Is there such as thing as a modern, fast, compact 360 for 8x10?

[KushLovely]

Hey LFPF!

Wondering if a lens like this even exists...?

I'm looking for a 360mm 8x10 lens, that is modern and very sharp, but is also lightweight, and around f/6.3

Is there a lens that ticks all these boxes?

Thanks so much (:

[Oren Grad]

Nope.

[Dann Corbit]

This list shows coverage circles and max apertures for a broad spectrum of lenses:
https://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html
You can find that link in the Lens FAQ document:
https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%...d=root&o=OneUp

Also potentially useful:
http://www.brucebarrett.com/large_fo..._Coverage.html

[Vaughn]

Like picking a mate. One hunts for looks, brains, and emotional stability. Pick two. At least you did not toss in cost! I have the FujiW 360/6.3 and it is a large beast. I do not know if the 360/6.8 Rodenstock Sironar N would be much lighter.

[Dann Corbit]

Also:
https://www.largeformatphotography.i.../LF8x10in.html

[KushLovely]

Thanks Vaughn! What do you think of the Sironar-N?

Like picking a mate. One hunts for looks, brains, and emotional stability. Pick two. At least you did not toss in cost! I have the FujiW 360/6.3 and it is a large beast. I do not know if the 360/6.8 Rodenstock Sironar N would be much lighter.

[Drew Wiley]

F/6.3 and light/compact would be mechanically irreconcilable. You need something that fits in a lightwt no.1 shutter rather than a big no.3. The realistic option, if you can find and afford it, would be a multicoated 360/f10 Fuji A. It's plenty bright for outdoor use, optically superb all the way from near-macro to infinity, and has plenty of surplus image circle for 8x10 usage. I'm not guessing. This has been one of my favorite lenses for both 4x5 and 8x10 for a long time.
There is also an uncommon relatively recent Schneider 350 f/11 Apo Tele Xenar which is only slightly tele in design. I don't personally have any experience with that particular lens, but a few people on this forum might own one.
The Fuji A 360/10 weighs only 465g, whereas their 360/6.3 W plastmat in no.3 shutter weighs 1533g. You can expect that kind of dramatic weight difference in all the other brands of 360 general-purpose plasmats too. For example, the 360/6.3 Sironar N weighs 1560g. That's quite a brick to haul around very much outdoors, if that is what you have in mind. But the big general-purpose studio lenses seem to be going for about a tenth of the price of the rarer and more coveted lightweight equivalents. A realistic compromise in both price and weight would be the 355/f9 G-Claron (later plasmat version) in no. 3 shutter, which weighs 855g.

[KushLovely]

Hey Drew,

Thanks so much for that detailed answer! It's really helped to give me a better idea of this lens arena.

I'm wondering - have you ever used a Schneider 360mm f/6.8 Symmar-S MC non-APO (Copal 3)? And where would you place it amongst the others you've listed?

F/6.3 and light/compact would be mechanically irreconcilable. You need something that fits in a lightwt no.1 shutter rather than a big no.3. The realistic option, if you can find and afford it, would be a multicoated 360/f10 Fuji A. It's plenty bright for outdoor use, optically superb all the way from near-macro to infinity, and has plenty of surplus image circle for 8x10 usage. I'm not guessing. This has been one of my favorite lenses for both 4x5 and 8x10 for a long time.
There is also an uncommon relatively recent Schneider 350 f/11 Apo Tele Xenar which is only slightly tele in design. I don't personally have any experience with that particular lens, but a few people on this forum might own one.
The Fuji A 360/10 weighs only 465g, whereas their 360/6.3 W plastmat in no.3 shutter weighs 1533g. You can expect that kind of dramatic weight difference in all the other brands of 360 general-purpose plasmats too. For example, the 360/6.3 Sironar N weighs 1560g. That's quite a brick to haul around very much outdoors, if that is what you have in mind. But the big general-purpose studio lenses seem to be going for about a tenth of the price of the rarer and more coveted lightweight equivalents. A realistic compromise in both price and weight would be the 355/f9 G-Claron (later plasmat version) in no. 3 shutter, which weighs 855g.

[Drew Wiley]

My own usage of Symmar S lens lenses predates my 8x10 days, and was related only to 4x5 format. But I think I can give a relevant opinion, nonetheless. They aren't quite as ultra sharp or contrasty as later plasmats by the big four manufacturers. But that's not a big deal with 8x10, or even really with 4x5, since the degree of enlargement isn't great even on a large print. They're plenty sharp for most things, with very good color rendering, and I particularly liked the gentler out of focus rendition of Symmar S, or background blur, which wasn't as hard-sharp-busy as later, more contrasty plasmats, and was therefore more appropriate for portraiture or things like flower closeups. There are plenty of these lenses still around at bargain pricing, and if you encounter one still in good condition, why not? But they'll be heavy just like all general-purpose lenses of this focal length

[Vaughn]

Thanks Vaughn! What do you think of the Sironar-N?

I'll defer to Drew and others. My hands-on experience has been with the Fuji W 360/6.3 (both 8x10 and 11x14) and the lens Drew mentioned, the 355/f9 G-Claron, which I have used only with 11x14 -- and very very nice lens indeed. Unfortunately it was not my lens, or I never would have bought the Fuji W.

I have used f11 lenses in the redwoods (process lenses), but another stop of light of a f9 is much nicer to work with. Taken with the 355/f9 G-Claron on 11x14 (carbon print):