for time is

bellows factor = (1+M)^2....so at 1:1 you get (1+1)^2 = 4===4x the exposure...this is TWO STOPS

for .5:1 you get (1+.5)^2=2.25 (so 1 second of exposure is now 2.25 seconds) OR you convert to stops like so stops = log(bellows)/log(2)...so in stops this is log(2.25)/log(2) = 1.17.....so like slightly more than one stop...call it one stop.

for EXACTLY one stop you need (1+M)^2 = 2....this give a magnification of sqrt(2)-1 or .414:1 magnification.....and bellows extension is the same, sqrt(2)-1...total bellows draw is sqrt(2)*focal length in this case....

[johnielvis]

I love this kind of stuff.....

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there, optical formula are great, cool and groovey BUT completely useless for real world, practical applications. All of the lenses available have different optical construction and mounting styles moving the exit pupil to where ever they wish.

To test my theory I setup a static target and focused a variety of lenses and I'm right. :D

Camera = Ansco 5A double extension studio 8x10
target = 60" from lens board
bellow draw = lens board to GG

lenses =
B&L 11x14 tessar
400/4.5 = 20"
Heliar
14"/4.5 = 17.5"
420/4.5 = 23"
480/4.5 = 26.5"
Dogmar
420/5.5 = 20.5"
480/5.5 = 26"
500/4.5 = 29" (mounts mid-barrel)
Extra Rapid
Lynkeioskop 19"/6 = 26.5"
Verito 18"/4 = 21"
Vitax 16"/3.8 = 23.25" (rear cell well behind flange)
Varium 19"/4 = 26"
Voigtlander Petzval 20"/5 = 24"

B&L Aero-Tessar 610/6 = 41" :eek:

Yes, moving up to 600mm from 500mm does make a really large difference in bellows draw at portrait distance, much easier to stay 500mm and below.

[SAShruby]

Fujinon 250mm SF, they go in $300-$500 range, I have one for sale in pristine condition.

[John Kasaian]

14" Commercial Ektar, 375mm Ilex or 12" Wollensak Velostigmat should all give excellent service for 8x10 portraiture, IMHO (Karsh used Commercial Ektar and IIRC the Ilex for portraits while the Velostigmat is just a kick-a$$ great lens IMHO) These are commonly found in shutters. The 24" Artar would be the bee's knees for a 600mm but putting one in a shutter ain't cheap.

[Ari]

I'd get something in the 250mm-300mm range for 1:1 portraits; not wide angle , but just wide enough that the face's shape and forms are part of the composition.
Longer than 360mm, and it starts to look flattened.

[johnielvis]

I dunno dudes--I likes em L O N G as possible myself....totally personal preference obviously...but man even a 14" lens racked all the way out is still pretty much too close for comfort for me---and it makes it hard for lighting too--you gotta get a face a camera/lens and tripod AND the strobes/lights ALL in there up in that little space----with a longer lens, you got a little room to breathe. with the camera that close, you get shadows from teh camera/lens if the strobes are not at what is becoming an extreme angle from the sides... in other words--the camera gets in the way of the lighting if you want straight on lighting.