8x10 Lenses Most Used, Most Desired

I hope I"m not treading too much familiar territory with this inquiry. The nice thing about 4x5 is the variety of lenses that are available at reasonable cost, or at least, are available.

But, 8x10 is a different ballgame. Need lots of movement on a moderate wide-angle, and a SW 120mm or 121mm can be found for under $400. But for 8x10, an equivalent cost can exceed $1500.

Need a 300mm for 4x5 that doesn't weigh a lot? It's pretty easy to find a 300mm Nikon M at a reasonable price. But for an equivalent lens on 8x10, prepare to weight months (or years?) and spend upwards of $2000 for a Fijinon, 600mm C.

So, this prompts me to inquire, what lens focal lengths/model (W, SW, T, G-Claron, M, etc.) for 8x10 do your use regularly? Also, what focal lengths/model would come in most handy, if one could either find and afford?

ADDED A LITTLE LATER . . .

What kinds of photography do you do in 8x10, versus what you might do in other, smaller formats?

I used a 210 Sironar-W, 300 Nikon M, 450 mm Fujinon C, and 600 mm Fujinon C. I paid the piper.

Going wider than 210 you have limited options. There is an old Schnieder SA 165 that covered 8x10 - I forget the exact designation.

I don't think you will get a lot of movement flexibility with a 120 mm. Plus you should verify that your bellows are compressible enough for such a short draw. I had a Wehman 8x10 with a 4x5 reducing back. But it was almost unusable with a 90 mm lens because the bellows were so compressed.

There are some inexpensive solutions that are wonderful. If you like 120 on the 4X5, consider a 240mm G-Claron on the 8X10. 135mm on 4X5? Look for a 270mm G-Claron. A little harder to find but a really wonderful lens and the darn thing will cover an 11X14. 210 G-Claron covers 8X10 with modest movements. Yes, longer focus is more $$$ but there are worthy choices that are less than the modern Fuji. Red Dot ARtar in shutters are around. 19" and 24" are affordable. About 1/4 of the price of a Fuji 600. 300 and 355 G-Clarons in shutter are spectacular 8X10 lenses. 450 Nikkor is affordable and although heavier than the Fuji, it's also faster and having owned both, I like the Nikkor just as well.

Once you get comfy in your shoes you may want to experiment with some of the thousands of older lenses still floating around. I bought a convertible Wollensak 13" Series 1a from 1915 or so for $110 the other day. It's a marvelous old lens. Turner Reichs by the boat load. The sky's the limit and it seems to be a buyers market these days. Be curious. Have fun.

I've made some incredible images with a 45CM f9 Reproduction Tessar that I couldn't get 60 bucks for if I sold it. There's tons of stuff out there.

Most used and desired is the Fujinon A 360/10 - light for the focal length and large IC. The G-Claron 355/9 is a great but heavier alternative as mentioned above. Fujinon W 210/5.6 with lettering inside filter ring is a great sleeper wide lens and does not cost too much. Tried the Nikon SW 120/8 and it worked barely on my 8x10 - very wide of course. The SSXL 110/5.6 apparently almost covers, but the SSXL 150/5.6 definitely does. Artars, Rodenstock APO Ronan CL lenses, and lots of old Kodak glass as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The other thing to bear in mind is which lenses do you use most on your 4X5??? Remember that your smaller camera will be able to use more FL's than your 8X10 due to bellows compression + extension issues, so maybe it's time to go "back to your roots" and choose the FL that matches your "vision" and go back to the old "one lens" rule for a duration, then decide what is lacking, then fulfilling that need...

Then maybe you can avoid the "GAS" bling-bling syndrome, before you start lusting over stuff you don't need, and concentrate on shooting with something that you have already developed a deep relationship working with, and stay focused on completing your vision cycle...

Keep it simple!!!

Steve K

My most used lens is my 14" Kodak Commercial Ektar. For a wider lens I own a Fujinon 250mm f/6.7 (lettering on the inside) lens and for a longer lens I own a 19" Red Dot Artar. You don't have to spend a fortune for 8x10 lenses.

I wouldn't mind having a 14" Dagor and a 14" Heliar for a different look but they are too pricey for me.

It also depends a lot on what you shoot. For instance, I have a book of Upper Michigan water falls taken by a gentleman with an 8x10. He said that for his work he never needed a shutter, as the exposures were all long enough to time manually. If so, that opens up a lot of options, especially on the long end. Apo Nikkors, Ronars and other process lenses in barrels are very high quality and not that expensive. And don't discount 120mm wide angle lenses. I recently did a shot with a 120mm SA with my 8x10 Sinar. I was focused 20 feet away, and there was nothing important in the corners. The lens covered just fine, as in as seen with a 3000 spi scan at 100% on screen. G-glarons, Graphic Kowas, Fujinon Ls, APO Germinars.....there are a lot of good choices that aren't hellishly expensive.

My most used lens is a 12" Goerz Am Opt Dagor, although made in 1940 te original owner had it coated after the war. I have a Nikon 300 M bought initially for my 5x4 Wista with an eye to moving to 10x8 later on, but my first camera came with the Dagor essentially just thrown in for nothing, the second owner never used it.

I have a 165mm f8 Super Angulon a great lens but a huge beast covers 15"x12" stopped downto f22, so plenty of room for movements, not practical for backpacking. Last year I bought a 240mm Nikon W on this Forum from another UK member it's a nice moderate WA on my Agfa Ansco 10x8s and also quite nice to ue on my Wista 45DX as wella s my Seneca 7x5 (one is converted to take Wista/Linhof lens board).

I have a pair of 159mm Wollensak EWA lenses which I've not tested yet (one has separation - I was sold it for the shutter), if the best one performs well then it would be ideal for backpacking with the Agfa Ansco Commercial view, and I've a Turner Reich triple convertible to test as wel. Really I'm looking for the equivalent of my light weight 5x4 kit which is a 90mm f8 Angulon, 150mm Xenar or Tessar, and a 203mm f7.7 Ektar. Teh 12" DAgor is a relatively small light lens compared to 300mm Symmar etc.

Ian

I do mainly portraits, and look towards older Tessar-type lenses in the 12-16" focal lengths. There are plenty of Ektars, Caltars, Paragons, and Raptars out there, excellent lenses and often incredibly cheap, especially if you can handle a Packard shutter. I've come to prefer synched Packards in the studio in preference to anything else, because they're very fast to work with.

My most used lens is a Fuji CM-W 360mm (when backpacking) and/or my Schneider 360mm Symmar-S when working from the car. I've taken some of my best images with the Schneider and really like that lens, but it's a beast! Most used wide angle is a Fuji A 240mm with occasional use of a Kodak 190mm Wide Field Ektar. The Kodak lens is nice, but it just barely covers 8x10. For longer focal length it's a 19" Schneider Apo-Artar. I'd like to have a wider lens than the 190mm, but then coverage becomes an issue. I've looked at the Schneider 165mm SA, but, again, that's a beast of a lens!

450 nikkor M, 305 g claron, 210 5.6 fujinon-w, 250 fujinon w, fujinon 600C. I got my fujinon 600 before the price tripled. I rarely us it and the 450M is my go to.

You can get a 300/5.6 in copal 3 shutter, planar style from Schneider or Fuji for a few hundred dollars in perfect condition used. It's probably quite common. I haven't used my symmar-s for years and should probably sell it.

I have a Kodak 305 portrait lens I just leave on my 8x10 field camera. I like soft focus and that does it well. They are quite popular as well and used prices start at several hundred $. It's a little short for portraits on 8x10 as it was designed for 5x7.

If you use a studio camera, you can have a bigger lensboard and have more lens options, including those with packard shutters.

Nothing wrong with used just so long as you budget some $ for the shutter to be serviced.

I'm glad I own a 600C, but don't use it very often either. When I want long perspectives, I generally prefer to use my 4x5 monorail. With a 450C on it (also one of my most used 8x10 lenses), I get a lot of reach. A lot depends on the wind and atmosphere. Any long shot is apt to suffer from some intervening haze; so 8x10 doesn't always give as much extra detail as you might expect in distant scenes. For certain projects I'll tote along the 600, but mainly use 360 and 450 for 8x10, but also routinely carry a 250. All these lenses remain in side pouches to the pack, and I only switch out the camera in the main compartment between 4x5 and 8x10, according to my seasonal preferences and budget.

I seemed to have gone towards the Fuji W lenses for the 8x10 (250/6.7, 300mm and 360mm -- the 360mm also being for the 11x14). They are on the heavy side, but none of my 8x10 system is lightweight...and I may not carry the 300 and the 360 at the same time, perhaps go with the 250 and 360. I just got the 360mm, so it will be fun to try that out...just need to get it on the right lens board. Time will tell if it replaces the 300mm which has been my mainstay.

But if I am under the redwoods and will be making all long exposures, I also have the choice of some process lenses without shutters...a 210mm Graphic Raptor (small and light) and a couple RedDot Artars (19" and 24"). My LF work is primarily B&W landscapes.

My non-LF photography has taken an interesting turn. It is primarily 6cmx6cm B&W using a TLR (fixed lens, 80mm or 75mm). Negatives are contact printed -- Platinum/palladium. The small size requires a very different way of seeing and composing than I use with the 8x10. Very rewarding. Time for another printing session!

120 Nikkor SW, 210 Nikkor W, (both just cover), 240 Nikkor W, 300 Nikkor M, 450 Nikkor, 600 Fujinon C

I have a 120 Nikkor SW and a Fujinon-SW 125 f/8 both cover 8x10 very nicely and give you an impressively wide angle of view. The 210mm Fujinon-W is a great lenses as well, wide angle of view and no trouble covering 8x10. For longer focal lengths I like the 15" f/10 APO Raptar. It's a lightweight lens that is easily used with a Packard Shutter (or get it mounted in a shutter if you have the cash).

And once again, your instincts took you down the right path with those little 6x6 contacts, Vaughn. Draws the viewer in.

I use 240 and 305 G-Clarons, and the 450 Fuji C. I also have a 210 Symar that covers, and can be converted to a longer focal length, but I don't recall the details at the moment.

A 270mm G-Claron for me. It is also my 'long' lens for the double extension Wista 5x4. The 8x10 will only get lenses added if/when it proves it's worth for my interests.

For portraits and urban work on 8x10, a 150 and a 300 are all I need. I think the 150XL is a fantastic modern lens, and I've also used it on 4x5 where it shines just as brightly as on 8x10.
I'd love to have a 210 that has plenty of room for movements (Grandagon 200 or 210XL), because I always run out of room with a 210.
I guess prices would put those two lenses in the "desirable" category.

And for portraits, I've used many different lenses on 8x10, from Heliars to Ektars, even a Nikon 300 f5.6, briefly; the 12" Commercial Ektar was my fave until I bought a Cooke XVa, the triple convertible.
Yes, its IQ is stellar, but the Cooke is also quite economical: it's prevented me from wanting or needing (or affording) any other lenses. :)
And the three FLs (300, 476, 646) are similar to the Fuji C offerings, costing roughly the same, probably a little more.

It depends on what you'll be shooting and how much you want to spend and how large of a lens your front standard (or your poor back, if you're hiking) can take. For vintage glass---as Jim Galli mentioned---the sky is the limit.
I shoot with a passel of old lenses---Ektars, Dagor, Artars, G Claron, Velostigmat, Nikon, and B&L.

The 240 G Claron is probably my most used lens because it is small and light weight and was one of the least expensive to purchase.
I also use a 250 Widefield Ektar mostly for architecture because it seems to have acres of coverage.

My "normal" lenses are a 14" Commercial Ektar and a 12" Dagor. "Long" is a 19" Artar.

A 360 Nikon M, 14" Artar and 159 Velostigmat yellow dot spend most of their time aboard the snouts of other cameras. The 15" B&L Petzval is just plain fun.

Any of these, plus many others(Fuji, Wollensak, Ilex, Schneider, TR etc...) would be considered desirable. It's not so much the lens, but what you do with it that makes or breaks a photo op (ducks and takes cover.)

Defining photographers' preferences is as elusive as tracking such foolish metrics as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. It's all bullshit.

A question remains: are photography viewers of a similar metric?

Would love to have a Cooke XVa Triple convertible lens. Just priced a bit much these days.

Over the years have always gone back to photographing waterfalls and streams especially in gorges. Shoot 8x10 film. Printed with traditional Silver gelatin paper up to a few years ago when I started to make digital negatives and print Platinum/Palladium and some Silver prints.

These 3 lenses are the ones I currently use:

240mm Dagor - little gem of a lens

12" f/4.5 Wollensak Series I Velostigmat in a Betax - the first lens for my 8x10 back in the 1970s. Also in the 1980s bought a 12 3/4 “ (18 7/8” 27”) f/7.7 BL Protar VII and a 14” f/7.7 GOERTZ DOUBLE-ANASTIGMAT. They both have huge coverage and are excellent optics but have always gone back to the 12" Velostigmat. The Velostigmat does not have the 1 to 6 front "soft focus" ring.

508mm f/7 Caltar - bought it primarily for my 11x14 but whenever i take my 8x10 out, the Caltar also goes with me.

If I really need a wider angle lens, I take along my 5.9” f/14 No. 5 Gray Periscope in a Copal. It actually covers 11x14 but its sweet spot is 8x10.

When I was printing on traditional FB paper, preferred to use G-Clarons but for Platinum/Palladium prefer to use older classic optics.

Always wanted to own a Trigor but never came across one that was priced reasonably.

The last time I did an 8x10 project, I used a 10" Kodak Wide Field Ektar and a 14" Kodak Commercial Ektar. The WFE got most of the use. I was unhappy to sell that system off, but it wasn't paying its way. Should I ever go back to 8x10, I'd look for those lenses again.

I mainly shoot 4x5 but I have been shooting some 8x10. In order of use: Nikkor 450 M lens, Nikkor 300mm M lens, 240mm Nikkor W lens, 19 inch red dot artar lens, 12 inch soft focus Wollensak Velostigmat lens with variable 0-5 settings, and 8 1/4 inch 1960's American Optical Co Dagor lens. I have been shooting nature close-ups to infinity images, some architectural - urban to rural images, and working on portraits. The image is what its about.

I only used an 8x10 for a couple of years, but I found that a 300 and a 19" or 20" (can't remember precisely what it was) did me for most subjects. I never owned a wide-angle lens for it, couldn't fathom the cost.

Most used is the 12" Dagor followed by a 9 1/2" Dagor. Wide to a 6 1/2" WA Dagor then long to the 19 and 24" RD Artars.

Most desired? That would be the Cooke XVa because Ansel had one, and the 19" Dagor f/7.7 because it's a Dagor and it has enough coverage to contain a Walmart parking lot. That's if most desired translates into what prices they demand from buyers. There are good reasons why cult lenses are highly regarded, but to dismiss more pedestrian long time industry workhorses just because Ansel didn't have one, or have the market cornered when it comes to some esoteric quality is, IMHO, just silly.

I have nearly the whole set of 80-degree Fujinon-W that cover 8x10. The 300, 250, 210, and 180. I don't know the current market, but when I first got into 8x10 these lenses could be had at bargain prices. For super wide I use an inexpensive Fujinon SW 125 and just crop a little when printing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ic-racer

I have nearly the whole set of 80-degree Fujinon-W that cover 8x10. The 300, 250, 210, and 180. I don't know the current market, but when I first got into 8x10 these lenses could be had at bargain prices. For super wide I use an inexpensive Fujinon SW 125 and just crop a little when printing.

---

I have an older Fuji W 180mm -- inside lettering. I bought it as a long 4x5 or a short 5x7 lens. Will there be any movements possible on an 8x10 at infinity? I did not even think to check it for 8x10 coverage.

The inside-lettering 180 has an image circle of 305mm at f/22, so it offers no practical movements on 8x10 at infinity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Goldstein

The inside-lettering 180 has an image circle of 305mm at f/22, so it offers no practical movements on 8x10 at infinity.

---

Thanks! Tight for 8x10, but it sounds like the 180mm would work nicely for some 4x10 exposures! Now I just have to remember where I put that lens!

Unlike the Germans, Fuji tends to be a bit overly optimistic about how they calculate usable image circles. So even head-on, without any movements, I'd expect
some degradation towards the corners. Probably no big deal on a contact print, but there. Even my 180 Fuji A has an illumination circle bigger than 8x10 film;
but the corners are conspicuously mushy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaughn

Thanks! Tight for 8x10, but it sounds like the 180mm would work nicely for some 4x10 exposures! Now I just have to remember where I put that lens!

---

Vaughn, I've got the same lens but I haven't tried it on 8x10. Someone on here told me to try it straight on but I haven't yet. Might be good for 4x10.

The 180 W covers dead-on, I've used it that way a couple of times. But that doesn't make it an 8x10 lens.
Same goes for the 210 W, which covers 8x10 amply; when using it on 8x10, I find the entire image suffers in quality, not just the edges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Goldstein

The inside-lettering 180 has an image circle of 305mm at f/22, so it offers no practical movements on 8x10 at infinity.

---

Unless my math is wonky (a distinct possibility) the image circle for 8x10 is 327mm, so not only will there be no practical movements, it won't even cover 8x10 at f22.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari

The 180 W covers dead-on, I've used it that way a couple of times. But that doesn't make it an 8x10 lens.
Same goes for the 210 W, which covers 8x10 amply; when using it on 8x10, I find the entire image suffers in quality, not just the edges.

---

312.5mm is usually considered the IC for 8x10



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most of us routinely shoot 8x10 at smaller stops than f/22 anyway, more like f/45 to f/64; so that has to be taken into account. But any 180 general-purpose plasmat is going to be dicey at best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by faberryman

Unless my math is wonky (a distinct possibility) the image circle for 8x10 is 327mm, so not only will there be no practical movements, it won't even cover 8x10 at f22.

---

I've owned a few lenses that were not supposed to cover 8x10, but did.
Most of them had smaller ICs than the Fuji 180W; for example, the Schneider SA 121mm, or 120mm.
IC in the 290s, but it covers 8x10 straight-on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari

I've owned a few lenses that were not supposed to cover 8x10, but did.
Most of them had smaller ICs than the Fuji 180W; for example, the Schneider SA 121mm, or 120mm.
IC in the 290s, but it covers 8x10 straight-on.

---

Ari, I've got the SA 121mm f/8 lens too. On 4x5 it mirrors my 250 on 8x10. Feels like a 35mm lens on a 35mm camera. I haven't tried it straight on with 8x10. It''s pretty wide!

I bought the thing off Ebay for about $175 shipped. I checked the shutter with my shutter speed tester and to my surprise it was accurate. What a bargain!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drew Wiley

Most of us routinely shoot 8x10 at smaller stops than f/22 anyway, more like f/45 to f/64; so that has to be taken into account. But any 180 general-purpose plasmat is going to be dicey at best.

---

I won't take it on a long trip...but one of these days with 4x10 in the redwoods at less-than-infinity and f/64? The Zone VI 8x10 has plenty of rise/fall and shift to get the lens centered on the 4x10 section of film to be exposed. I already have a light little Wollei Graphic Raptor 210mm barrel lens that does cover 4x10 and 8x10 just fine...but shutters are so fine, though...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Gales

Ari, I've got the SA 121mm f/8 lens too. On 4x5 it mirrors my 250 on 8x10. Feels like a 35mm lens on a 35mm camera. I haven't tried it straight on with 8x10. It''s pretty wide!

I bought the thing off Ebay for about $175 shipped. I checked the shutter with my shutter speed tester and to my surprise it was accurate. What a bargain!

---

What a lens, eh? I keep mine on 4x5, but in a pinch it could work on 8x10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari

What a lens, eh? I keep mine on 4x5, but in a pinch it could work on 8x10.

---

I'll keep using my 120mm f6,8 Dagor, it's so small amd light and overs 7x5 :D

Ian

I'm not ashamed to admit that I like the lenses that our esteemed Jim Galli does not like. :) His work is nailed-down. I appreciate it very much, but differ.

A 14 3/4" fast(ish) lens I bought from Jim remains a favorite of mine for 8x10.

Edit: I'm through with lenses that have no shutter. Sure, my studio camera has a huge Packard shutter with sync, but I'm over it. Ma Faute!
.

There are at least a dozen Fujinon lenses that might meet your needs. Check them out at

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/lensgraph.gif

Some are older, some newer, some hard to find, some easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neil poulsen

...
But, 8x10 is a different ballgame....

---

Yes, 8x10 is indeed a different ballgame. And that's part of what makes it so much fun!
8x10 was the "go to" format for so may years. And because of that there were many, many lenses designed for it. So today, those of us with a taste for the arcane and archaic enjoy a plethora of choices.

There are probably so many 14" lenses out there that you'd go nuts trying to count them all. In fact, after years of collecting, I ended up with so many [14" lenses] that I had to start getting rid of them. Alas, I do still regret selling that 36cm Heliar...:rolleyes: And yes, Heliars were made in focal lengths for 4x5. But it is in 8x10 that the Heliar seems to take on the persona that we love. That's the difference in the ballgame (at least the way I see it). The portrait lenses just don't mean the same in 4x5 for some reason...

But not just the portrait lenses. The commercial lenses, too, the ones which were designed to be semi-soft and flattering wide open and sharp closed down (so that the working stiff of a photographer might get by with the investment of just one lens and not a vault-full) were largely designed in focal lengths for 8x10. I refer to lenses like the Gundlach Radar. Take a look at the Portraits thread on this forum and you'll see what I mean. 8x10 is a different ballgame and it's a great one! The redoubtable Kodak Commercial Ektar is itself among that bunch. Yes, the prices of Ektars have risen over the last 20 years (what hasn't?), but it's still a bargain among lenses for the 8x10 and would be my recommendation for a solid 8x10 lens (if my opinion means anything. Ha!)

On a personal note, I have a Cooke f/6.3 Series XIV, purchased years ago from an esteemed member here, which I adore. A pleasing glow wide open, yet quite sharp stopped down, this lens makes me want to drag that 8x10 out and use it.

It's a great ballgame!

8x10 is my go to format and although I have collected a broad array of options to consider, in the landscape West the 450m and the 600C get the most usage. Mid distance the 355 G Claron is the go to lens because of the enormous coverage for movements and the razor sharpness. Macro it is usually the 240mm Doctor or the 355 G Claron. I have two 12" lenses and it has been years since I have taken them out of the case. Keep them around just in case just like the 30" Red Dot.

I must say, this has been a really interesting thread. Given some of the limitations of needing such a large image circle for 8x10, it shows how many have explored the "corners" of the available lens space. I look forward to visiting some of these corners.

The 250mm f6.7 is my standard lens in that focal length, if for no other reason, because of it's size. But, it's a great 8x10 lens. However, other "inside lettering" lenses kind of escaped my notice. The discussion of the 180mm Fujinon (inside lettering) was interesting. While it's pretty thin on 8x10, if I become more involved in 5x7, I'll get this lens. It's inexpensive, and it's pretty easy to find. I think that I'll also keep my eye peeled for an "inside lettering," 300mm Fuji.

Another 300mm lens that occurs to me is a convertible Symmar. It's my understanding that, because of their construction, they can be stopped-down for additional coverage more effectively than say, a Symmar-S.

Perhaps because of some of the image circle challenges, I feel that 8x10 is more for fine-art, landscape, or portrait photography. This works fine, because 4x5 is always available for more "logistical" photography, like architecture. With that said, it would be interesting to hear what Ezra Stoller might have said in this conversation. His architectural work using an 8x10 is amazing.

Given my brief experience with an 8x20 I was "inspired" to purchase during 2015, I found examples of a 355mm G-Claron that I bought from Kerry, a 450mm M, and a 600C. The 600C was sheer luck, as I otherwise, could never have afforded the cost. I happened to stumble across one for $1000, when I also had some extra room on my credit card. So, I have a nice spread. But, I see that there are some other avenues to explore as well.

Thanks for all the input.

At first I only had the Nikkor 300 mm M and that was the only lens I used for big project. I carried a Temba shoulder bag with the Tachihara 8x10" folded, the lens + 3 holders. Then I added the 250 6,7 Fujinon and the Nikkor 45O M. Later I got the Schneider 150 XL and the Fujinon 600 C. When you have a long lens like the 600 mm you need a big Ries tripod. At the beginning I could run around with my one lens 8x10" kit, now I need a station wagon and an assistant when shooting the big format.