8 x 10 lens recommendation

[Vaughn]

My 180mm lens has become my new wide normal for 5x7...especially in tight places. The 210mm (matches the diagonal of the 5x7 film) still sees use.

 

[Ian Grant]

My 180mm lens has become my new wide normal for 5x7...especially in tight places. The 210mm (matches the diagonal of the 5x7 film) still sees use.

I've gone for a 240mm as main standard lens on my Kodak Specialist 2 half plate camera (I use it for 7x5) it's standard lens (sold with it) is a 203mm f7.7 Ektar in an Epsilon shutter, not the best shutter as ut's the early version. So I've gone for a slightly longer normal but will be using the camera for portraits, but as I've made an adapter lens board I can use any lens on a Linhof/Wista lens board.

Ian

 

[Vaughn]

I have a Fuji W 250/6.7 I use for 8x10, which takes Sinar lensboards. If it was easy to put on the 5x7 Eastman View No.2, it would be a fun lens for that camera. The 180mm and the 250mm would be a nice combination, and I'd leave the 210mm at home.

 

[DREW WILEY]

For awhile I used the 250/6.7 as my normal on 4x5 and as my wide for 8x10. Great lens. But then I got burglarized and it's the one item that was never recovered. A 250 G-Claron replaced it with about an equal image circle, and once that very highly used lens is retired, I have a mint Fuji 240A in reserve, which is very similar but a bit more contrasty due to the multi-coating. I don't know if I'll take the 180A along for my next backpacking trip or my 200 Nikkor M. Both are superb 4x5 lenses, and great for roll film backs too. I'll use a 300M for long shots.

 

[Ian Grant]

250mm is an unusual LF focal length, although I do have a 250mm or rather 25cm CZJ Tessar missing it's aperture blades. I can't access the Fujiclub site is the 250mm f6.7 a s wide Tessar design ?

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

250's were a routine offering by all the big manufacturers. Lots of choices out there. The Fuji 250/6.7 W used some kind of glass type no longer available with a single coating that made it behave like a multi-coated optic. It also had more coverage than their following 6.3 versions that makes it practical for 8x10, yet in a nice lightweight no.1 shutter. The Fuji 240 A is even smaller and better corrected, and covers 8X10 too. All of these are plasmats. Fuji's tessar line was "L".

 

[Ian Grant]

Thanks Drew, I'm currently abroad in a part of the world where many websites are blocked, Wikipedia is one but in the past Facebook, Youtube, and many others.

We never see many Fuji LF lenses here in the UK, but they are excellent value for money even with Import duty and VAT adding over 33%

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

Fuji lenses are every big as good as German ones, in some cases even better, especially with regard to combining superb performance with portability.

 

[Alan Gales]

Fuji lenses are every big as good as German ones, in some cases even better, especially with regard to combining superb performance with portability.

Every big as good!

Yeah and those Fuji 250mm f/6.7 lenses are a bargain. I paid $300 for mine and thought I got a deal. Since then I've seen plenty go for $250 and a few as low as $200.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Every bit as good. At least the dang Dumbphone speller didn't switch it into some cussword like it sometimes does.

 

[Alan Gales]

Every bit as good. At least the dang Dumbphone speller didn't switch it into some cussword like it sometimes does.

 

[Nokton48]

5x7 Norma 1 by Nokton48, on Flickr

My 5x7 Norma that I am finally going to start using.

OP: What is my fave 360mm lens? That would be my Norma specific Plasmat Schneider 360mm F5.6 Symmar. It is in automatic iris configuration with Norma cables leading into the rear standard. Nearly as fast to operate as a reflex camera, in some respects.

I plan to haul this out in the field on a wooden tripod.

I have also used Normas in the field (4x5 and 8x10) for many decades. 5x7 is new to me.

It has been patiently waiting for twenty years in my studio, for me to have the time to go forward with my using it.

 

[jimgalli]

I'd go for the 210 and the 300. Whatever focal length is working well for you on 4X5, double it for 8X10. A 240 on 810 is like a 120 on 4X5. So a 210 SA on 8X10 would be like a 105 Wide Angle on 4X5. After that if you're wishing for longer focus, the old triple convertible's are fun.

 

[njr]

I cant recommend the Schneider 240mm F/5.6 Symmar-S highly enough.

In regards to cameras, I use a Toyo 810MII, but the Intrepid 8X10 mk2 is a good, portable and affordable option.

 

[markbau]

Well my sight unseen purchase arrived today. The guy who I purchased it from sure did take great care of his equipment, everything is pristine!
The lenses that came with the 8x10 Wista are:
Nikkor W 240mm f5.6 (without lensboard)
Rodenstock APO Ronar 360mm f9
Rodenstock Sironar 240mm f 5.6.

Am just interested in any thoughts on these lenses for 8x10 work as a quick google has different opinions about some of these lenses regarding if they can cover 8x10 with any movements.

 

[grahamp]

See https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/

Based on that, the plain Sironar will not really cover 8x10, and certainly no front movements. The Nikkor should be fine. The APO Ronar will not have a lot of movement.

My 'go to' lens on 8x10 is a G-Claron 270mm, which makes a decent long lens on 5x4 and short standard on the larger format. But it does not cover better than the Nikkor W 240mm on 8x10.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Nikkor W 240/5.6, 335 mm @ f/22
240/5.6 Sironar: jes' plain, no prefix or suffix, 336 mm @ f/16; -N, no prefix, 350 mm @f/22; Apo Sironar N, 350 mm @ f/22; Apo-Sironar S, 372 mm. Which Sironar do you have?
240/9 Apo-Ronar, 212 mm @f/22

All coverage claims from catalogs. I think that grahamp made a look up error.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Isn't 360mm closer to 'normal' for 8x10 than 300mm? I find 300mm to be a slightly wide 'normal'.

My 355 G-Claron is my normal lens on the 8x10.

 

[markbau]

Nikkor W 240/5.6, 335 mm @ f/22
240/5.6 Sironar: jes' plain, no prefix or suffix, 336 mm @ f/16; -N, no prefix, 350 mm @f/22; Apo Sironar N, 350 mm @ f/22; Apo-Sironar S, 372 mm. Which Sironar do you have?
240/9 Apo-Ronar, 212 mm @f/22

All coverage claims from catalogs. I think that grahamp made a look up error.

It doesn’t have any prefix or suffix, it just says Sironar.

Do any of these jump out as a close up lens? (I think the Ronar is listed as a process lens)

 

[Ian Grant]

The Apo Ronar is a Dialyte design made primarily as a process lens and ideal for close up work. Kodak's 203mm f7.7 Ektar also a Dialyte was sold for technical and medical use for distances from Infinity to 1:1.

Barrel mounted Apo Ronars can be quite inexpensive, I paid £20 ($26) for a 360mm Apo Ronar CL earlier this year, I have a few shutters I can use it with.

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

Do any of these jump out as a close up lens? (I think the Ronar is listed as a process lens)

To echo Ian, Apo-Ronars and other top rate process lenses work well close up. Their only weakness, and not all process lenses have it, is low coverage.

 

[Ian Grant]

To echo Ian, Apo-Ronars and other top rate process lenses work well close up. Their only weakness, and not all process lenses have it, is low coverage.

Low coverage at Infinity, so a lens which barely covers or perhaps doesn't cover at Infinity may well be fine for close up work.

The Hexanon GRII lenses have excellent coverage my 150mm covers 10x8.

Ian

 

[Neil Poulsen]

Thanks to all that have replied.

It looks like I will have the choice of one or two of the following from a deceased estate.
Schneider 210mm f6.8 Super Angulon (don't think this covers a 8x10)
Schneider 240mm f5.6 Symmar
Schneider 300mm f5.6 Symmar
Rodenstock 240mm f9 Apo Ronar
Rodenstock 360mm f9 Apo Ronar

I want to do mainly landscape work but would like to also be able to do still lifes, not really close up but maybe a full frame photo of say a vase of flowers.

Any lens in the list that jumps out?

The two I would go for are the 210mm Angulon for wide angle, and the 300mm Symmar, which is the focal length that had your initial interest.

The Angulon can be hard to find. If you have that option, I would go for it.

As I understand from K. Thalmann, the Symmar lenses can be considerably stopped down for greater coverage. More so than a Symmar S. It's single coated; but for some, this is preferable. I think that another good choice would be the 300mm Fuji that Vaugn recommended. If you think you will need lots of movement, the Fuji with inside lettering would be a good choice. It's single-coated, but with lots of movement.

If 360mm, consider a 360mm Schneider G-Claron over the Rodenstock Apo-Ronar. It's a comparatively light-weight lens with tons of movement.

A 300mm Dagor is a very sharp lens; but, longer Dagors can display focus shift. That is, the plane of focus can shift as the lens is stopped down.