Favourite lens design and why?

[Shen45]

Through the years many lens designs have been used but do you have a personal favourite?

Your choice may be coverage, contrast, resolution or a mystical property you can not fully convey.

I shoot 5x4 on a modified 5x7 empire state #2 for the extra bellows draw and my choice seem to be Tessars and Dialytes.

I have two specialty lenses a Verito and a Petzval but the Tessars and Dialytes are certainly my choice for image qualities I like.

My reasons are probably quite simply explained as sharp and creamy for the Tessars and sharp and contrasty [but not too much] for the Dialytes.

I have a couple of plasmats but I find them increadibly boring lenses. Great optics but boring. They do everything well but have no personality. In colour they are probably sensational - but I don't shoot colour.

[Walter Calahan]

I simply love my Cooke XVa. Three wonderful lenses in one. Simple to use.

[Dave_B]

Nikkor 300M. It just works for me. My best shoots are with this lens. The 200M is a close second.
Cheers,
Dave B.

[Shen45]

If you wouldn't mind can you guys elaborate a bit more. Walter I've never used a Cooke like you have so any impressions you can share will be interesting and valuable in appreciating what other photographers find special about their favourite optics. The heritage of your particular lens Walter is rather special and not just from a technical point of view.
Dave I can understand your feelings on the Nikon as a friend has both the 200 and 300 but if you can can add something extra it may explain to some other person the character of the lens.

Anyway any information on what makes other photographers tick is to me interesting.

Steve

[William Barnett-Lewis]

I, too, prefer the Tessar and other asymmetrical lenses. What I especially enjoy is that with a good tessar design (and the old classic 127/4.7 Ektar is a good example of this) is how the center of the image is razor sharp but then it gently fades away the further from the center you get - and yet you'll still run out of coverage before you are completely out of sharpness. Using that right can be a total bit*h, but that's half the fun of the camera game.

William

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. Lessee now. I shoot an Uno type, tessar types, dialyte types, a 4/4 double Gauss type, heliar types, 6/4 plasmat types, 6/4 double gauss types, a 6/6 double Gauss type, dagor types, an f/5.6 Super Angulon, an f/4.5 Biogon. No triplets, just haven't got around to using the ones I have in the drawer.

I have my favorites, but don't see any connection between which lenses I prefer and their designs.

[Jack Flesher]

I get the question, but the answer is tougher...

Personally, my favorite lens of all time is a triplet -- creamy smooth with interesting aberrations wide open, gradually falling off to quite sharp when stopped down... I do like the comparative smoothness from tessars and Dagors, but they have a harsher contrast. Angulons are smooth and a bit less harsh, but perhaps not quite as sharp. Plasmats are nice and sharp, excellent contrast, excellent flare control, and modern versions are consistent in color rendering. The SA's have more notable, but still manageable, falloff, but are also sharp with great contrast and flare resistance, so I like using them mixed with the plasmats for wideangle work. So for me, the "favored" kit is one of consistent performance using plasmats and SA's.

And I aknowledge, as you pointed out, that they have no character... But I think it is their neutrality that I have come to appreciate; not too strong in any direction, delivering consistent and exceptional performance between focals without surprises. That said, I still carry the triplet when I want a unique look -- but I've only found one particular triplet that delivers character as described above, so I am limited to expressions that will work using her lone focal...

Cheers,

[Neal Shields]

75mm Biogon for 4x5.

Even though there is little or no movements, the prints just pop out at you. I always try to use it first and then revert to a 90mm Angulon if I need more movement.

There is a reason these things when 30+ years old sell for more than a new lens on the auction site.

[Dave_B]

In general I tend to be a Nikkor guy. I like their rendition of colors. The 300M is a Tessar type with 4 elements in three groups. It has a covering power of 52-57 degrees when stopped down to f22. The 300M has an image circle of 325mm at f22. It is small and compact for a 300mm lens that covers 8x10. I find this lens to be very sharp and contrasty. For some reason, I just know I'm going to nail the shot when I reach for this lens. I always seem to get a keeper with it. I use it for 4x5 and 8x10. I guess golfers feel that way about certain clubs and carpenters that way about a certain hammer. I just really like how it performs and the images it produces. It is probably the last lens I would be willing to part with and I have more than 60 others to compare it with.
Cheers,
Dave B.

[John Kasaian]

Whichever lens is out front on the lensboard at the time a scene comes together. I have tessars, double gauss, dialytes, dagors, rapid rectilinears, at least one radio active aerial and a lot whose names I don't even know. If I do my part, I figure they won't let me down.