Schneider Symmar-S 210m F5.6 Lens - Will this work for 8x10?

[Bernice Loui]

Remarkable how much more image circle is available by going up 30mm more in focal length..

210mm f5.6 Symmar S image circle at f22 = 294mm..

240mm f5.6 Symmar S image circle at f22 = 337mm

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/02157/02157.pdf

BTW, a 50mm lens covers 8x10 tooo.... ponder how many 35mm film images have been projection enlarged to 8x10 prints over the decades... Will any given lens cover dependent how how it will be used, the specific lens design formula... and fully understanding the limitations and abilities of any given lens design formula, it's capabilities and it's limitations.


Bernice


Bernice

I just picked up a 240 S as well so sounds like that one will cover better.

[rawitz]

Whats remarkable here?
The math. faktor for focal from 210 to 240 is 1,143 and for IC from 294mm x 1,143 = 336 mm. 1mm extra bonus?

Rainer

[Bernice Loui]

For those seeking a lens for 8x10, 240mm or 250mm Plasmat cost a bit more or about the same as a 210mm Plasmat yet the 240mm / 250mm (exception being the 250mm f6.3 Fujinon W) Plasmat actually covers 8x10 properly..

~That is what is "remarkable"... 30mm increase is essentially insignificant in the overall view for 8x10 compared to 210mm..

The numbers appear to be insignificant, it is the real world differences that are significant and remarkable here..



Bernice

Whats remarkable here?
The math. faktor for focal from 210 to 240 is 1,143 and for IC from 294mm x 1,143 = 336 mm. 1mm extra bonus?

Rainer

[Daniel Unkefer]

Old Man's Cave Falls by Nokton48, on Flickr

Old Man's Cave Falls 8x10 Sinar Norma 240mm Norma Symmar, 8x10 HP5 (not +) D76 1:1 fibre 8x10 print Fortezo Dektol

[Drew Wiley]

rawitz - your hypothetical nonsense numbers are way off. With respect to real world 8x10 circle of coverage, the difference between a 210 and a 240 of similar plasmat design tends to be very significant.

[ic-racer]

My first 8x10 camera used a $125 Symmar-S 210. As long as you are smarter than the people that say it won't work, it will work fine.
For example, my camera with no front tilt, was modified to increase rear tilt by rotating the rear 'standard' 180 degrees. This, of course magnifies the image circle for complete coverage.
Also, without enough image circle for front rise, converging verticals can be corrected in the darkroom.
I made many great images with my Symmar-S 210 on 8x10, four are shown here:

[rawitz]

rawitz - your hypothetical nonsense numbers are way off. With respect to real world 8x10 circle of coverage, the difference between a 210 and a 240 of similar plasmat design tends to be very significant.

Well, if mathematics is nonsense you are right. Every fool (like me) can calculate the IC difference between 210 and 240 focal with the same lens construction, so whats "remarkable" with the info I asked.

[Bernice Loui]

Mathematics alone does not result in emotionally expressive images.. Mathematics functions best in the abstract.. as mathematics requires and demands some means to churn abstract into tangible stuff..


Bernice

Well, if mathematics is nonsense you are right. Every fool (like me) can calculate the IC difference between 210 and 240 focal with the same lens construction, so whats remarkable with the info?

[rawitz]

Mathematics alone does not result in emotionally expressive images.. Mathematics functions best in the abstract.. as mathematics requires and demands some means to churn abstract into tangible stuff..
Bernice

I fully agree! But I and many others here regret the statement, that there is a sharp borderline in useability between 210 and 240 focal for 8x10.
I myself have a Symmar-S 210 and a Sironar-N 240, but for my 8x10 photography I mostly prefer the 210 for the "remarkable" more wide-angle effect, because anyway i (and many here) can do corrections in digital post.
Once again: The Symmar-S 210 DOES cover 8x10 without vignetting.

regards
Rainer

[Bernice Loui]

..."The Symmar-S 210 DOES cover 8x10 without vignetting"...

~vignetting.. kinda depends on interpretation, expectations, image goals and... Yes, your definition, expectations, demands and goals might be absolutely acceptable for you... might not be acceptable or workable at all for another... yes/no _?_


Which is subject to image/film plane dependent.. as previously mentioned a 50mm lens easily covers 8x10.. dependent on subject to image/film plane distances..

Now, take that 210mm Symmar S, make the subject distance at infinity to the 8x10 film plane then apply no less than 10x optical enlargement to the very edges of the image circle AND apply no less than 50 to 75mm of camera shift and rise/fall and front tilt and swing.. What might the results be_?_

Point being, there are very real reasons why Schneider published image circles at f22... why might this be_?_

BTW, if you're serious about using a 200_ish mm lens for 8x10, the 200mm f6.8 Rodenstock Grandagon, 210mm f8 Schneider Super Angulon or 210mm f6.8 Angulon and others wide angle lenses specific formulas WILL do better than abusing and pushing the image circle of the 210mm Symmar S..


Bernice

I fully agree! But I and many others here regret the statement, that there is a sharp difference in useability between 210 and 240 focal for 8x10.
I myself have a Symmar-S 210 and a Sironar-N 240, but for my 8x10 photography I mostly prefer the 210 for the "remarkable" more wide-angle effect, because anyway i (and many here) can do corrections in digital post.
Once again: The Symmar-S 210 DOES cover 8x10 without vignetting.

regards
Rainer