I always knew I wasn't "normal!"Originally Posted by Dan Fromm
I always knew I wasn't "normal!"
Well, I actually gravitate towards close to standard lenses (and my assumption is that this tendency is more likely to be reinforced when moving to larger formats; at least if the purpose doesn’t change).
My provisional strategy for now is just to see what’s available qua standard lenses for 8x10 and see what that would mean and what kind of trade-offs I would face. The alternative is 5x7 with a 203 ektar that I already have.
The uses I would exclude now are architecture (at least the kind that requires wide angles) and elaborate studio work with strobes. In 4x5 I have a Technika iii and don’t see me switching to a monorail when moving up formats.
The 203mm Ektar is a superb lens. I have others, like the Schneider f5.6 210mm and the Kodak 8.5” Commercial Ektar, and truth be told, neither of those offers huge advantages over the 203mm Ektar. Where the other two do have some advantage is their larger image circle, allowing for more camera movements:
The 203mm Ektar has an image circle of approximately 8.25”.
The Schneider 210mm Symmar f5.6 has an image circle of approximately 11.5”.
The Kodak 8.5” Commercial Ektar f6.3 has an image circle of approximately 10.6”
The quoted image circle sizes above are for infinity focus with the lens stopped down 2-3 stops. (The image circle increases in size as you focus on closer subjects)
So, if you don’t expect to need to use camera movements beyond maybe a little bit of tilt or swing, the 203mm Ektar will be an excellent lens for 5x7. I use mine often and have made some of my favorite images with the 203mm Ektar, but its image circle barely covers the 5x7 format at infinity focus.
If you want more freedom to incorporate camera movements beyond a small bit of swing/tilt, a lens with a bigger image circle will be required, so something like the 8.5” Commercial Ektar is a great choice, though it can be difficult to find one for a reasonable price (I’m a huge fan of my various Ektar lenses). The 210mm Schneider f5.6 Symmar will perform similarly and will likely be a less expensive lens to acquire.
One last thing to consider: the 203mm Ektar has a maximum aperture of f7.7 and so ( as you likely realize) it can be a bit dark to compose with under less than daylight conditions. Both the Schneider 210mm and the 8.5” Commercial Ektar have larger maximum apertures and will give you a bit brighter image on the ground glass to work with.
I have the 12" Kodak Commercial Ektar, and it works for both 8x10 (limited movements, but some) and 4x5.
It's a wonderful lens.
Depends if you want a normal lens, or more wide (landscape) or more tight (portraits).
I wasn't sure whether I'd get into large format, and didn't want to spend the $$ finding out. When I looked into what's involved, it became evident that the lens was central to the camera and the biggest initial obstacle to entry into large format.
I dipped my toes into the large format waters by removing the rear element from a 50mm lens made for 35mm film, and replacing it with a convex element from a wide angle lens which turned it into around a 150mm lens that covers 5x7. Installing it into cardboard box and loading it with paper under a safe light and using the lens cap as a shutter produced my first 5x7 photo. I was hooked.
The next step was making a simple hardboard 5x7 sliding box camera The film holder I made had light leaks, but using this camera inspired me to get a 210mm fujinon lens which sort of covers 8x10, so I made a plywood 8x10 sliding box camera for the 210mm lens along with a couple of film holders. I mainly used paper negatives and lith film.
Later on, I made an 8x10 field camera with front movements out of an old coffee table. The bellows was the most difficult step to do, but this camera introduced me to the possibilities with front standard movements. I got a 360mm Industar lens and made a 3d printed servo operate shutter for it. After this I made a 5x7 field camera with a 4x5 adapter.
This is all to say that you may not need to jump fully into large format to try it out. First, get or make a lens (a couple of inexpensive 600mm achromat doublets will make a nice 300mm portrait lens--cost: $20), then a couple of boxes to make a sliding box camera. If it's a go, then you can decide on whether to build to buy, and jump all the way in.
(an update on what I learned from the various replies and a list of homework for me -- this is just me thinking out loud and giving credit to the input I got here)
Initially I saw development as a non-issue. In Brussels we still have a professional black-and-white lab and I thought that this could just be the solution to the dev-problem. I've worked with them before and in terms of quality it's about the best one can get. But the comment from MartyNL made me reconsider. I think I'll order the Stearman Press SP Compact 8x10 from FotoImpex and test it with 4x5 sheets. (as an alternative to the mod54 I own now). This will show whether processing larger sheets would work out.
Second, the trade-off between 8x10 and 5x7 is bigger than I would have thought. Both in terms of lenses and in terms of availability of used gear in continental Europe. Before, I only thought of it as a trade-off in terms of weight, size and cost only. One of my tasks is just finding out what the realistic options are in terms of obtaining at least one good lens and a lens-board that would fit. Older lenses are fine, but I don't think I would consider barrel lenses. A shutter seems a hard requirement for now.
I'm not yet ruling out Intrepid, but have the impression that this makes more sense for standard and wide lenses than for longer non-tele focal lengths.
Lastly, I'm now also looking again at 5x7 / 13x18 Linhof Technika , both older models (such as this one) and IV/V. This is familiar territory (have a late model Technika III) and seems readily available in Germany and the Netherlands. (yes, I'm well aware of the weight and the necessary cams to use the rangefinder). Will try to find out what other avenues open up by exploring the German eBay.
Last edited by p-trick; 4-Jul-2025 at 06:23.
Have you considered any of these options...
They also come up secondhand from time to time.
https://www.stenopeika.com/
https://gibellinicamera.com/
https://fasquelcameras.com/
I've encountered those while browsing, but didn't yet look for it specifically. Will keep an eye on this as well. Thanks.
I urge you to consider not only the two film sizes, but the aspect ratio of each. I bought my 8x10 Deardorff ten years ago because I wanted to work big (I was doing a lot of wet plate work at the time), but I remained drawn to 5x7 specifically because of its aspect ratio, which I find far more appealing than 8x10 (or 4x5).
The 8x10 is nice for its size, certainly - but it lives in a space between square and golden ratio, and for me, that's a tense kind of limbo that lacks resolve. The 5x7 addressed that issue beautifully.
But of course, this is entirely a matter of personal preference. Many people love the 8x10 aspect ratio, and that's fine. But you owe it to yourself before buying into a new format to ask yourself whether or not the aspect ratio matters to you and to determine the answer to this question.
To get the 4x5 experience, one can get a 4x5 that's reasonably priced, and then get a 210mm lens. (210mm lenses ten to be less expensive.) Get some film holders, and then, go for it.
Then, get some ASA 400 film and experiment with your cyanotypes, etc. See what you think of it.
For my purposes for black and white prints, if I can't develop at home, then it's not worth it. To get decent results, I have to be able to develop my own negatives. (But, that's me.)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks