8x10 LF Lenses

[sperdynamite]

I'm using a Caltar 240/5.6 which I am finding to be excellent. Though the Fuji 250/6.7 has more coverage and is also a great general purpose semi-wide. When it comes to 8x10 I feel like photographers don't often collect a whole slew of lenses. I mostly hear of folks using a Fuji 450 if they want something longer than 360. If I had my pick regardless of cash I'd probably pick up one of those newer Cooke XVa's and call it a day. But that kind of cash can buy a whole 8x10 enlarger or two.

Right now I have the 120/8 Super Angulon, 240/5.6 Caltar, 300mm 6.8 Komura, and 360/6.8 Caltar. I'm probably going to sell the Komura when I get around to it....or the 360? Who knows?

[jurgenestanislao]

I've always found that a 210mm is the right focal length for macro work..............

.........and your Deardorff is stunning, way too lovely to be used, I suggest that if put to use then it shouldn't venture outside.......

regards

Andrew

Thank you, a very good friend of mine restored it for me, looks really good cosmetically and and works flawlessly.

[jurgenestanislao]

For macro, I suggest a 180 or 210mm, like Weston used on his peppers. Close to 1:1 the distance from lens to subject is 360 or 410mm respectively. A G-Claron 210 would also cover at infinity. A Nikkor-AM 210mm would not cover at infinity, but give you 1,5 stop more light to focus with. A 240mm G-Claron might give the right combination with your 360mm, but at 1:1 it needs 480mm bellows.

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

Thank you will l take a look.

WHich 180 or 210 do you use?

[jurgenestanislao]

I'm using a Caltar 240/5.6 which I am finding to be excellent. Though the Fuji 250/6.7 has more coverage and is also a great general purpose semi-wide. When it comes to 8x10 I feel like photographers don't often collect a whole slew of lenses. I mostly hear of folks using a Fuji 450 if they want something longer than 360. If I had my pick regardless of cash I'd probably pick up one of those newer Cooke XVa's and call it a day. But that kind of cash can buy a whole 8x10 enlarger or two.

Right now I have the 120/8 Super Angulon, 240/5.6 Caltar, 300mm 6.8 Komura, and 360/6.8 Caltar. I'm probably going to sell the Komura when I get around to it....or the 360? Who knows?

The 240 Caltar doesn't have full coverage?

[jurgenestanislao]

You could potentially get a hundred different answers. Among my numerous 8x10 lenses, the ones most often used are a 450 Fuji C and 360 Fujinon A, which also happens to be a superb close-up lens. I think dagors are actually a little less versatile, but do sometimes use a late Kern 14" dagor, another overpriced cult lens these days. But I bought these back when the price was reasonable. Another 360 I sometimes use for its special look is an old Zeiss coated f/9 process barrel tessar which has lovely background blur. For long views, a 600 Fuji C is practical. For wides, 240 Fuji A and 240 G-Claron. A Nikkor M is my only 300, and another very small lens, but it has a rather limited image circle for 8x10 applications. I don't own any big draft horse sized studio plasmats because I mostly shoot outdoors.

Yes aware of that possibility, just doing broad strokes as to what people in the group generally use. Nice lenses you have!

[Drew Wiley]

General purpose lenses can often give acceptable results close-up, but if you want even better results, there are special plastmats like G-Clarons and Fuji A's that work very well all the way from close range to infinity, as well as a number of graphics-style airspaced 4-element lenses like Apo Nikkors, Apo Ronars, Apo Artars, etc. It depends on your definition of macro. Tabletop photography is one thing, filling a sheet of film with a single diamond on a ring or a bug's eye is a different topic. Coverage increases as the bellows are extended beyond infinity position, provided you have enough extension. Hence even a 180 Fujinon A might work on 8x10 film IF you are close enough, but a 240 would be a safer bet if you need to get up especially close. There is also a 210 G-Claron in between.

[Two23]

For sheet film I only have three modern lenses. A Fuji 210 for wide, Nikon 300M for normal and a Caltar 508mm for long. I find I don't shoot a wide variety of subjects with 8x10. I personally wouldn't shoot table top with it because of the very limited DoF.


Kent in SD

[Matt Stage]

In lens selection, much depends on your style and sensibility. If you are at all interested in soft focus photography, I would suggest that you look no further than the Tri Tran Signature Pictorialist lens. Hands down, this is the best large format soft focus lens in current production. Great for portraits. Landscapes, Still Life, etc. Many people will tout their favorite classic lenses and they are all very nice and also agonizingly hard to obtain, even at astronomical prices. In side to side testing, Tri's lens compares very well and usually comes out better than the most rare and exotic of the famous pictorialist lenses. It would be very easy to throw a lot of money into buying lenses which don't come anywhere close to this lens. (I did) Check out his website for yourself, and order one while you still can: https://www.tritranphotography.com/tt-signature-lens

[Oslolens]

Thank you will l take a look.

WHich 180 or 210 do you use?

Both, but the 180 is placed in my 4x5" rucksack, the 210 is resting at home. Good thing about the 180 apo macro sironar is the 70 degree coverage and a Copal #1 shutter. My 210 macro sironar (bought in whim at LP foto auction) does not cover 8x10" at infinity. My landscape 8x10" 210mm is a Nikkor-W with 77mm filter ring. Avoid the latest 67mm-version for use with filter.

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[Oslolens]

In lens selection, much depends on your style and sensibility. If you are at all interested in soft focus photography, I would suggest that you look no further than the Tri Tran Signature Pictorialist lens. Hands down, this is the best large format soft focus lens in current production. Great for portraits. Landscapes, Still Life, etc. Many people will tout their favorite classic lenses and they are all very nice and also agonizingly hard to obtain, even at astronomical prices. In side to side testing, Tri's lens compares very well and usually comes out better than the most rare and exotic of the famous pictorialist lenses. It would be very easy to throw a lot of money into buying lenses which don't come anywhere close to this lens. (I did) Check out his website for yourself, and order one while you still can: https://www.tritranphotography.com/tt-signature-lens

Thanks for the link. Pictures to inspire me to drag out my tiny casket set

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk