Sharp LF lens for Portrait

[Ganesh Devarajan]

Hi..I'm Ganesh from Bangalore, India.
I'm an active medium format photographer and got my LF Chamonix recently...excited to explore large format process.

Need advice on LF lens for my portraiture and fine art work.

Been looking at 210 focal length in eBay, any other recommended portal?

 

[darinwc]

Any of the 'big 4' manufacturers are fantastic. Sironar, Symmar, Fujinon, Nikkor.

 

[xkaes]

Hello and WELCOME to the FORUM. There are lots of friendly, knowledgeable photographers here that can help. The biggest problem is that sometimes they can give you too MUCH information!

I'll start off by saying that a lot of photographers do not use sharp lenses for portrait work, Why? Because they can show every minor imperfection of the person. Some photographers use soft-focus filters or soft-focus lenses to minimize the appearance of the imperfections.

In addition, you need to decide what focal length lens is best for what you want to accomplish. You might want a lens that is slightly longer than 210mm for portrait work. There are many lenses to choose from -- and we can help you out.

Here is a list of all the lenses from FUJINON -- as well as some other useful information and ideas:

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

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Hi..I'm Ganesh from Bangalore, India.
I'm an active medium format photographer and got my LF Chamonix recently...excited to explore large format process.

Need advice on LF lens for my portraiture and fine art work.

Been looking at 210 focal length in eBay, any other recommended portal?

I just started large format photography two years ago with a Chamonix (45H-1). I shoot landscapes so can't help you with portrait lenses. The link below were taken with 75mm, 90mm and 150mm of various lens manufacturers. Schnieder, Nikon, Fujinon, and Rodenstock, the four main lens manufacturers, all make good lenses for large format.

Flickr Search

www.flickr.com

What kind of Chamonix do you have? In any case, good luck with your portrait photography, and post some shots when you get a chance.

Not to take anything away from this photo site, but I belong to another forum as well that focuses exclusively on large-format photography. YOu may find it useful as well.

Large Format Photography Forum

A discussion forum on large format phtography http://largeformatphotography.info

www.largeformatphotography.info

 

[otto.f]

If you want it sharp, just sharp, perhaps Fujinon is the right choice, if you want also a bit variety from aperture 4.5 to 22 the Voigtländer Heliar would give you the extra possibility of dreamy shots. Schneider is in between: sharp but still sympathetic.

 

[BradS]

Assuming you're talking about 4x5...yes, 210mm is a nice focal length for portraits. Actually, 150mm is also nice.
My preferences for 210mm lenses are ... (in no particular order)

• Rodenstock Sironar-N - avoid plain Sironar (ie, without an "S" or "N")
• Schneider Symmar-S or APO Symmar
• Nikon Nikkor-W
• Schneider Xenar
• Rodenstock Geronar (this one is especially good for portraits! and often dismissed because of its simple design)
• the newer Fujinon-W and CM-W are also fine choices.

With any of these prefer one in a late model Copal shutter - the ones with the black shutter speed dial and the ones just prior to that with the chrome shutter speed dial that looks the same as the black dial...avoid the early Copal shutters with the "fine toothed" or "serrated edge" shutter speed dial.

 

[btaylor]

I like the 210 focal length on 4x5 for portraits too. In fact it is what I use most of the time anyway. I like the older Kodak Ektar lenses a lot. You can find a 203mm f7.7 Ektar in the Supermatic shutter for not a lot of money which you may like, and it’s close enough to 210mm I think.

 

[Ian Grant]

Assuming you're talking about 4x5...yes, 210mm is a nice focal length for portraits. Actually, 150mm is also nice.
My preferences for 210mm lenses are ... (in no particular order)

• Rodenstock Sironar-N - avoid plain Sironar (ie, without an "S" or "N")
• Schneider Symmar-S or APO Symmar
• Nikon Nikkor-W
• Schneider Xenar
• Rodenstock Geronar (this one is especially good for portraits! and often dismissed becuase of its simple design)
• the newer Fujinon-W and CM-W are also fine choices.

With any of these prefer one in a late model copal shutter - the ones with the black shutter speed dial and the ones just prior to that with the chrome shutter speed dial that looks the same as the black dial...avoid the early copal shutters with the "fine toothed" or "serrated edge" shutter speed dial.

That's the reply I was thinking of giving Yesterday The Sironar N. Symmar S. and Nikkor-W are all excellent lenses.

Now add in the Xenar (or a Tessar/Ektar/Comgo - Osaka) and Geronar, stopped down to f 22 they are in practical terms as good as the above lenses, but at wider apertures the Tessar type lenses become softer at the edges and corners as you open up to wider apertures, that can be a benefit for portraits.

The Geronar's are modern Multi Coated Cooke Triplet designs and excellent portrait lenses, but like Tessar type lenses very sharp over all by f22.

I worked shooting portraits commercially in the early 1970s (35mm & 120), and I am beginning to shoot portraits again but LF. I will test my 210mm f6.3 Geronar, 210mm F4.5 Osaka, and I also have a 210mm f4.5 Xenar (uncoated), but the Crème de la crème is my 1863 8" f4 Taylor, Taylor, & Hobson. Rapid Acting Petzval. I have front mounting shutters that fit it, one a Gitzo with flash sync.

I should add when is a Petzval quite different to type, swirly distortion etc, and I have 2 or 3. It's these Dallmeyer Petzvals, no swirl.

Ian

 

[xkaes]

....the Crème de la crème is my 1863 8" f4 Taylor, Taylor, & Hobson. Rapid Acting Petzval. I have front mounting shutters that fit it, one a Gitzo with flash sync.


Ian

Everyone else seems to prefer a 210mm for portraits -- except you and me. I think a 250mm -- or 300mm -- is better.

 

[Ian Grant]

Everyone else seems to prefer a 210mm for portraits -- except you and me. I think a 250mm -- or 300mm -- is better.

Most LF field cameras only have double extension, that means maximum bellows draw is twice the nominal standard FL lens, which is 150mm/6" with a 5x4 camera, so a 300mm lens is at almost full bellows extension focussed at Infinity. With my Wista 45DX or Super Graphic a 300mm lens is very impractical. I do have 3 5x4 cameras, all MPPs with triple extension, but reality is I like working with short FL lenses.

With my Mamiya 645 cameras working with models I mainly use my 45mm lens, with 5x4 I may well start using my 120mm Angulon for portraits as well as 130mm and 210m lenses. I do have a 240mm Nikkor W. and a 250mm CZJ Tessar so all options are open. However, I think for 5x4 I'll stick to 120mm to 210mm.

Ian

 

[BradS]

Kodak 127mm Ektar, Crown Graphic handheld, rangefinder focused, Fuji Provia 100F RDPIII
My Neighbor lady, Claudia had been diagnosed with stage IV cancer and was undergoing chemo-therapy. She was adamant that I not take her photo...but allowed a photo of her dog.
She died a few weeks after this. She was just 45 year old. RIP.
Sometimes, 127mm on 4x5 works for portrait of a sort...it just depends upon the situation. In this case, it was what I had in my hand at the moment.

 

[BradS]

Schneider 135mm Symmar-S, Kodak 320TXP

 

[Richard Man]

As others have mentioned, any particular reasons why you are looking for a sharp portrait lens?

 

[GregY]

210/ 8" Heliars & Commercial Ektars are also superb

 

[xkaes]

Most LF field cameras only have double extension, that means maximum bellows draw is twice the nominal standard FL lens, which is 150mm/6" with a 5x4 camera, so a 300mm lens is at almost full bellows extension focussed at Infinity. With my Wista 45DX or Super Graphic a 300mm lens is very impractical. I do have 3 5x4 cameras, all MPPs with triple extension, but reality is I like working with short FL lenses.

Ian

The OP does not have that limitation, but there are lots of field cameras with 13" or 14" of extension. There are also many 300mm lenses with a flange focal length of 270-280mm which works well with just a 12" bellows. There are also 300mm telephoto lenses with flange focal lengths around 8" (200mm). Similarly, some companies addressed this by producing 270mm lenses -- so there are lots of options for those who prefer a longer lens for 4x5" portraits.

 

[Ganesh Devarajan]

As others have mentioned, any particular reasons why you are looking for a sharp portrait lens?

Not liking that soft looks in portraiture

 

[Richard Man]

Not liking that soft looks in portraiture

In that case, just get a top-4 210mm or 180mm Plasmat and the images will be tack sharp

 

[benveniste]

The term "portrait" means different things to different people, but I've mainly used two different Nikkors -- a 180mm f/5.6 Nikkor-W and a 270mm f/6.3 Nikkor-T.

For a sharp large format portrait, you need to take into account depth of field. For a head-and-shoulders shot, you have about 4.5" of depth of field at f/22. That's almost enough to cover the tip of your subject's nose to the back of their ear, but only if you focus precisely. At those apertures, lens quality only plays a minor role.

 

[xkaes]

Not liking that soft looks in portraiture

You might like razor sharp portraits, but your subject might not. I've taken lots of portraits with sharp 85-100mm-135mm lenses for 35mm film, and many subjects hated the results. Not because the focusing was off or the lighting was bad, but because these sharp lenses showed even the smallest "blemish" in great detail. But maybe that's what you want to accomplish.

I even "lost" a girl friend because I used a wide-angle lens for her portraiture -- too close-up!

 

[BradS]

Most all modern large format lenses, except those specifically designed to be soft focus, are quite sharp. The exceptions maybe, as mentioned above, the Rodenstock 210mm f/6.8 Geronar which is a modern interpretation of the Cooke Triplet....and a fantastic portrait lens on 4x5. Even the Geronar is quite sharp when well stopped down.

Speaking of Cooke, I recall a modern Cooke lens that was specifically marketed as a 4x5 portrait lens...
the Cooke PS945 or something like that wasn't it? I remember that it was priced well outside my comfort zone....and so never paid it much attention.

 

[Donald Qualls]

You can always make a soft print or scanned image from a sharp negative, but not so much the other way. I'd go with the Big 4 lists of sharp lenses above, and I'd agree that 210 mm is a good focal length for portraits; I certainly wouldn't shoot that subject matter with the 135 mm that lives on my Speed Graphic (unless I was out street shooting and didn't have another lens).

One nice option here is a 135 or 150 mm convertible lens. These won't be cheap and tend to be slow (f/8, perhaps, instead of f/5.6), but you get, in effect, three lenses for the price of one. The complete lens gives you the primary focal length -- say, 150 mm, nice for general use. Take off the front lens group (just unscrews from the shutter) and you get a ~265 mm lens 2/3 stop slower -- almost all 4x5 cameras have enough bellows draw for this length, and while it's longer than 210, it's still very usable for portraits. Unscrew the rear group and put the front set in its place, and you get a third, still longer focal length (in the above example, it would be about 345 mm -- which is a little long for some 4x5 cameras, but very usable for others). But you only have to pay for and haul around one lens and one shutter to have those three focal lengths.

 

[Richard Man]

Speaking of Cooke, I recall a modern Cooke lens that was specifically marketed as a 4x5 portrait lens...
the Cooke PS945 or something like that wasn't it? I remember that it was priced well outside my comfort zone....and so never paid it much attention.

I am a huge fan of Cooke triplets and portrait lenses. Have the PS945 (taken over a thousand sheets with it), a few older Series II Cooke, even the Cooke Rapid View!! And Veritas, Paragon, Gundlach Meniscus, Pinkham and Smith... Damn, I can stop any time I want!!!

 

[jimgalli]

A late 1960's coated Heliar in a shutter is a force to reckon with. I have a 180 I was going to sell but can't remember tonight if it's coated or not.

 

[John Wiegerink]

If I were looking for an inexpensive way out, I'd look for something like this LINHOF Schneider-Kreuznach TECHNIKA Symmar convertible. Maybe in 150mm to 265mm. The regular Schneider convertible lenses are fine also, but it's said that the ones for Linhof were tested/selected as the "pick of the litter" so to speak. These go for very little money and are actually very good lenses. They don't have the fancy latest coatings, but for portrait work coating means nothing since higher contrast is much, much less important. These lenses will be as sharp as anybody needs for a portrait, trust me.

 

[gone]

A late 1960's coated Heliar in a shutter is a force to reckon with.

I'll bet it is. Heliar lenses are special, unique even.

FWIW, this is the first time I've seen a thread about sharp portrait lenses, but LF is different. Your DOF is so thin wide open that w/ the wrong lens you can get abrupt bokeh effects. Seeing a hard change from soft to sharp on a person's face can be an issue. I don't care for the look, it needs to be a smooth transition or just get it all in focus.

It may be impossible to make a LF portrait that is just too sharp like you can with 35mm, as LF lenses are really about coverage. But the key to success here is more about your lighting (and subject) for portraits. Something as small as a faint reflection on someone's face can stand out and ruin the shot. Everything is magnified on a portrait, both good and bad.