210mm wide angle

[Harrigan]

I have been looking for a 210mm lens to cover 500mm diagonal for some time. Does anyone know of any 210mm lenses that would work on my 30x40cm camera at infinity? I am aware of the 210mm sa and the 200mm grandagon but these lenses are very expensive and while I shoot wide angle almost all the time the 210 would be used less than my standard 300mm lens. Are there any reasonable 210mm lenses that would cover the 30x40cm? What about the computar 210? I’ve tried almost every other 210mm process lens that’s come my way and nothing had covered yet. I have a 200mm Russian metrogon that just misses as does the wollensak 10x12 extreme wide angle 200mm lens. I believe I’ve hit a brick wall here but there certainly is the possibility that I’ve overlooked some lens? Can anyone shed any light on a 210 that would cover 500mm other than the 210 sa and the 210 grando? Thanks for taking the time to read this.

 

[Donsta]

210 super symmar XL - even more expensive! The issue is that the sort of coverage you are looking for from a 210mm lens requires a highly exotic and expensive design. I'm not sure of the exact coverage of a Computar 240mm, but it may get close to 500mm - I have one which covers 11x14 with a bit of room for movement (about 2 inches of front rise at f64 - which would equate to around 500mm of coverage). In the 240mm focal lengh, the Kowa Graphic seems to be the same as the Computar and is usually a much cheaper option (a couple of hundred for a barrel mounted version). Even then though, it's not a 210mm.... FWIW, the 210 super symmar XL would have substantially more coverage for your format even though the quoted image circle is only 500mm. I have shot it on 12x20 pretty much straight on with good results. Also, you may want to check that your camera can focus a 210mm at infinity first.

 

[Harrigan]

I can easily focus a 120mm and maybe even shorter. I forgot about the 210 ss xl but I'm aware of that lens as well. I know my requirements are steep but there's got to be something out there. Are you satisfied with the computar 240 on 11x14? I tried a kowa graphic 360mm lens and it was a poor performing lens at infinity, soft even on 11x14 coverage @ the corners. It may have been a bad copy or something that lens ought to cover.

 

[df cardwell]

..... I know my requirements are steep but there's got to be something out there.....

No, there doesn't. Extra-hyper-super Wide, good, cheap. No.

 

[Dave Wooten]

Computar 240 on 7 x 17 is fine about a 480 mm circle....was recommended to me by Sandy King.

I will put it on the 14 x 17 (about 550 mm circle) later and check the corners.

 

[sanking]

I have been looking for a 210mm lens to cover 500mm diagonal for some time. Does anyone know of any 210mm lenses that would work on my 30x40cm camera at infinity? I am aware of the 210mm sa and the 200mm grandagon but these lenses are very expensive and while I shoot wide angle almost all the time the 210 would be used less than my standard 300mm lens. Are there any reasonable 210mm lenses that would cover the 30x40cm? What about the computar 210?

The Computar 210 will not throw a circle that large. It will just barely cover 11X14, which puts itx maximum circle at around 460-65 mm.

Computar 240 will cover, according to my calculations. It covers about 90 degrees, stopped way down of course, and should throw a circle of around 520mm. Some 240mm Kowa Grahics are of the same design as Computar, but most are not so be aware of this fact when buying.

Sandy

 

[matt miller]

What's this lens that www.glennview.com/lens.htm refers to?:

"~210mm ~F8 lens, coated, in barrel with filter slot, also with slip in gel filter holder, also with an S.K.Grimes made adapter for this lens that accepts 52mm or 67mm filters, will screw into Copal #1, covers 11X14, small, Mint, $1200. For $1600 I will put this lens into a Copal #1 shutter and have S.K.Grimes make an F-stop scale for the shutter and ship it directly to you. The only other similar focal length lenses that will cover 11X14 with such quality are the Schneider 210 S-A and 210 Super SymmarXL and the 200 Grandagon, and they are 6-7# heavier, 20 times larger, and much more expensive. Because this lens' capabilities are known only by a few very knowledgeable photographers, and although rare, the lens does come onto the market occasionally, and I don't want any more competition than necessary--I will not list the lens' name. If you buy it from me you'll know, but you won't have any need for another. 25% restocking charge if returned. If you want to see for yourself what the lens can do, send $50 for 11X14 contact print made with this lens. "

 

[sanking]

What's this lens that www.glennview.com/lens.htm refers to?:

"~210mm ~F8 lens, coated, in barrel with filter slot, also with slip in gel filter holder, also with an S.K.Grimes made adapter for this lens that accepts 52mm or 67mm filters, will screw into Copal #1, covers 11X14, small, Mint, $1200. For $1600 I will put this lens into a Copal #1 shutter and have S.K.Grimes make an F-stop scale for the shutter and ship it directly to you. The only other similar focal length lenses that will cover 11X14 with such quality are the Schneider 210 S-A and 210 Super SymmarXL and the 200 Grandagon, and they are 6-7# heavier, 20 times larger, and much more expensive. Because this lens' capabilities are known only by a few very knowledgeable photographers, and although rare, the lens does come onto the market occasionally, and I don't want any more competition than necessary--I will not list the lens' name. If you buy it from me you'll know, but you won't have any need for another. 25% restocking charge if returned. If you want to see for yourself what the lens can do, send $50 for 11X14 contact print made with this lens. "

IMO the lens he is selling is a 210mm F/9 Computar in an original barrel. These lenses screw directly into Copal #1 shutters.

Sandy

 

[Dan Fromm]

Harrigan, I don't mean to insult you, but do you sell on eBay as landarc?

 

[Harrigan]

I never said dirt cheap but a computar for 1200 is a bit much and I doubt it covers. I can find a sa 210 for that if I'm patient. There are plenty of 210s that cover 11x14 and I just need a little more coverage. In fact I have 3 different ones but they each just miss 500mm by a bit. For me though as a secondary lens I cant justify spending thousands but I do have occasions where it would be nice to have. I still have the feeling there is a lens out there that I've missed. Until recently I never knew of this 200mm metrogon (or topogon?) Russain lens that I have and it cost me 75 bucks. I also recently found the 10x12 wollensak ext wa lens and it was Very inexpensive and supposedly covers 11x14 at small stops.

 

[sanking]

I still have the feeling there is a lens out there that I've missed. Until recently I never knew of this 200mm metrogon (or topogon?) Russain lens that I have and it cost me 75 bucks.

I doubt there is anything out there inexpensive in the 210mm range that will cover a circle of 500mm. No harm in looking, but many ULF photographers before you have gone down that path and come up empty. The metrogon (Topgon) design is commonplace, but only covers about 90 degrees, and you need a lot more than that in 210mm to cover 500mm.

The only exception I can think of would be a very old lens of Protar V design or the same design made under a different name. But almost everyone already knows to look for these so chance of finding one cheap is not great.

Sandy

 

[Donsta]

Yes, when you find the "Holy Grail" of ULF superwides, please be sure to let us all know - I think everyone and their dog's would be all over a cheap 210mm with a 500mm image circle... There's a very good reason that a 270 Computar on Ebay just sold for $1700 - these lenses are rare and highly sought after.

The only "cheap" 500mm image circle wides out there I have first hand experience with are the 240mm Kowa and the 305 G Claron (which never ceases to amaze me for coverage - I just did some 8x20 shots last week with one - around 540mm of image circle and I used a little tilt - and I bought the lens for under $500). And believe me, a 305mm on 8x20 is wide....

 

[jimgalli]

The answer to your question is "no". If a Protar V of 8 3/8" shows up you'll be bidding against me. In spite of all the hype, the Computar 210 does not get the job done. Nice to wish for but I have one and to cover 11X14 you're focusing "in" at 80 feet or less and stopping down to f64 to try to get the corners covered. That isn't an 1114 lens in my book. There was a pretty 210 pre-war f6.8 Angulon from a seller in Japan earlier this week. I have no experience but Ole swears they'll cover amazing things.

 

[Harrigan]

Jim thanks I hadn't thought about the f6.8 angulon. I've had a 90mm and 120mm angulons in the past that illuminated big but real coverage was not quite as good. You may thing I'm nuts for trying to find such a lens but I'll keep looking you never know. I don't know if its the holy grail but....I also think ebay deals are pretty hard to find these days the best prices I'm getting are definatly not online.

 

[Dave Wooten]

Harrigan, is this for a specific project? Would nt a 300 or 240 suffice? just wondering...you might be more in the ball park?

 

[Harrigan]

Also here is a list of inexpensive wide angles that cover 500mm that I have had or tried:

300mm apo gerogon (very similar to g-claron coverage)
360mm apo gerogon
300mm Konica Hex grii
310mm Konica Hex grii
300mm jml wide field process lens

There are others that escape my mind right now but the facts are you dont need to spend a ton to get a good wide angle that covers 500mm.

 

[wilsonneal]

180mm or so to cover 8x10

Not to highjack the thread, but I have been looking for a lens in the 180 range that covers in the range of 350 to 400mm. The 165mm lens feels too wide for my application, and my 240 is a just a bit long. Are there any lenses of about 180 for 8x10 in shutter?
Neal

 

[df cardwell]

Finding a 300mm that covers 500 is easy. A Dagor will do that.

Finding a 210 is also easy, but it is the current state of art.

So, if you want to step back from the cutting edge, you can find something in between.

Depending on how you work, an 8 1/2 " Protar V will do it, at 22 or 32. It WILL be darker in the corners... and the Super Angulon XL will be far less so.

Good luck.

 

[Dave Wooten]

Also here is a list of inexpensive wide angles that cover 500mm that I have had or tried:

300mm apo gerogon (very similar to g-claron coverage)
360mm apo gerogon
300mm Konica Hex grii
310mm Konica Hex grii
300mm jml wide field process lens

There are others that escape my mind right now but the facts are you dont need to spend a ton to get a good wide angle that covers 500mm.

JML made a 209.7 EFL f/8 both the front element and rear are about 65mm diameter so wide open would indicate more of a f/3?.....the iris stops at f/8..the elements protrude..quite bulbous....I will try and mount this up and see what I see....wasnt aware the JML 300 had that coverage...they show up once in a while and are not that pricey yet

 

[Harrigan]

Dave I put a shot I made with the jml 300mm in the gallery a few days ago, with the 30x40. The lens covers 500mm with a tiny slice of movement at f64. The 209mm jml barely covers 8x10, I had one that I sold but its a good sharp lens.

I've never considered this other lens I have here......marked special wide angle 80-90 degrees 11x14 and I know its there about 210-220mm brass waterhouse stops. Heck it may even be a protar knock off of some sort. It has Ralph J. Golsen Chicago on it. I got it to shoot wide open and make old timey looking images but I should try it at f64 I just never considered it might be sharp. I've always considered the old brass lenses to be sort of iffy but I should give this lens a try.

As far as a 180 for big coverage there aren't any that come to mind.

 

[sanking]

As far as a 180 for big coverage there aren't any that come to mind.

The 8X10 Series V Protar, which is about 180mm in focal length, will easily cover 400mm. In fact, the one I have just barely misses the corners of 7X17 at f/45, which puts its coverage circle at about 455mm. Focused at 20-30' it would in fact cover fully the 7X17 format, which might make it useful for interior work (if you can live with the f/18 maximum aperture).

The Zeiss Protar will cost more, but in my experience the B&L version is every bit as good.

Sandy

 

[Ole]

The pre-WWII Angulons have a less abrupt end to the "coverage", so that the corner unsharpness is less obvious. For contact printing purposes, I'm willing to say that my 210mm Angulon covers 30x40cm (12x16") at very small stops.

EDIT:

I forgot to mention that I recently tried a 150mm Busch ROJA Wide-Angle Aplanat on 24x30cm. It covers, at f:64. Optimum sharpness is less than that of a Protar, but the price and availability more than compensate for that. A 210mm WA Aplanat should easily cover 30x40cm.

 

[sanking]

The answer to your question is "no". If a Protar V of 8 3/8" shows up you'll be bidding against me. In spite of all the hype, the Computar 210 does not get the job done. Nice to wish for but I have one and to cover 11X14 you're focusing "in" at 80 feet or less and stopping down to f64 to try to get the corners covered. That isn't an 1114 lens in my book. There was a pretty 210 pre-war f6.8 Angulon from a seller in Japan earlier this week. I have no experience but Ole swears they'll cover amazing things.

I had a 210mm f/6.8 Angulon at one time in the past and the circle of illumination was slightly greater than that of my 210 Computar. However, performance at the corners, even for contact printing, was dismal. The 180mm (8X10) Protar V I have gives much better performance on the corners than the 210 Angulon, as does the 210 Computar.

No surprising, since the Angulon is really nothing but a Dagor by another name, and Dagors are simply dreadful beyond about 85 degrees.

Sandy

 

[Ole]

No surprising, since the Angulon is really nothing but a Dagor by another name, and Dagors are simply dreadful beyond about 85 degrees.

A Dagor and an Angulon are as similar as a Petzval and a Tessar. All the glasses are different, all the curvatures are different, and the order of elmnts is different. They are both 3+3, but that's the only similarity. Like Petzvals and Tessars are both two pairs - one cemented, one not.

Also, the Angulon design has been changed around WWII. As I said earlier, the older ones have less very sharp image circle, but a better acceptably sharp image circle for contact printing purposes - and if you don't really need ultimate sharpness in the corners.

 

[sanking]

A Dagor and an Angulon are as similar as a Petzval and a Tessar. All the glasses are different, all the curvatures are different, and the order of elmnts is different. They are both 3+3, but that's the only similarity. Like Petzvals and Tessars are both two pairs - one cemented, one not.

Also, the Angulon design has been changed around WWII. As I said earlier, the older ones have less very sharp image circle, but a better acceptably sharp image circle for contact printing purposes - and if you don't really need ultimate sharpness in the corners.

There is nothing at all similar in coverage and performance between Petzval and Tessars. On the other hand, all of the older 3-2 symmetrical designs such as Dagors, Angulons, Collinears, etc, have very similar performance characteristics in terms of angle of coverage and performance at the center and at the far corners. The curvatures of the glass may be different, and the order of elements may be reversed, but the final result on film is virtually identical, give or take a few degrees of coverage. I have used many Dagors and Angulons and my experience is that for any given focal length there is very little difference in performance between the two designs, either in sharpness at the center of the field or ithe useful circle of illumination. A Dagor of 210mm focal length gives a useful circle of illumination as large as that of a 210mm Angulon, when stopped down to f/45 or f/64. The Angulon may in principle throw a larger circle of illumination but I have not found anything beyond 90 degrees to be useful.

Granted, both of these designs were made over a very long period of time and significant differences in performance exist between lenses of the same design so I leave the door open to surprises in performance of individual specimens.


Sandy