I'm in the market for a lens in the 300mm range for my 8x10 Burke & James, which has been in storage and unused for nearly 40 years. The lens currently on the camera is an unlabeled piece of junk in an unreliable shutter. I've owned and used three different 4x5 cameras at various times prior to 1990, but only exposed a few frames of 8x10 film. Today, most of my work is done with a modern 35mm format digital camera.
There are always compromises when choosing tools. A 300 f/5.6 can weigh 2-3 pounds in a Copal #3, while a 300 f/9 in a #1 is less than a pound. Filters are bigger and more expensive for the faster lens, too. On the other hand, a f/5.6 lens lets in twice as much light, so should be easier to focus, particularly in somewhat dim conditions. The big question, for those who own(ed) and use(d) both, is the brighter f/5.6 lens significantly easier to compose and focus? Worth the extra size and weight? Unfortunately, there's no convenient way for me to personally compare the two side by side on the same camera.
I'll be using this camera/lens combo both in the studio and in the field, probably mostly with B&W film and at least initially making contact prints. A largish image circle is important as I expect to do some architectural work.
Bookmarks