Lenses that are sharp wide open (or only just stopped down)

[M Harvey]

Anyone want to share any experiences with lenses shot wide open, or only slightly stopped down? I shoot 4x5, and a lot of what I do involves isolating an individual in an environment-- usually full body, and often in relatively low light. Can't remember the last time I crossed f11. Any lenses (in 135-150-180-210) that provide noticeably superior resolution and contrast between f5.6 and 8?

Some of you may suggest-- and rightly-- that a different approach to my desired goal of subject isolation is to use longer focal lengths. In fact, this is why I often find myself using a 210 instead of a 150. (Others of you may suggest that I just shoot a Mamiya 7 with it's razor-sharp-at-f4 lenses. Good point. I don't know what to say except that I love the 4x5 working method. Others that it doesn't really matter, as you've got resolution to burn in 4x5 anyway. Fair enough. But I prefer to avoid a "dreamy" look, and I do anticipate printing large.)

To get the ball rolling, I've used the 150 f5.6 from the Schneider HM series for a low-light project. Really lovely wide open, and definitely stronger in resolution and contrast wide open than my Fuji and Nikon plasmats. What else do you guys like for this challenge?

[djdister]

Try the Schneider Xenar or Zeiss Planar lens at (or near) wide open...

[EdSawyer]

I use both Xenotars wide open or @ f4 and they are quite sharp. The 8" f/2.9 Pentac @ f/4 is also another good choice, not crazy $, etc. The Aero Ektar also comes to mind.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Zeiss F3.5/135 Planar for 4x5. Beware that I have seen many flogged on the auction site in the wrong shutters. For or 8x10 ... well, you didn't ask but a Caltar F/6.3 14 3/4" is impressive wide open if your 4x5 has enough extension.

Best,
Jac

[Kevin Crisp]

I only know this due to a mistake on my part, but the Fuji 450-C is very sharp wide open.

[Daniel Unkefer]

150mm F2.8 Schneider Xenotar, 180mm F2.8 CZJ Zeiss Sonnar

[Whir-Click]

Kodak Ektar 203mm 7.7

Excellent at any aperture, but brilliant wide open.

[LabRat]

Most fast lenses tend to be a little soft/mushy when used wide open, but the old astrophotography rule is to stop a lens down at least two stops from max opening for better correction... So if you had an f2.8 lens, you would be shooting about f5.6 or smaller (if better definition is preferred, but often a lens can have a pretty effect wide open, but not super tack brittle sharp there)...

I like old Tessars wide open, image has pretty, smooth gradations, not too much or too little sharpness, and a pretty focus fall-off/OOF areas... And cheap...

My APO/process lenses have the best wide open performance compared to my standard lenses , but can fall-off to OOF strangely... (And slow...)

Steve K

[Lightbender]

i dont have any of the longer fast lenses, but I have tried both the Xenotar and Planar in 80mm, and they are soft and have really bad CA wide open.
I dont think i would ever use them wide open.
Stopped down to about 5.6, they are pretty good. But I would not pay the extra $$$ for stops I would not use.

Other slower lenses.. G-claron (i have), apo-ronar, etc are good/great wide open, but they are of course slower to start with.

I also have a 210mm f5.6 Sironar N. At f5.6 it is acceptably sharp, though there is CA in the out of focus areas. It may not be noticeable in a portrait setting though (low contrast). At f8 it is fantastic, and most of the CA is gone. But this is probably comparable to the lenses you already own.
I have not tried any of the APO versions, maybe they are better at f5.6, maybe not.

Truth is I don't think any large-format lens will be as good above 5.6 . Especially not some vintage 'magic' lens. But it still may be acceptably good. So what really matters is would you be willing to sacrifice some critical acuity for better background separation?

Or you may want to rethink the placement of your subjects. if you are in the studio, place our subject a bit further away from the background.. or get closer by a few feet.

[goamules]

Anyone want to share any experiences with lenses shot wide open, or only slightly stopped down? I shoot 4x5, and a lot of what I do involves isolating an individual in an environment-- usually full body, and often in relatively low light. Can't remember the last time I crossed f11. Any lenses (in 135-150-180-210) that provide noticeably superior resolution and contrast between f5.6 and 8?

...

A Golden Dagor at F6.8, or a Commercial Ektar at 6.3 might be interesting to try wide open, they are sharp, and are good portrait lenses. The classic Petzval was the epitome of fast and sharp. But you have to be careful to ensure the size you want will fit on your lensboard, they're large, and you'd probably need a longer focal length than you want, just to cover. I shot this on 4x5 transparency Fuji, and know it was stopped down a couple times.