Picking a 210 for 4X5

[BrianShaw]

Didn't one of the LF saints tell us we needed a 210... either St. Ansel or St. Fred the Picker. Isn't that really why there are so many onthe market?

Which one probably doesn't matter. I chose mine using the eenie-meenie-mynie-moe method and ended up with Schneider. I remember lots of talk of Schneider being lower contrast than Nikon and Fuji having a reddish color cast... but never noticed these differences myself. If I knew at the time that Nikon had 67mm filters I might have gone that way.

[jp]

I like my 203mm optar.

I'm sure you can't go wrong with any of the poll choices either. I have a fujinon and a symmar-s in other focal lengths and they are well made.

[Drew Wiley]

Brian, 210 was pushed by some of the pro photo schools for its versatility. If a student
had one of these for portraiture and general use, and a 90 for architecture, they had
most applications covered with a minimal investment. Plus a 210 has a much better image circle than most "normal" lenses like a 150. In fact, it came to be regarded as
"normal" by many 4x5 users. I certainly regarded it that way, and liked the angle of
perspective too, although now I consider 250 more as my personal "normal".

[Ken Lee]

In 35mm terms, you can divide that by 3, so it is very slight difference.

14% is 14%

(240-210)/210 = (80-70)/70

[Dave Wooten]

Not my point (though the 210 isn't even that long relative to the format--it's more like a 60). The 210 is the standard "longer" lens for 4x5 use (probably because so many were available, given that they are normal lenses for 5x7). The 135 was the standard accessory long lens for small format. Thus, both were have been produced in quantity relative to their markets, and offered at relatively low price points. Also, both are long enough to be "long", but not long enough to require a telephoto design. That has the double-pronged benefit of not requiring much coverage and not including elements that magnify faults.

Most people add a 210 to their 4x5 collection using the same basic motivations as people adding a 135mm lens to their 35mm collection.

The equivalent focal length to a 135 would be something like a 450, which is rare and expensive for 4x5 use, and which commonly requires a telephoto design to work on a 4x5 camera. 4x5 users think hard before buying one, and in that format it's a specialty lens, not the default long lens.

(I should add that the only reason there are sucky 85's is because they push the limits in terms of speed. Most cheapie 135's are f/2.8-f/4 lenses, just as most 210's start at f/5.6 or smaller. There are probably no bad 85/2.8's, but most 85's are f/2 or faster, and are considered more of a specialty portrait lens than an accessory telephoto.)

Rick "thinking in market terms" Denney

Rick, You are right, mom always said I wasn't mathematically inclined! She was right. I have the Sironar 210 and have been very pleased with it. I have also used it on my 8 x 10 Wista but even the slightest movements and it tends to loose the corners. It is fine for 5 x 7. 215 mm paragons are out there cheap at times and they also have good coverage but I don t think they are a coated lens.

[rdenney]

215 mm paragons are out there cheap at times and they also have good coverage but I don t think they are a coated lens.

Yes, they are coated. I have an 8-1/2" Paragon in the fast f/4.5 version. It's a tessar design and a nice lens for many applications. It can go sharp or soft, and the bokeh is not bad. They are big, though, for their format, being mounted in an Ilex No. 4.

Rick "who has tasked the Paragon as a portrait lens for the Speed Graphic, and will calibrate the Kalart for it once all the right pieces are collected" Denney

[Kirk Keyes]

210 or 240 G-Claron

[Vaughn]

Just to toss another lens into the ring, I used a Computar Symmetrigon 210/6.3 (Copol 1) that was very sharp and came with a nice metal lens shade. I used it for 4x5 and 5x7. It got ripped off with the rest of my 5x7 gear back in 1995. But I recently bought another 5x7, and another Symmetrigon that I just mounted on a lens board -- so I will see if it will match the sharpness of my old one.

Vaughn

[Gordon Moat]

I would rather suggest a Nikkor-M 200mm f8.0 instead of much larger 210mm choices. After using a 210mm for a little while, I now find that my longest normally used lens is a 180mm f5.6, and the 210mm sits unused much of the time. So my reasoning behind the 200mm Nikkor is that it takes up very little room in a bag, and it is a really good lens.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

[Thalmees]

Really do not know why more votes went to 210/5.6 Fujinon-W ? compared to 210/5.6 Symmar-S MC ?
Thanks for any comment.

[IMG]

Now Thing are more logic.
Still my query has no answer !!!
Appreciate any input.