Thank you very much! I found one on ebay for under $100 with a dysfunctional aperture I'm going to attempt to fix. Thanks everyone for their suggestions, I guess I'll know if I like it when it gets here.Originally Posted by ic-racer
Thank you very much! I found one on ebay for under $100 with a dysfunctional aperture I'm going to attempt to fix. Thanks everyone for their suggestions, I guess I'll know if I like it when it gets here.
312mm image circle is required to "just" cover 8x10 direct on center. IMO, 305mm image circle is too small for 8x10.
Might be better served with a 210mm inside lettering Fujinon W instead of the 180mm. Know this will be about 80 degrees angle of view (spec for inside lettering Fujinon W) or medium wide, not really wide.
Good wide angle lenses for 8x10 has alway been an issue with a long list of trade-offs. While vintage lenses like Protar V is tiny and will "cover" 8x10, these have a small working aperture as with similar vintage 8x10 wide angle lenses. Modern wide angles that are tooted to cover like 120mm SW Nikkor, 120mm and 121mm Super Angulon does sort of cover 8x10, they have significant limitations. GOOD 8x10 wide angles like 150mm Super Symmar XL, 155mm Grandagon, 165mm Super Angulon, 200mm Grandagon, 210mm Super Angulon and ... are not low cost and comes with heft and bulk that is beyond the want-need of some 8x10 image makers.
Essentially, 8x10 is NOT a low cost film format. one box of 8x10 film and processing could easily exceed $100. IMO, "bargain" 8x10 lenses and related is "penny wise-pound foolish"..
Then again, this has been the standing opinion for many decades now.. All a matter of what one is trying to achieve with 8x10.
Bernice
I used a 210mm f/5.6 Symmar-S for a while (~$150) before upgrading to a Graphic Kowa 210mm f/9 (I paid $450, higher now).
The Symmar covers with a tiny bit extra, GK covers with enough to spare for almost any amount of movements you could want.
Break the rules
At close up magnifications more lenses fit
or Pinhole with X-Ray
Tin Can
I use an E Francais casket set if I want to go wide on 8 x 10 - the set covers 11 x 14, has a couple of softer focus lenses and a couple of wide angles, I can't recall the f stop(s) but they're way brighter than the small Protar's - check it out, if you can find one you get a lot of combinations for a little price, I've never been fussed about coated glass nor that a lens has to be in a shutter
good luck and regards
Andrew
An older Fujinon 210 will cover with some room for movements. The Fuji 180 has to positioned straight on and even then, you'll get slightly dark corners. It didn't bother me, but I still like to have some room for movements.
Shorter FLs get much more expensive, except for the 159mm Wollensak, but it's hard to see through except in very bright light; while it's an ok performer, you might outgrow it quickly if you continue with 8x10.
If you're in 8x10 for the long haul, consider the 165 Schneider SA/155 Grandagon/150 SSXL/150 Nikkor a worthy investment in your photo journey.
If you want a true 8x10 lenses with plenty of coverage then you will have to pony up. If you don't mind little to no room for movements and maybe darkened corners then there are lenses out there. I own a Super Angulon 121mm that works straight on and it cost me less than 200 dollars. I read that Clive Barker used this lens at one time. I own an 8x10 but only used this lens for 4x5. It's too wide for me on 8x10.
Also realize that true 8x10 wide angle lenses with plenty of coverage get large and heavy. Some call them boat anchors.
Back in the 8x10 days (about two decades ago) the fave 8x10 wide angle were 200mm & 155mm Grandagon. These were GOOD, big-heavy and not budget lenses. Eventually the 155mm Grandagon went to a new owner, replaced by the 150mm Schneider SSXL. Smaller, lesser big at higher cost than the 155mm Grandagon at the time. Still have this lens to this day. Recent adder became a 165mm Super Angulon. These lenses are used today on 5x7 which makes them a moderate wide with remarkable amounts of camera movement possible and the light fall off problem is not nearly as significant as it would be for 8x10.
For moderate wide angle 8x10 lenses going to 210mm or so makes a real difference in what lenses can be used and their related cost. Once you're at about 150mm the cost, size and all related goes up lots unless you're willing to trade off optical performance. Beyond the challenge of optics, will the camera being used be comfortable with a focal length of 150mm or so. Then there is film flatness and a host of other requirements that are very real obstructions to realizing the potential performance of any given lens on 8x10.
Bernice
IMO, if you're going to do all that is involved with producing 8x10 film images, they better be as best as they could given what is involved to create these 8x10 film images.
Yes, get the circular image thing.. then again this drive the choice of lens in a different direction.
Bernice
Good thing Edward Weston didn't agree.
I have a 159 WA Raptar. It was cheap, and it'll help me determine whether I like that focal length on 8x10. I've only used it a bit, but so far I have no complaints quality wise.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks