Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Bellingham, WA (displaced Canadian)
    Posts
    519

    Re: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Much like today, there was an obsession over image circle and what a given lens will cover. There was a marketing advantage to claiming "your" lens has the largest image circle. That ~400mm Plus image circle could be achieved by approaching or exceeding life size aka 1 to 1 image reproduction ratio. Which does bring up a very real world way in which many wide angle lenses are used. They are often used by moving the camera in to create large print image object close to the lens -vs- shrinking objects away from the lens. This tends to increase the projected image circle of the lens.

    Historical curiosity about the Angulon, it is essentially a "reverse Dagor" done to get around the Dagor Patent. Having used both WA Dagor and Angulon, they have similar performance. These lens designs go back a long time and have stood the test of time for good reasons.. they have quite remarkable optical performance for what they are and given when these were designed and made. Many decades passed before notably better optical designs were done to surpass the optical performance of this seemingly simply and lowly design. The modern trade-off became HUGE compared to the Angulon in the march to improving optical performance.

    Not a lot wrong with the Angulon (lf the sample is a good one), this 165mm Angulon in barrel lives with the Sinar Norma in the roller pelican case, serves as the medium wide for 5x7. Does well for this as it is essentially a Dagor in this focal length. Typical taking aperture for the 165mm Angulon is f16 and smaller. It's optical performance at f6.8 to f11_ish is not that "hot"...

    Note the size difference between the 165mm Angulon -vs- the 165mm Super Angulon -vs- the 150mm SSXL. Each has its plus/minus for a given image need.
    Attachment 210370


    Bernice
    I have the same set! Well, nearly. I don't have the Super Symmar and my 165mm SA is multicoated. But I certainly enjoy using them!

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Mother Lode, California
    Posts
    714

    Re: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Lindquist View Post
    Like Schneider, C.P. Goerz American Optical Co./Goerz Optical Co., Inc. became more conservative in their coverage claims for the Wide Angle Dagor. A 1960 piece of Goerz literature I have claims 100 degrees for the Wide Angle Dagor. A 1967 brochure (if I'm interpreting the date code correctly) claims 90 degrees. Typically they specify this is at f/45.

    David
    Reviving this thread as I have information further narrowing down when Goerz got more conservative in describing the coverage of the Wide Angle Dagor. A price list dated June 1960 gives the coverage of the "Wide Angle Golden Dagor" as 100 degrees. A descriptive leaflet from Goerz dated October 1963 gives the coverage of the Wide Angle Dagor as 90 degrees and this coverage is reached at f/45; at f/22 it's 80 degrees.

    The June 1960 price list doesn't so much say at what aperture the 100 degrees is achieved, rather it gives "film size" for f/8 and f/32. For example for the 6 1/2 inch Wide Angle Dagor the respective film sizes given are 5 1/2 x 7 1/2 and 10 x 12.

    David
    Last edited by David Lindquist; 21-Jun-2021 at 18:43.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    West Chicago, IL, USA
    Posts
    103

    Re: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    Just the 159/12.5 Wollensak with B&W. I don't know if I have a bad copy, it was dropped, or operator error (more work with it needed, probably), but 'covering' 8x10 must have a different meaning.

    I've got a coated version of the 159mm f9.5. It's a completely different lens but Wollensak advertised it having less coverage than the f12.5 (the f9.5 is at 91.2º and the f12.5 is listed at 100º when stopped down). I don't have any complaints about my lens. It's small and decently sharp for its age. I definitely don't see any of the corner smearing like your example image shows.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	50176903981_c5935babe7_o.jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	97.8 KB 
ID:	216909
    Christopher J May
    West Chicago, IL

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Posts
    111

    Re: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

    Same article as the subject in other thread:

    For myths and facts about SuperAngulon MC and SSymmar XL here some original Schneider datas for SA 165 MC and SSXL 150

    Attachment 222682

    What we see clearly is, the SSXL 150 is a better optical performer at aperture 8, but (slightly) worse at 22 to the SA 165.
    More important, the 150 has clearly more light-falloff compared to the 165, at 22 in the extreme image-border 20% to 30%.
    I remember, the Schneider folks at the Photokina around 2000 told me, the advantage of the SSXL is the much smaller size and the simpler and cost reduced manufacturing, therefore they will discontinue the bigger SA 165 and 210 sooner or later. So they did.
    But they also told me, that the 150 and all the SSXL are not recommended to use without centerfilter. the SAngulons lightfallof at 22 is not too critical.

    happy holidays
    Rainer

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,901

    Re: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

    Yes indeediee. Schneider phased in the 150mm SSXL to replace the 165mm f8 SA in time.

    Back in the 8x10 film days, the 155mm Grandagon was the "go to" very wide angle for 8x10. Needed a center filter for color transparencies to correct for light fall off. In time the 8x10 sheet film stopped. This turned the 155mm Grandagon into a medium wide for 5x7, center filter not really needed. Keep in mind the 155mm Grandagaon is HUGE and about the same size as the 165mm f8 SA.

    It was the later 1990's when Schneider announced the SSXL aspheric wide angle lenses. Decided to go for the 110mm SSXL and 150mm SSXL as a pre-order promo. Nearly a year passed before delivery. Adding to this deal, Schneider did a trade in your old view camera lens for new discount, any view camera lens was eligible for this discount. This further sweetened the deal. It was the 110mm SSXL that arrived first, good lens on 5x7, does NOT cover 8x10 and has significant light fall off. Yet, text on the web-internet continues to float the fantasy the 110mm SSXL covers 8x10 and .... This simply NOT true as the optical performance image circle dies before properly covering 8x10 and the light fall off is BAD.

    The 150mm SSXL got pressed into medium wide duty for 5x7, center filter not really needed and it was about half the size of the 155mm Grandagon.

    Being one of those who does not press view camera lenses past f32 and often not past f22, both SSXLs worked very good. Based on decades of experience with these two copies, Optical performance is good at f8 to f22, there after the performance begins to drop off.

    In recent years, the 110mm SSXL got parked being replaced by a 115mm Grandagon or 105mm Fujinon. The 150mm SSXL still serves for medium wide 5x7 as needed, but for lug around portability the 165mm f6.8 Angulon works good enough.

    Regardless of what folks say about the SSXLs, they NEED a center filter if the light fall off problem is to be corrected and the image goals demand this.


    Bernice




    Quote Originally Posted by rawitz View Post
    Same article as the subject in other thread:

    For myths and facts about SuperAngulon MC and SSymmar XL here some original Schneider datas for SA 165 MC and SSXL 150

    Attachment 222682

    What we see clearly is, the SSXL 150 is a better optical performer at aperture 8, but (slightly) worse at 22 to the SA 165.
    More important, the 150 has clearly more light-falloff compared to the 165, at 22 in the extreme image-border 20% to 30%.
    I remember, the Schneider folks at the Photokina around 2000 told me, the advantage of the SSXL is the much smaller size and the simpler and cost reduced manufacturing, therefore they will discontinue the bigger SA 165 and 210 sooner or later. So they did.
    But they also told me, that the 150 and all the SSXL are not recommended to use without centerfilter. the SAngulons lightfallof at 22 is not too critical.

    happy holidays
    Rainer

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    2,412

    Re: Preferences for 150-165mm lenses in 8x10?

    I use and old uncoated 6.5" W.A. Dagor from the late 1930's. Covers great and is a great lens!

Similar Threads

  1. 165mm Lenses - Why Is It An Uncommon Focal Length?
    By Flauvius in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 28-Oct-2012, 17:07
  2. Linhof 001716 Coupling Package For Technikardan 45 75-165mm Lenses
    By J Maxwell in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-Apr-2010, 14:07
  3. 8x10 lenses, 150-165mm
    By Mark Sawyer in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 15-Apr-2005, 22:43
  4. Suggestions and Preferences for 4x5 Lenses
    By Paul mapstone in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 6-Mar-2002, 11:39

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •