What lenses should I look for to cover 6x9/2x3 on 120?

[Donald Qualls]

I've recently gotten a Century Graphic 2x3 press-type camera; it came with a 101 mm lens and the Kalart rangefinder calibrated for that. I have other lenses in shutter, however, or can get them by buying a beater folding camera, and I'd like to explore wider angles (longer lenses are easy, anything longer than 101 is likely to cover the frame without movements).

I know my 90 mm Angulon will cover (that covers 4x5, at least if it's stopped down a bit), but I'm wondering about the 75-80 mm lenses usually found on 6x6 or 6x4.5 folders. They don't need to cover 6x9 in their original application, but just as a 105 mm Agnar triplet will cover 4x5 if stopped down enough, I'd expect a 75 or even a 65 would likely cover 6x9 if I can stop down to f/16 or focus in a little from infinity.

Any experience with this?

 

[ic-racer]

I think the sharpest lens in the 6x9cm (2x3") Horseman lineup is the 75mm Topcor. There are a number of them on ebay less than $200 with shutter. I have two of them on different lensboards.
I think the 75mm Topcor is as sharp as the 80mm Zeiss normal lenses in the Hasselblad and 6000 Rollei SLR system, and those don't even cover 6x9cm.

 

[randyB]

I have gone thru and am still going thru your same scenario on finding lenses for my 6x9. Like you, I have lenses for 4x5 that will work for "tele" pix and have switched some to the 6x9 lens board. I have tried a few of the cheap 6x6 lenses, while they are fine form 6x6, they don't cover well for 6x9 even stopped down, 6x7 is just ok but they do have softness/blur in the corners. The wide angles for 6x9 can get pricey. Good luck with your search, keep us posted on what you find.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Donald, I know that you get great pleasure from repurposing inexpensive apparently obsolete lenses. Even so, 6x6 folders aren't a good source of lenses shorter than 100 mm/4 inches that will cover 2x3. Beware of 80/2.8 Xenotars, unlike 80.2.8 Planars they won't cover 2x3.

I'm not aware of many lenses longer than 65 mm and shorter than 100 mm and not for 4x5 that will do for you. The 80/6.3 WF Ektar is explicitly for 2x3 and is a fine, fine lens. Topcor/Horseman lenses for 6x9, as mentioned by ic-racer in post # 2 above, are good bets but may cost more than you want to spend. In addition, they're usually on 80 x 80 mm Horseman boards with the sync terminal sticking through the board and attached to the shutter by a twisted pair.

An 85/6.3 Tessar from a Premo #12 might do for you. I have two, both cover 2x3 but one's not very good. I also have an 85/6.3 Krauss Zeiss Tessar in barrel that ain't bad, but your Century Graphic wants lenses in shutter.

For 65 mm and shorter see https://1drv.ms/x/s!AggQfcczvHGNgYhYGeQuOzsBIyw8Og?e=uIWOnL. You might also want to look at my lens diary, I think you know where it is.

 

[abruzzi]

the Super Angulon 65mm f8 is nice (but tiny) and usually pretty inexpensive. Mine is in a 00 shutter, but so far is running great. Technically it will cover 4x5, and has plenty of coverage for 6x9.

I was looking at the Topcor/Horseman lenses (see my thread a ways down the page) but they all have some kind of adapter on the lens board for shutter release, and the feedback is that most of them don't have a normal cable release on the shutter.

 

[ProfessorC1983]

The (non-Super, but also tiny) Angulon 65mm/f6.8 also covers 6x9 in my experience. As I believe we've discussed in the past @Donald Qualls I have a pair of these I'd be quite happy to part with if you're still interested.

 

[abruzzi]

yeah, I have the angulon 65/6.8, but mine doesn't have a shutter release socket. Something I have to add to the list of things to check when I buy a LF lens. All it has is a lever with a hole in it. I have to trip it by hand or come up with a some sort of hack to trip it via a cable release. (like the Linhof style QR release, but hack the pressing rod to hook in the hole of the release. if size or weight are important, it is //REALLY REALLY SMALL//, I feel like I could lose it under a quarter (ok, not that small, but still...) Right now my Galvin 6x9 is outfitted with a Nikkor-SW 75/4.5 (both the 65s need a recessed board on the Glavin, which I don't have.), a Schneider Xenotar 105/2.8 (love the bright focusing screen...), and a tele-Arton 180/5.5 (I also have the TA 180/4, but that one is pretty large, and I don't feel like the extra stop is all that necessary.) I'm surprised that the camera, three lenses, and all the kit to shoot it (film holders/roll backs, meter, loupe, dark cloth) probably weighs less than my ETRSi with three lenses and a film back and fits in an equivalent sized camera back.

I have a search on eBay that will email me if any Galvin parts come up, but if nothing appears in the next couple of months, I'll probably get SK Grimes to make me a recessed lens board with a #00 hole in it. Looking at Dan's list, I was surprised that the 53 Biogon and 53 SA both had a ~70mm flange distance. Are they slightly retrofocal?

 

[removed account4]

oscillio-raptar 75mm 1.9 wollensak / dumont ..
you'll have to use it for extreme close up work.
or photographing your oscilloscope

 

[nosmok]

The G. Leitmayr Weitwinkel Anastigmat in 65mm FL is a decent lens that works well on 6x9 / 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 and is usually well priced, even if rarer than the Schneider. There's also a 65mm Wollensak WA Optar specifically made for Century-type cameras that's pretty small; it came on a camera I got so don't know a standalone price.

 

[Dan Fromm]

oscillio-raptar 75mm 1.9 wollensak / dumont ..
you'll have to use it for extreme close up work.
or photographing your oscilloscope

Please spare us frivolity.

 

[Dan Fromm]

The G. Leitmayr Weitwinkel Anastigmat in 65mm FL is a decent lens that works well on 6x9 / 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 and is usually well priced, even if rarer than the Schneider. There's also a 65mm Wollensak WA Optar specifically made for Century-type cameras that's pretty small; it came on a camera I got so don't know a standalone price.

Please see the link in post #4 above. If it doesn't work, please complain.

 

[nosmok]

oscillio-raptar 75mm 1.9 wollensak / dumont ..
you'll have to use it for extreme close up work.
or photographing your oscilloscope

I've had more luck with this type of lens by REMOVING the rear group-- you get a kind of interestingly distorted view (especially in color) that makes infinity with no coverage problems, but it also more or less doubles the focal length.

 

[Donald Qualls]

@Dan Fromm Not your fault, but I can't see that link from work; I'll try to remember to look at it when I'm home.

 

[Dan Fromm]

@Dan Fromm Not your fault, but I can't see that link from work; I'll try to remember to look at it when I'm home.

If it doesn't work from home, please complain again. It just worked for me.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If it doesn't work from home, please complain again. It just worked for me.

The network at my workplace blocks certain arbitrary classes of domains, that's probably it. Problem is, I don't remember to check here often when I'm home, I have so little free time there. Here, I can sneak in a couple minutes at a time.

 

[Dan Fromm]

The network at my workplace blocks certain arbitrary classes of domains, that's probably it. Problem is, I don't remember to check here often when I'm home, I have so little free time there. Here, I can sneak in a couple minutes at a time.

Well, if you're willing to risk it, send me your e-mail address by PM and I'll mail the file to you.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Well, if you're willing to risk it, send me your e-mail address by PM and I'll mail the file to you.

I'll try it from home, first. This isn't an immediate need; I've got the 101 that came with the camera and a 90 mm Angulon I can remount -- but it's pretty much same old same old. Longer lenses, easy; I've got 135 mm and 150 mm f/4.5 Tessars in working shutters (if I have a flange ring, they're on bayonet mounts for Zeiss/Ica Ideal plate cameras), as well as a 150/5.6 Componon that becomes a 250/13 if I unscrew the rear group -- and making lens boards for that standard is easy.

 

[nosmok]

Just tested out my own Wollensak 65mm WA Optar on my own late (serial 519729) Century Graphic-- it has no trouble covering the whole negative at infinity. Since the Century rear aperture is 82mm x 59mm by my measurement, and the Lisco Regal holder I used is a 2-1/4" x 3-1/4" model that measures an actual 3-1/8" x 2-1/4" (78.5mm x 57.5mm), I can't truly say that the Wolly covers 6x9cm, but I certainly wouldn't disqualify it for use on a Century Graphic with commonly available sheet film holders (and, though I'm making an educated guess here, with commonly available Graflex roll holders). Especially since the last 2 that sold on evilBay looked good and both were significantly under a hundred bucks.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I certainly wouldn't disqualify it for use on a Century Graphic with commonly available sheet film holders (and, though I'm making an educated guess here, with commonly available Graflex roll holders).

I don't think I've seen a roll film holder with larger than about 85 mm long dimension on nominal 6x9 -- originally it was 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 (= 57+ mm x 82.6 mm). Generally, if it'll cover 2x3 sheet film, it's probably fine. Found a reference that suggests the WA Optar, Raptar, and Angulon at 65 mm all have about the same image circle, i.e. 109 mm -- should cover quite adequately.

 

[nosmok]

I don't think I've seen a roll film holder with larger than about 85 mm long dimension on nominal 6x9 -- originally it was 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 (= 57+ mm x 82.6 mm). Generally, if it'll cover 2x3 sheet film, it's probably fine. Found a reference that suggests the WA Optar, Raptar, and Angulon at 65 mm all have about the same image circle, i.e. 109 mm -- should cover quite adequately.

Yeah, and measuring an old Plaubel Makina film pack holder that was just lying around (plainly, I need help), it's EXACTLY 105mm on the diagonal, 86mm x 61mm across, so the WA Optar seems like a good candidate even for European nominal 6x9's. I wouldn't push it to 6.5 x 9 nominal, but anything short of that seems plausible (maybe even Plaubel-sible).

 

[Donald Qualls]

I wouldn't push it to 6.5 x 9 nominal, but anything short of that seems plausible (maybe even Plaubel-sible).

I don't have 6.5x9 film handy, but on the assumption that it's like 9x12 (i.e. smaller than nominal by about 1mm each way for film sheaths that fit an exact dimension plate holder), it'd be 109.6 diagonal. Seems rather like those lenses were made for that. Should handle it easily if focused in even a hair or stopped down smaller than f/16.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I use the Rodenstock 65/4.5 Grandagon N (170mm IC) with 6x9 & 4x5. No center filter needed for 6x9/6x12, but have it for 4x5. The Nikkor 65/4 SW can be found for even less cost with similar results.

Darr, its good to see that you're still around.

If you have big heavy fast 65 for a 4x5 camera and it will fit a Century Graphic -- Darr what's your 2x3er? -- by all means use it. But be aware that the 65/4.5 Grandy's rear cell's OD is 60 mm and the 65/4.5 Nikkor's is 61 mm.

The Century Graphic's -- 2x3 Crown's and 2x3 Pacemaker Speed's too -- lens throat is 48 mm x 48 mm. Lenses like these can be attached to a Century by unscrewing the rear cell, mounting the board with shutter and front cell on the standard, removing the camera's focusing panel, and screwing the rear cell back into the shutter from the rear. This will also work with a 65/5.6 SA, which covers a mere 170 mm. Fiddly but doable. Don't ask how I know. All of these lenses cover much more than can be used on a Century Graphic, which has very limited movements.

Donald, the 65/6.8 Angulon and 65/6.8 Raptar/Optar were made for 2x3, not 6.5 by 9 and have marginal coverage on 2x3. This doesn't matter much for cameras with limited movements like 2x3 Graphics.

nosmok, I'm glad that your 65/6.8 Wolly gives results that please you. I hated mine, replaced it long ago with a 65/6.8 Ilex. SA clone, much much better lens than the Wolly.

 

[beemermark]

I haven't seen it mentioned but the Nikon 105mm lens is a fantastic newer lens in a modern shutter. I have one somewhere that I bought thinking it would cover 4x5 (which it does barely). Nikon made superb large format lenses but it was towards the end of large format film photography so not really common. But a relatively modern, coated lens. Probably should find mine and sell it.

 

[darinwc]

Donald: what to look for?
Try to find a 80mm f2.8 planar. It's a fantastic lens.
A 101 ektar is also a great lens.
The Angulon you already have would be another suggestion.
On the cheap side.. buying a folding camera may not save you much. But there are some very inexpensive lenses like the Kodak on the tourists.
Wides.. it is worth it to spend the extra money for a good wide angle. But don't get a f4.5 super wide.. may be too large to fit. Stick with f8 to f5.6. the horseman 65mm f7 is a good value.

Others.. the Tominon 75mm can be found very inexpensively. I forget how well it covers.

 

[Dan Fromm]

the Tominon 75mm can be found very inexpensively. I forget how well it covers.

I've had several, wouldn't use one for general photography. Tessar type, if I recall correctly, can't possibly cover 2x3. But Mr. Qualls and I don't have quite the same preferences.