Opinions Regarding 150mm and 203-210mm Lenses for 4x5 Field Kit

[Old-N-Feeble]

Following is the list of lenses currently in my 4x5 field kit. It's actually a 6x12cm roll film kit but I want as much shift as I can reasonably get... up to 5x7 coverage. I'm aware the 38mm and 47mm can't do that but the rest can. Performance is of primary concern and size/weight is of secondary concern. Also, my eyesight is failing so speed is of some concern so the 203mm f/7.7 Ektar might be an issue occasionally... though probably not most of the time especially since it is very sharp wide open and has no focus shift.

NOTE: I calculate "normal" focal length using the actual image area (56mm x 112mm) so, IMO, "normal FL" for 6x12cm is 125mm. BTW, I don't care about building a lens kit around a "normal lens".

My question is regarding ONLY the 150mm and 203mm LENSS: Disregarding cost, what others would you recommend? BTW, I know the 150mm Apo Sironar is an excellent option. It wouldn't take much convincing to swap the Apo Symmar-L for the Apo Sironar. However, I tend to like dyalite designs in longer-than-normal focal lengths so it'll be difficult to convince me to replace the 203 Ektar.

Please... no recommendations for any of the other lenses.

My current kit:
38mm SA XL
47mm SA XL
72mm SA XL
110mm SS XL
>>> 150mm Apo Symmar-L
>>> 203mm Ektar (late version in Compur)
300mm Fujinon-C
450mm Fujinon-C

 

[ntenny]

Is something *wrong* with the 150 and 203 you have? Both should already cover 5x7, I think (the 150 won't give you much movement at infinity), and neither seems like an obvious weight problem.

At the 200-210 range, I think you're just stuck with speed vs. weight, and the Ektar seems like a compromise between the two. It's not as light as something like a Protar, it's not as fast as the f/5.6 plasmat or f/4.5 Tessar alternatives, but I doubt if it's possible to find something that improves on it for both aspects at once.

In sum, it seems to me like the kit you already have is in "don't fix it if it isn't broken" territory.

-NT

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

No, nothing is wrong with the 150 0r 203 lenses I already have. They're both excellent. And you're right... this lens kit is not broken and both focal lengths in question cover 5x7. I don't want a Protar or Tessar. The 150 should be a plasmat and the 203-210 should be a dyalite or plasmat. I'm just looking for that little extra "edge".

 

[jp498]

I like my fuji 210/4.5 tessar for something smooth or sharp. And my Trioplan for something smooth. And my 8.75 verito for something soft, and my Optar for something small/sharp like the Ektar.

 

[MDR]

The only thing that would beat the Ektar would be a Multicoated APO Design since you already own a Apo Symmar 150mm lens the obvious choice would be a 210mm Apo-Symmar-L but you would lose some of the advantages of the Ektar like lighter weight. But all in all ntenny is right
"In sum, it seems to me like the kit you already have is in "don't fix it if it isn't broken" territory."

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

As stated by others, there's a substantial size/weight difference between a slower dyalite and a faster plasmat. The speed could be an issue some of the time as my eyesight is failing. But size/weight are issues too as my ability to ambulate is failing also. I've already compromised on the lens kit choosing slightly larger bulk/weight for better performance with some of the other lenses.

Will a top-notch 210 faster plasmat be worth the extra size/weight vs. the 203 Ektar dyalite? BTW, I do prefer the rendering of dyalite designs in longer-than-normal FL.

Is it worth replacing the 150 Apo Symmar-L with something like the 150 Apo Sironar or something else?

 

[BrianShaw]

I wouldn't change a thing until you decide one of those lenses isn't meeting your needs anymore.

But I've been slowly moving from plasmats to tessars myself. I know you don't want to hear this, but Kodak Commercial Ektars are really sweet lenses. An 8-1/4 inch Kodak CE might be a nice alternative. Mea culpa.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Heh... I just sold a nice 8.25" Commercial Ektar. Yes, I know they're excellent lenses. The beautiful round apertures in those Ilex shutters certainly don't hurt. I'll never understand why lens makers put so much effort and money into grinding and coating the glass while not demanding better apertures from the shutter makers.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'd recommend either a 200 Nikkor M or 210 G-Claron, if ya want something small and light with superb optics for 4x5. Otherwise there are plenty of 210 plastmats out there.

 

[ntenny]

I really like G-Clarons, but for the OP it seems like that f/9 aperture would be an area of concern. On the other hand, they're cheap enough and small enough that maybe it makes sense to add one to the kit for situations where the light level isn't a problem, while also keeping something faster available when needed.

-NT

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I might consider the 200mm Nikkor-M except that, IIRC, it's a Tessar variant and the corners on 5x7 might be slightly soft. The 210mm G-Claron is a good option to save weight but I think the 203mm Ektar performs better in tests (only up to 5x7) and the G-Claron is actually a tad slower.

BTW, I'm selling a 210mm Graphic-Kowa that I've verified is an early version same as Kyvytar and Computar with greater coverage... I just don't need that caliber of lens for 6x12cm. I'm also selling a 150mm Graphic-Kowa and 150mm G-Claron.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Hmm... Seems like some are recommending two different lens kits... "exclusively daylight" vs. a kit which might be used on very overcast/stormy days or early AM or late PM.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I might consider the 200mm Nikkor-M except that, IIRC, it's a Tessar variant and the corners on 5x7 might be slightly soft.

Reasonable concern. Nikon's coverage claims, possibly conservative, are 166 mm @ f/8 and 210 mm @ f/22.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Reasonable concern. Nikon's coverage claims, possibly conservative, are 166 mm @ f/8 and 210 mm @ f/22.

Right... and I'd like the option of shooting at f/11 if I was forced to. The EKtar can easily do this.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Conservative or bunk? The 200M handles 4x5 superbly with plenty of wiggle room. But 5X7 is a different story - I wouldn't recommend it for that. The corners will go soft. The G-Claron has significantly more coverage, and is a stellar performer from quite closeup clear to infinity. Very sharp, and will even handle 8x10 with minimal movements and small stops (though certainly not an ideal choice on film that big - the 240 version is better for 8x10, or that 210 Kowa Graphic). I've never had problems focusing f/9 or f/10 lenses outdoors in any kind of light. Even did it inside a lava tube last year - though that was a bit tricky.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

BTW, I've owned and sold two 200mm Nikkor-M lenses over the last many years. Both were stellar performers on 4x5 but with little movement sharp to the corners. They are beautiful tiny gems though.

Any more comments regarding 150mm and 200-210mm lens options?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well you can forget f/11 with either the 210M or G Claron, unless you're aimed point blank. You need smaller stops to get corner sharpness. A 210 Apo Sironar S would be great, but that's somewhat bulkier. The Fuji 180 A is a tiny lens with a surprisingly large image circle for 4x5 use; but for 5x7, you'd need to use it well stopped down.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

There was also a Docter Optic Apo-Germinar in a 210, IIRC, that would be a wonderful option for the focal length. I got a 240 apo-germinar which is an f9 but it will cover 5x12 to the corners even wide open.

 

[DREW WILEY]

210's are abundant from all the major manufacturer, and some lesser known mfg too. Many 240's will easily cover 8x10, though not all of em.

 

[ChuckP]

I've been using an 8 1/4 in Dagor and it looks very nice. Small and good coverage.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I think for now I'll hold onto the 150 Apo Symmar-L. I may still replace the 203 Ektar with something like a 210 Apo Symmar because the brighter image will help my failing eyes to focus but I doubt I'll opt for the pricier "L" version. I really do prefer dyalite designs in longer-than-normal FL and the f/7.7 aperture won't be an issue most of the time. Decisions, decisions...

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Any more suggestions?

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I just found a 210mm Apo Symmar-L for $375 and bought it. I hope it's in decent shape. My "guess" is someone at the retail operation priced it as a non-L version. I'll know in a few days.


I "might" sell the 203 Ektar in a few days. Anyone interested? This is a super-nice late example in Compur shutter. If anyone is interested then I'll post the eBay link in the Classifieds Section... assuming that's allowed. Actually, IIRC, I have a second slightly older but coated copy stashed away too. I'll have to look.

 

[MattKing]

I "might" sell the 203 Ektar in a few days. Anyone interested? This is a super-nice late example in Compur shutter. If anyone is interested then I'll post the eBay link in the Classifieds Section... assuming that's allowed. Actually, IIRC, I have a second slightly older but coated copy stashed away too. I'll have to look.

Nope.

You need to be a paid subscriber to post items for sale in the APUG classifieds, and you are not permitted to link to existing eBay sales.

If you want to sell through APUG, the subscription is very reasonable, and you are helping support the site.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I don't have a problem with a reasonable subscription fee. This site is worth it even without the Classified Section. However, I'll be listing all my stuff on eBay because I've always gotten higher prices even after the fees.

I just paid for a subscription even though I won't be using the Classifieds Section. Too bad eBay links aren't allowed though.