Close up still life with 8x10 camera lens recommendations

nicointheclouds · Jun 27, 2024

Dear all,
I print out of my colour darkroom in Tokyo, currently up to 4x5 size, i don't have an 8x10 enlarger at the moment but my question as i am this year looking to buy my first 8x10 camera is to do with lenses for an 8x10 camera. I specifically will be buying an 8x10 camera mostly to keep in my atelier and to photograph the everyday in my space, most of my visuals in my mind are almost always close to the subject, very close in some cases. Could you kind and knowledgeable members point me in the right direction with a lens set up to allow me to do such photography on an 8x10 camera. Close ups of tableware, fruits ect
Thank you for your time and i look forward to hearing from you.

Ian C · Jun 27, 2024

The answer will depend on the range of subject distances you will use.

For very close focusing, you’d likely need a relatively short focal length lens designed for excellent resolution within the subject distance range you intend to use. The projected image must fully cover the corners of the film at the farthest subject distance at which you’d use it (where the image is smallest).

A lens made specifically for close-up photography might be the best choice. One of the best such lens is the 210 mm f/5.6 Nikkor AM ED (AM = Apochromatic Macro lens). It is intended for high grade macrophotography on the 8” x 10” format at around 1:1 or greater magnification

https://www.mr-alvandi.com/downloads/large-format/nikon-large-format-lenses.pdf

Due to its short focal length, it has limited far-distance use on the 8” x 10” format. Using 310 mm as the diagonal of the film visible in the holder, the far limits of magnification and subject distance are:

0.974 X and 425.5 mm at f/5.6 (41º coverage angle)

0.547 X and 593.6 mm at f/22 (51º coverage angle)

Subject distance is measured from the subject plane to the first nodal point of the lens. On this lens, the first nodal point is 11.9 mm forward of the flange (the flange is positioned the same as the front surface of the lens board).

If a 210 mm macro lens is too limiting, you’d need a longer focal length lens to project an image sufficiently large to cover the corners of the film. A good choice would be a 300 mm lens, such as the 300 mm f/5.6 Nikkor W. It too can produce fine results at relatively close distances and has no far distance limit, as it can be used all the way to infinity focus on the 8” x 10” format. It might be difficult to use in very close photography because that would require moving the lens rather far from the film to focus.

For example, if you wanted to photograph at 1:1 magnification, a 300 mm lens would require placing it so that its second nodal point is 600 mm from the film plane. The 210 mm macro lens would achieve 1:1 magnification with its second nodal point at 420 mm from the film.

Whether or not a 300 mm lens would work in your situation is determined by the bellows limit of the camera. Can you place the lens far enough from the film to focus at the magnification you require?

It might be the case that you’d need two lenses, a short focal length macro lens for very close focusing, and a second longer lens for shots at greater distances.

xkaes · Jun 27, 2024

As Ian has mentioned, it depends on how close you want to get. There are lots of process/macro lenses that might meet your needs, but many will not cover the 8x10 format at infinity. For table-top subjects -- 1/4 life size -- they will work fine. Nikon, Fuji, Tomioka, and others made many lenses for you to choose from. Here's a list of Fujinon lenses -- the A series might be what you need:

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byseries.htm

Donald Qualls · Jun 27, 2024

I've got a 150 mm Componon that ought to be very good for this kind of application -- it's an enlarging lens, so it's better optimized for close focus than most large format lenses intended for landscapes or even portraits, it would allow exceed 1:1 on the negative and covers 4x5 with good movements at infinity, so should do the same on 8x10 at 1:1. Most Componons don't come in a shutter (just an aperture mount), but mine has been mounted in a good large format shutter. Even better, with the front group removed, it's a very passable longer lens (~265 mm, f/13 instead of f/5.6), which will save buying a second lens if you want to shoot occasional longer distance (like portraits or interiors -- maybe even landscapes, though it likely won't have much movement space on 8x10 at infinity if it covers at all).

No, not selling mine -- just offering the general ideal of a double Gauss type enlarging lens in the 150 mm range as an option for close-up/macro photography on 8x10, at a much better price than most specific 8x10 lenses.

DREW WILEY · Jun 27, 2024

There is no need for a specialized macro lens unless you are going to specialize in photographing bugs or diamond rings. You'll get more versatility out of a close-range corrected general-purpose lens like the Fuji A series, or Schneider G-Claron series, or one of the older Componon lenses in shutter. The ideal focal length will depend on both the scale of magnification involved, and the length of bellows you have available.

ic-racer · Jun 27, 2024

With a negative the same size, or larger than your subject you will always be fighting with limited depth of field.

But, you many know that and intend to use that to your advantage.

In terms of lenses, your choices are plentiful. For example, at 1:1, all 4x5 format lenses cover 8x10. At 8:1 magnification, 35mm format lenses will cover.

xkaes · Jun 27, 2024

ic-racer said:
At 8:1 magnification, 35mm format lenses will cover.

A point that many don't realize! And not much bellows is needed.

ic-racer · Jun 27, 2024

xkaes said:
A point that many don't realize! And not much bellows is needed.

Yes, in the 'magnification' range, many times a lens with focal length equal to the diagonal of your subject framing size will give the shortest bellows draw.

nicointheclouds · Jul 1, 2024

Thank you for your replies, much appreciated, i can take a lot from this info. In terms of how close, i imagine ill be looking at something around this distance (photos attached).
Any more comments are very welcome

nicointheclouds · Jul 1, 2024

ic-racer said:
With a negative the same size, or larger than your subject you will always be fighting with limited depth of field.

But, you many know that and intend to use that to your advantage.

In terms of lenses, your choices are plentiful. For example, at 1:1, all 4x5 format lenses cover 8x10. At 8:1 magnification, 35mm format lenses will cover.

very interesting, by 1:1 what exactly do you mean?
Thank you

nicointheclouds · Jul 1, 2024

Ian C said:
The answer will depend on the range of subject distances you will use.

For very close focusing, you’d likely need a relatively short focal length lens designed for excellent resolution within the subject distance range you intend to use. The projected image must fully cover the corners of the film at the farthest subject distance at which you’d use it (where the image is smallest).

A lens made specifically for close-up photography might be the best choice. One of the best such lens is the 210 mm f/5.6 Nikkor AM ED (AM = Apochromatic Macro lens). It is intended for high grade macrophotography on the 8” x 10” format at around 1:1 or greater magnification

https://www.mr-alvandi.com/downloads/large-format/nikon-large-format-lenses.pdf

Due to its short focal length, it has limited far-distance use on the 8” x 10” format. Using 310 mm as the diagonal of the film visible in the holder, the far limits of magnification and subject distance are:

0.974 X and 425.5 mm at f/5.6 (41º coverage angle)

0.547 X and 593.6 mm at f/22 (51º coverage angle)

Subject distance is measured from the subject plane to the first nodal point of the lens. On this lens, the first nodal point is 11.9 mm forward of the flange (the flange is positioned the same as the front surface of the lens board).

If a 210 mm macro lens is too limiting, you’d need a longer focal length lens to project an image sufficiently large to cover the corners of the film. A good choice would be a 300 mm lens, such as the 300 mm f/5.6 Nikkor W. It too can produce fine results at relatively close distances and has no far distance limit, as it can be used all the way to infinity focus on the 8” x 10” format. It might be difficult to use in very close photography because that would require moving the lens rather far from the film to focus.

For example, if you wanted to photograph at 1:1 magnification, a 300 mm lens would require placing it so that its second nodal point is 600 mm from the film plane. The 210 mm macro lens would achieve 1:1 magnification with its second nodal point at 420 mm from the film.

Whether or not a 300 mm lens would work in your situation is determined by the bellows limit of the camera. Can you place the lens far enough from the film to focus at the magnification you require?

It might be the case that you’d need two lenses, a short focal length macro lens for very close focusing, and a second longer lens for shots at greater distances.

very educational answer, thank you
i have just attached 2 images so you can have an idea

koraks · Jul 1, 2024

nicointheclouds said:
by 1:1 what exactly do you mean?

1cm in reality = 1cm on the negative.

I'd use a relatively short lens for the kind of work you have in mind. Something in the range of 150-250mm focal length. I sometimes do close-ups (around 1:2, half life-size) with a 300mm lens and the bellows draw is already quite long when doing so. For even larger magnifications as in the examples you posted, I'd definitely resort to shorter lenses as it'll make life overall a lot easier. I've occasionally used a Symmar-S 210/5.6 for this kind of thing and it works fine. Evidently it doesn't even begin to cover 8x10" focused at infinity, but for close-up work, that's not an issue.

xkaes · Jul 1, 2024

For 8x10", 1:1 (1X) = 8x10". The subject is the same size as the film.

A subject about 4x5" -- like the two pictures above -- is about 2:1 or a 2X magnification. As koraks also mentioned, a 150-250mm lens will work fine for you, and there are many process/macro/close-up lenses in that range to choose from.

Andrew O'Neill · Jul 1, 2024

I did some closeups with my Fujinon W 180 on 8x10 (the old ones cover 8x10). The camera was about 60cm away.

DREW WILEY · Jul 2, 2024

I'd call the scale of any example posted so far as representative of "tabletop" photography, not really "close-up" work at all. If you want to fill the frame with a caterpillar on one of the leaves, that's a different story. Most general purpose studio lenses would do just fine, although I'd personally select a close-range corrected version like a Fuji A or Schneider G-Claron of appropriate focal length.

nicointheclouds · Jul 2, 2024

xkaes said:
For 8x10", 1:1 (1X) = 8x10". The subject is the same size as the film.

A subject about 4x5" -- like the two pictures above -- is about 2:1 or a 2X magnification. As koraks also mentioned, a 150-250mm lens will work fine for you, and there are many process/macro/close-up lenses in that range to choose from.

Roger that, thank you

nicointheclouds · Jul 2, 2024

koraks said:
1cm in reality = 1cm on the negative.

I'd use a relatively short lens for the kind of work you have in mind. Something in the range of 150-250mm focal length. I sometimes do close-ups (around 1:2, half life-size) with a 300mm lens and the bellows draw is already quite long when doing so. For even larger magnifications as in the examples you posted, I'd definitely resort to shorter lenses as it'll make life overall a lot easier. I've occasionally used a Symmar-S 210/5.6 for this kind of thing and it works fine. Evidently it doesn't even begin to cover 8x10" focused at infinity, but for close-up work, that's not an issue.

Hi Koraks

Evidently it doesn't even begin to cover 8x10" focused at infinity
What does that mean exactly? the 8x10 negative will not be fully used in an instance where focused to infinity?
For close ups i can cover the whole 8x10 negative with a frame?

DREW WILEY · Jul 2, 2024

I have a lot of experience with that lens. The Symmar S 210/5.6 does not have a large enough image circle to adequately cover 8x10 film size at a bellows extension and focus set to infinity. There would be a qualitative falloff toward the corners. There are a few 210's which can do the job, at least at small stops; but ordinarily with a general purpose lens design with a 70 degree angle of view, you'd need a 240 or 250 at least. But as you're magnification increases at close range, along with a longer bellows extension, so does the size of the image circle.

But again, if you're just talking about the scale of potted plants or floral arrangements, many 8x10's have plenty enough of bellows draw to accommodate 300 and even 360mm lenses for that kind of distance range.
If you still need to buy a lens, you might want something versatile enough to use at infinity too.

koraks · Jul 3, 2024

nicointheclouds said:
What does that mean exactly? the 8x10 negative will not be fully used in an instance where focused to infinity?
For close ups i can cover the whole 8x10 negative with a frame?

Yes, that's right.

DREW WILEY said:
if you're just talking about the scale of potted plants or floral arrangements, many 8x10's have plenty enough of bellows draw to accommodate 300 and even 360mm lenses for that kind of distance range.

Indeed. However, images like the two examples posted earlier are already a different story - especially the first one, with the glass and the egg. That would be an inconvenient shot to make with a 300 or 360 and not every 8x10 camera will have sufficient bellows draw to manage it.

dpurdy · Jul 3, 2024

I do a lot of close focus stuff in 8x10. For a relatively close focus but not quite macro I often use a 210 Nikkor, which is rated for 5x7 but with bellows extension it easily covers 8x10 with some movement. I can also use a 210 Gold Dot Dagor for very close up but usually I go with the Nikkor.

Sometimes I use a 355 Red Dot Artar with a closeup diopter screwed on the rear element. I can go one to one with reasonable bellows. I can actually go quite a bit more than 1 to 1 and it still looks sharp.

Other times I use a 305 Schneider G Claron with the bellows stretched out quite a bit and get just under 1 to 1. But very very sharp. Actually all my lenses are very sharp

Tom Taylor · Jul 3, 2024

What about the Schneider 240mm f5.6 Symmar-S MC?

DREW WILEY · Jul 3, 2024

A whole different side of lens choice is how you want your out-of-focus rendering to look. Some of the sharpest lenses can render rather harsh background blur. This is a matter of taste, so experimentation might be wise, if one has access to several options.

My most used closeup lens for 8X10 is my Fuji 360 A. The 355 GC is similar, but single-coated and in a larger no. 3 shutter. But if bellows length was restricted, I could substitute either a 250 A or 240 GC. These are close-range corrected plasmat design. A 300 mm version exists in both cases too. Sometimes it's clumsy in terms of lighting and maneuvering to get too close to a subject. My Dagor design lenses were never as good at close range.

And Koraks - I do mean close-ups, not moderate distance tabletop shots like the ones posted. But I don't know what kind of 8x10 the original poster has in mind. For studio work, monorail cameras like Sinar make a lot of sense because the length of rail and bellows sections can be so easily reconfigured to anything necessary.

koraks · Jul 3, 2024

DREW WILEY said:
close-ups, not moderate distance tabletop shots

A glass of the kind in the first image is around twice life size if you want it to fill the 8x10 frame the way it does in the posted example (which is evidently not shot in 8x10 of course).

DREW WILEY said:
monorail cameras like Sinar make a lot of sense because the length of rail and bellows sections can be so easily reconfigured to anything necessary.

They're still a b*tch to work with with that much bellows draw. Very inconvenient. But yeah, it's possible. At around life size on a 300mm things start to get cumbersome IMO. The glass shot in the first example made with a 300mm lens would be annoying enough to set up for me to stop bothering about halfway through the exercise and just get it over with on 4x5 or so.

Donald Qualls · Jul 3, 2024

But again, if you're going to shoot close to life size on the negative, better to use a shorter lens to avoid needing the very long bellows draw (a couple feet for 1:1 with a 300 mm lens, vs. half that with a 150 mm lens -- image size identical and the shorter lens also gives a hair more depth of field).

blee1996 · Jul 3, 2024

Better start with what you have, and then figure out what is limiting you. When I first started with 8x10, I only have one lens (300mm Velostigmat barrel lens). And the initial photos were of table top still life, and they turned out really well. I think any decent 300-360mm lens will do well in your application.

Close up still life with 8x10 camera lens recommendations

nicointheclouds

Ian C

xkaes

Donald Qualls

DREW WILEY

ic-racer

xkaes

ic-racer

nicointheclouds

Attachments

nicointheclouds

nicointheclouds

koraks

Moderator

xkaes

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator

DREW WILEY

nicointheclouds

nicointheclouds

DREW WILEY

koraks

Moderator

dpurdy

Tom Taylor

DREW WILEY

koraks

Moderator

Donald Qualls

blee1996

Close up still life with 8x10 camera lens recommendations

Attachments

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency