Lens question

[Bob Carnie]

Hi There
Maybe someone can help me out here.
I am considering a purchase of a used 8x10 system preferrably field but I can live with studio only applications.
I have two lenses that I inherited over the years that I have questions on.
Rodenstock Rodagon 1: 6.3 f=360mm
and
Rodenstock Rodagon 1:5.6 f=300mm

I am interested in doing 3/4 length portraits , as well as photographing objects *still life* that are anywhere from 8 inches two 16 inches in height that fill 2/3 of the frame of the 8x10.

Will these lenses be of any value to me, I am not considering this work as commercial projects, but rather less ridgid application.
any thoughts on their usabilty??

 

[Craig]

I thought the Rodagon lenses were enlarging lenses, rather than taking lenses. Do these lenses have shutters on them?

 

[Pinholemaster]

Get a camera and test them.

Me, for full length portraits, I like a 240mm. A 300 or a 360 will serve you fine for portrait work. Can't speak about your Rodagons.

As for close-up work, I do that type of work on 4x5, so I can't address 8x10 close-up set ups.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Bob, on the one hand, as has been pointed out, Rodagons are enlarging lenses.

On the other, you plan to use them at relatively high magnifications, in exactly the range they were made to be used for enlarging. So they should work well as you want to use them if, as been pointed out, they are in shutter or you can use, e.g., a Packard to get the exposure times you need.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Thanks Guys

I realize they are enlarging lenses, but the kind of work I am thinking of is really in the abstract where nothing really matters except sharp focus on the object I am photographing.
Right now , I am into five rum and cokes right now so whaterver I say I will not admit to tommorow, I am just wondering has anyone ever used these types of lenses on a 8x10 camera with any success. I really don't want to buy the camera to see if they would work, just some sane advise.
I have just looked at a mint Linhoff 8x10 studio with all the shit to do the work I want with a 360 portrait lens and I am trying to justify the decision to buy this sucker ,my best friend and mentor tells me to do this, rather than put these enlarger lenses I have on a cameral and live with any problem that may come.
If my post is sounds crazy I will blame it on the booze.
The project I want to work on are very unorthodox , and the quality of precise capture is not my goal , so can I get any depth of field with a process lens for a portrait or small still life???

 

[Ole]

Depth of field only depends on reproduction ratio and aperture, so the enlarger lenses will be no worse than any other lens.

The small apertures you will use to get any DoF at all at close range also means that exposure times are likely to be long enough that you can get by without a shutter.

BTW - rum and coke is now proved to have deletorious effects on orthography.

 

[Sparky]

Of course you can get the DOF, Bob... just the same as a taking lens. I wouldn't sweat the differences too much.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Ok
I have woke up with no hangover and feeling pretty chipper.

So it sound like these lenses may work, I need to mount a shutter and or lens cap*on/off by hand* longer exposures which BTW is not out of the questions for what I am hoping to accomplish as I imagine I can count steamboats pretty good as Ole suggests.
The DOF is controlled by the apeture so I think I am covered on this point.
So what would be my percievable differences from a high quality lens made for on camera exposures rather than a enlarging lens?
I want to make 40inch by 50inch prints as a final product . So we are looking at approximately 5X enlargments.
Am I just wasting my time thinking that since I have these lenses , I will save some money by just buying the body, or will finding a mount, getting a shutter be as much hassel as splurging on the Linhof 8x10. The Linhoff is in mint condition, with reducing back and 360 lens and on a beautiful studio stand made for the camera.
For the projects I am currently working on it would be perfect.$3000 Canadian.
But I would never be able to do any location/outdoor work as it is not portable and knowing me I would want this capability in a couple of years.
I have never been a large format kind of guy, lots of my clients are, and this move in direction is daunting for me.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Am I just wasting my time thinking that since I have these lenses , I will save some money by just buying the body, or will finding a mount, getting a shutter be as much hassel as splurging on the Linhof 8x10. The Linhoff is in mint condition, with reducing back and 360 lens and on a beautiful studio stand made for the camera.
For the projects I am currently working on it would be perfect.$3000 Canadian.

I don't remember if these lenses directly screw into a shutter but in general DON'T buy barrel lenses in common sizes/coverage types with the intent of mounting them. Let me run a few numbers at you.

A new #3 shutter is what $300? More?
The guy to mount it will cost you a bit .
Then you've got what you paid for the lenses.

In comparison I bought a Caltar-S 300mm [Supposedly a Symar-S] For $150 US.

Personally in todays' market I'd be hard pressed to see a studio 8x10 at $3000. So many are being dumped on Ebay at a fraction of that price. They might not have the Linhof name plate but they'll all hold a lens for you.

If you want a field camera $3000 is enough to get you various brand new cameras. Or a almost any used camera.

Do the lenses you're looking at have mounting flanges? If so they can easily be mounted without a shutter to a wooden lens board.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Yikes I was wrong. Almost $500 for a #3 shutter.

 

[Harrigan]

Bob I don't really know what the Linhof is worth but the price seems way way high to me. The market for a huge studio 8x10 is also slow. You can get a lot of camera for 3 grand.

 

[Sparky]

Get a Sinar 8x10 F2 or P (preferably P - since it's more solid) for $1000. Then you can get a Sinar behind-the-lens shutter if you decide you really need it later. That'll be another 400. But you're shooting 8x10 - in most instances your exposures (if you're stopped down a ways) are going to be on the order of several seconds - in which case you can use the charlie chaplin shutter... if you know what I mean.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Thanks guys this is helpful.
Sparky are you suggesting the Sinar body and use my lenses?
You are right the exposures will be very long so I can wing it with a lens cap.
I must admit I feel a bit like the kid in the candy shop, I see this beautiful camera on a stand and I instintively want to buy it but I am not sure about the price. I do not want to insult the seller with a low ball offer as he has kept it in good condition and I respect that, but as well I do not want to be taken to the cleaners because of my niavetiy on 8x10 camera gear and its worth.
I know I will use it as I have hundreds of images floating in my mind so your thoughts are helpful on the realities of purchase.
If this was an enlarger I would know what to do immediately.
BTW I have a mint 11x14 Deveere enlarger and just installed a 8x10 2000w horizontal mural enlarger, and I am dying to make negs to go on these beasts.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Bob what do you intend to do with the camera?

Still life? You can get an older 8x10 monorail for very little. I got my big Cambo for $200. Something like that.

Portraits? I got a Century studio camera with a portrait lens for about $300.

Both of these cameras are relatively huge and nobody is going to pay big money in todays market for them. OTOH they do what they do well.

Or you could look at something like an Ansco 8x10. Still heavy but portable if you don't mind the weight. About the same sort of price depending on condition.

Or you could look at the various new cameras. You can get a brand new field camera for less then $2K US right now.

8x10 prices depend on what you want/need. The big heavy stuff isn't going hiking so many avoid it. That keeps prices down.

Remember you'll need film holders and likely lens boards.

 

[Craig]

BTW I have a mint 11x14 Deveere enlarger and just installed a 8x10 2000w horizontal mural enlarger, and I am dying to make negs to go on these beasts.

Bob, the enlarging lenses are optimized for a reproduction range of 2X to 10X, so for a still life they should be perfect. A portrait could be pushing things too far and you might run out of coverage.

I recently tried a 75 Rodenstock M lens on my enlarger, designed for 1:1. At a magnification to make an 8x10 from a 35mm neg it ran out of coverage, and was a devil to focus. That was the first clue that I didn't have the right lens for what I was doing.

If you're really desperate to make a print, I could send you one of my 8x10 Velvia's and you could make an Ilfochrome for me

 

[Bob Carnie]

Hi Nick
I have two projects going, one is called Big Head Pin Head * have you ever looked at your friends heads and think , boy he/she has a big head, or man this person really has a pin head* I want to do some portraits just under 3/4 length and with some background tricks emphasis the size of my subjects head and then print them on mural lith paper in not so flattering mode.I would like a very large pushed neg to really bring out contrast and detail.
The Second one is a continuing journey on disposable objects that I find and solarize. I started with crushed metal and now I want to switch to power rangers and discarded toys that all our kids get as gifts, use them for two days and then never play with them again* kinda sad like woody from toy story* I want to give them a new life.
Both Projects are in the mural size and I want a big meaty negative to really push around in the dark room.
This will keep me busy for a couple of years, in fact my first model will be councelman Dinesh, *have you ever seen the size of the potatoe on those shoulders*
I really am leaning to the Linhoff and will try to negotiate a deal that is good for him and myself. Just as a decor piece here at elevator its beautiful.

Bob what do you intend to do with the camera?

Still life? You can get an older 8x10 monorail for very little. I got my big Cambo for $200. Something like that.

Portraits? I got a Century studio camera with a portrait lens for about $300.

Both of these cameras are relatively huge and nobody is going to pay big money in todays market for them. OTOH they do what they do well.

Or you could look at something like an Ansco 8x10. Still heavy but portable if you don't mind the weight. About the same sort of price depending on condition.

Or you could look at the various new cameras. You can get a brand new field camera for less then $2K US right now.

8x10 prices depend on what you want/need. The big heavy stuff isn't going hiking so many avoid it. That keeps prices down.

Remember you'll need film holders and likely lens boards.

 

[Dinesh]

How is the hangover Bob? Were you able to get the ball gag out?

 

[bill schwab]

I have two projects going, one is called Big Head Pin Head

I can tell your friends will LOVE these.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Be careful Bill
I haven't decided where I am going to place the backdrop on your head!!
Les of course has a massive head so I know the placement, Dinesh , well what can I say with his last comment you know I will really be dedicating a place in my portfolio for him. I just have to gag him while the session is on because as you know he can't shut his mouth for more than 2 seconds.

I can tell your friends will LOVE these.

 

[Dinesh]

Yep, I can see it now "Excuse me officer, but there is a creepy guy in orange coveralls who says he like the shape of my head and has invited me back to his studio. Further, he keeps saying "It puts the lotion on it's skin or else it gets the hose again." Should I be concerned?"

 

[chrobry]

I had 5.6/180 mm Rodagon which I was using on 5x7. It was quite sharp lens, even for landscapes. Certainly more sharp then vintage taking lenses I had at that time, including Tessar and Satz Plasmat. Just my two cents.
Jan

 

[thebanana]

Dinesh , well what can I say with his last comment you know I will really be dedicating a place in my portfolio for him

Watch for lens flare if he turns his head sideways.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Thanks Jan

So even though the lens was an enlarging lens you got the kind of negatives that you were happy with and made prints from?
This is kind of where I am going , all joking aside the images that I want to take are obviously not mainstream portraiture or even clean still lifes of the toys, but an interpertation of the subject which is then pushed to some wierd level.
If the enlarger lens can give me sharpness with enough depth of field, I can live with any artifacts this set up gives me.

thanks
Bob

I had 5.6/180 mm Rodagon which I was using on 5x7. It was quite sharp lens, even for landscapes. Certainly more sharp then vintage taking lenses I had at that time, including Tessar and Satz Plasmat. Just my two cents.
Jan

 

[John Kasaian]

One option would be to front mount your Rodagons onto a common shutter. far less costly than mounting each lens in a shutter. Check S.K. Grimes' website for details.

 

[Sparky]

Bob - so... you're doing multi-second exposures for portraits...? There ARE certain problems affiliated with that - as you can probably imagine... it just sounds like you're looking for sharp details in the face - which you're not really going to get without either direct sunlight or a strobe system... just my 2 cents.