Which 360mm lens has the largest image circle

[Bernice Loui]

To be pondered...

This entire discussion about 360mm/14" lens with a HUGE image circle (800+ mm) is much about lens choices as the sheet film or plate format goes up-size. This discussion should serve as a harsh remainer of what happens to lens choice as sheet film or plate sizes goes up, the selection and choices for lenses shrinks to fewer to trying to discover nessie, big foot or a platnium unicorn..

Ultimate answer to this lens/optic need is to have a lens designed, built to the specific needs.. Then size, weight and all that is forced into this direction of any specially designed then built lens/optic.

It's all a set of trade offs with nothing being ideal to what any image maker wants to believe..


Bernice

[Mark Sampson]

In the 1980s, Douglas Busch built a 40X60" field view camera. He had Rodenstock design a lens to cover the format; they made the glass, and Melles-Griot did the final assembly. His work, and his camera, were featured in "View Camera" magazine c.1990. IIRC, his lenses were offered for sale (in very small numbers).
So yes, it's been done, and perhaps could be done again. As they saying the auto racing world, "Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?"
I wish the OP all the best in their quest...

[Tin Can]

I have read and seen pics of the Giant Busch Camera

He made a special tripod with big wood platform and 6 Majestic sticks

Made in Dekalb IL

[Drew Wiley]

Cameras larger than all the above were in use in Frontier times. One was so big that a crew of carpenters had to go along to assemble the "tripod" for every shot. I've seen 4 ft wide contact prints from another Frontier photographer who also needed to have camera support built for each location shot. Now people turn RV's and semi trailers into pinhole cameras, and back and jack them into position. And for a price, any kind of lens can be made, even another Hubble telescope if you can afford. It can be done even in my own neighborhood; just show them your NASA i.d. and credit card without a limit on it. But the whole question in this case is whether or not you need a forklift for any lens with sufficient coverage at the same time as a reasonably wide enough aperture to focus with. A 360 lens is going to be a distinctly wide an angle of view on any camera larger than 11X14; there is far more hypothetical choice in longish focal lengths instead. How about a 1200mm Fuji A? I do believe more than one of those was made; perhaps two? Dunno.

[xkaes]

How about a 1200mm Fuji A? I do believe more than one of those was made; perhaps two? Dunno.

I've seen estimates of as many as eight -- or 12. Who knows? It didn't last long, of course, and was probably made just to prove that they could -- for good advertisement. It was a special order anyway.

[ridax]

Does a Tessar design/formula lens really have the ability to produce a optically proper image circle of greater than 60 degrees? This is defined as near equal optical performace from center to edges of the image circle, no exceptions.

Sorry I was mistaken in the angle calculations for the 600mm focal length in my previous message (just edited it out).

Process Apo-Tessars cover 57°. Their sharpness is good up to the edges but vignetting comes fast.

[neil poulsen]

They are not always the same, as discussed in the thread I linked. Some people who have purchased lenses labeled "Graphic Kowa", expecting to get the coverage of a Computar, have been very unpleasantly surprised. Caveat emptor.

At one time, I had both a Kowa 210mm f9, and a Computar 210mm f9. In comparing the two, the Computar clearly had greater coverage.

[Drew Wiley]

Were both the Kowa and Computar in the same style shutter, Neil, or different?

[Dan Fromm]

Process Apo-Tessars cover 57°. Their sharpness is good up to the edges but vignetting comes fast.

Are you sure? Arne Croell has published 43° for Apo-Tessars and Nikon claims 45°-35°, depending on focal length, for tessar type Apo-Nikkors.

[ridax]

Process Apo-Tessars cover 57°. Their sharpness is good up to the edges but vignetting comes fast.

Are you sure? Arne Croell has published 43° for Apo-Tessars and Nikon claims 45°-35°, depending on focal length, for tessar type Apo-Nikkors.

Yes I am sure. Those officially published specs (1) are too conservative and (2) for these lenses, are for critical process work. For that application, absolutely flat field and negligible distortion are a must. Distortion rises along with the field angle - even in the best corrected lenses. Those strict requirements are never needed in general photography.

I've used later CZJ Apo-Tessars in 240, 300, 450, 600 and 900mm as well as the Soviet Industar-11M's (which are copies of the previous generation CZJ Apo-Tessars and are identical in coverage) in 300, 450 and 600mm focal lengths. I've not tried tessar-type Apo-Nikkors but I think they also cover more than the specs suggest, at reasonably smaller f-stops.