View Full Version : Widest modern lenses for 8x10

Michael Mutmansky
21-May-2002, 09:50
Hello group,

I was with an 8x10 shooter last week and we were discussing the availability of superwide lenses for 8x10 format.

We are familiar with all the lenses in the 150mm range, and know that they will all cover 8x10 without difficulity. However, we were talking about a wider lens .

There is some data in the archives that the Nikkor 120SW will cover when stopped down, and I have heard about the Schneider 110XL covering stopped down.

We are looking for anyone that can confirm or deny the above data, and whether t he Schneider 120SA, the Fujinon 125SW, and the Rodenstock 115G will cover 8x10.

Looking at the lens specifications is only part of the story, as you all know. I'm hoping that there are people out there that have had specific first-hand exp erience with the lenses listed above that can provide some input.

Thanks for the input,


Bob Salomon
21-May-2002, 10:05
The 115mm Grandagon N allows for very minimal movement on 18 x 24cm. That means it would not fully cover a full 8x10" at f22 at 00.

Bill Marsh
21-May-2002, 12:20
I have a 121 Super Angulon that covers 8x10 with very little movements. I alway s stop it down, so can't really say about the image circle wide open.



clay harmon
21-May-2002, 14:12
My 110mm Symmar XL will cover with no movement at f/32. It's almost too wide - you'll have lots of light fall-off at the edges and if you stick the front leg of the tripod straight out, you'll see that in your photo too.


Natha Congdon
21-May-2002, 20:31
The 110XL will defintely cover 8X10. I don't find the light falloff very objectionable in B + W. I have not used it at infinity, but the time when I usually think of such a WA is usually for interiors anyway, not shot at infinity. It's pretty sharp. I think this actually could be a practical lens in certain circumstances.

You said "modern," so you're presumably aware that the widest ever for the format is a 60 or 75mm Hypergon. I've used them, they cover 8X10 at infinity and are rectilinear, but the distortion of near (very large) and far (very small) is pretty marked, timing the exposure with the propeller is tough, and even for contact printing, sharpness is nothing to write home about.


21-May-2002, 22:31

I have used the Nikor 120 on 8x10 and it works stopped down below f16 with about 6mm of vertical movement. The subjects I was shooting did not show falloff, and there is none apparent. Circumstances forced me to sell the outfit-to pay for my son's year at Univ'y- so when he graduates he must buy me another set again, as it worked very well.

Click click

Michael A.Smith
21-May-2002, 23:06
I have an old Gundlach lens that I put in a Packard Shutter that is 110 degrees and was made for 8x10. It covers just fine. Does anyone know hat the focal length would be. A long time ago someone once calculated it at 4 3/4" I think, which would translate to about 118mm. but I'm not sure if I am remembering correctly.

David A. Goldfarb
22-May-2002, 00:18
I suspect that Grundlach is of the same design as my 120mm/f:14 Berthiot Perigraphe. It's surprisingly sharp with good contrast, actually. In barrel, stopped down past f:22, it covers 8x10" with a little room for movement. I had it mounted in an Ilex #3, and it just barely covers that way. Here's an image I've posted before with this lens:


and here's a detail:


both flatbed scans from a print.

David R Munson
22-May-2002, 09:45
Well, it doesn't *actually* cover, but the Schneider 90mm SA XL comes pretty close. The field of view with a 90mm on an 8x10 is ridiculously wide. Light falloff is moderate, but the center filter does help some.

tim atherton
24-May-2002, 11:10
84mm Hyperigon? (saupposedly works fro 11x14 too...)