Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    1,263

    200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    I would like to start doing more selective focus work and would like a lens with an older look to it. I want to shoot opened up and get a nice look to the out of focus areas. I would like something in a shutter, 200mm-300mm range that is not terribly expensive.

    Any suggestions of what to look for or am I asking for too much? I shoot 4x5 and currently have a Fujinon 240mm in that range, a really sharp lens, but I am looking for a different look.

  2. #2
    Big Negs Rock!
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Pasadena
    Posts
    1,178

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    I have a convertible lens for sale on eBay that is S-K 135mm/210mm lens. It'll probably sell for around $100.
    Mark Woods

    Large Format B&W
    Cinematography Mentor at the American Film Institute
    Past President of the Pasadena Society of Artists
    Director of Photography
    Pasadena, CA
    www.markwoods.com

  3. #3

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    An older Heliar, Tessar or Xenar could do it for you. Especially those from the 1930-40 which are uncoated. Check Ken Lee's work with Heliars and Tessars to see if it's something you like.
    The thing about the older versions of the lenses is that they are either mounted in a barrel or an older Compound shutter. Apart from the nice soft sound from the shutter, there are many blades in the aperture which gives a round opening, should you stop down. The post-WWII versions of these lenses are usually single-coated.
    I got a Fuji 240A too which is very sharp as you say. I also have both a Heliar and a Xenar 210mm. (I got the Heliar in a barrel mount and later picked up a nice working Xenar 210 in a compound shutter. The Heliar, which is a similar but not the same design, drops right into the shutter.) I havn't got around to testing the lenses side-by-side, but they differ a bit wide open and are very good and sharp when stopped down to f/16 or so. But I didn't get these lenses for that, but for their special personality wide open.

    //Björn

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    4,588

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    Kodak Ektar f:7.7/203mm is probably the best bang for the buck. Uncoated pre-WW2versions were called Anastigmet, not Ektar (otherwise same lens)
    Wilhelm (Sarasota)

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    B&L Tessar Ic f:4.5

    Cheers, Steve

  6. #6
    SF Bay Area 94303
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    433

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    10 inch Commercial Ektar would be nice too. Not too much money.
    K

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina
    Posts
    34

    Thumbs up Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    The Fuji 250 soft focus would be another option. I use it for tabletop/macro with both natural and studio light. Used wide open the "halo" effect, especially with B & W, is quite nice. Used price is in the range of $300-400.

  8. #8
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    7,595

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    Most of the older lenses have many aperture blades, which can give a very round opening, and there are lot's of great lenses in your range. Ilex paragons, Kodak lenses, process lenses....

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Carolina, United States
    Posts
    97

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill_1856 View Post
    Kodak Ektar f:7.7/203mm is probably the best bang for the buck. Uncoated pre-WW2versions were called Anastigmet, not Ektar (otherwise same lens)
    Another vote for the 203mm Ektar
    I shot with one for quite some time, always liked it

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Tonopah, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    6,338

    Re: 200mm-300mm, good bokeh, not too much $

    To get the look you want you need a minimum of an f4.5 lens. The Kodak Ektar 190mm f4.5 is superb as are the Schneider Xenar's in f4.5. Heliars are superb but may not meet your price requirement. I have a 190 f3.5 Tessar in shutter lost somewhere in the Classifieds here. It never sold. Price was obviously too high. Contact me off line if interest.

Similar Threads

  1. Recommend a good internal frame backpack
    By stompyq in forum Gear
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 22-Feb-2008, 20:27
  2. Bokeh, Bokeh, Bokeh....?
    By Kevin Crisp in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 7-May-2007, 14:59
  3. Portrait perspective: Quiz and two questions
    By Jerry Fusselman in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 5-Jun-2006, 17:57

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
  •