7X11 Lenses

In the next few weeks I will be selling my soul on Eb** to raise the

funds for my new dream kit..... So I am in need of your valuable

advice at this time about lenses for 7x11.... I have looked at the

lists at Q.-Tuan Luong's site and I am overwhelmed by the choices.

What I would prefer are lenses that are rrrrrazor sharp, contrasty,

with lots of coverage (I love to work those bellows like I'm playing

the concertina).... lightweight would be splendid also... So you see

I am not asking much!

 

I am thinking of a 3 lens kit, at present on 4x5 I use 2 lenses... a

Rodenstock 90/f4.5...(I would like one slightly wider) a Schneider

180/5.6... I really like this lens. For a long lens ....just a bit

longer.

 

I would truly appreciate the benefit of your experience and

suggestions so I may know what to look for....... any related horror

stories are also welcome.

 

Cheers Annie.

When I moved from 4x5 to 8x10 I thoght that I should get the

lenses that I like in 4x5 and just get the equivalent in 8x10. I was

very happy with my 110 mm in 4x5 but quikcly found the 210 in

8x10 doesn't give the same feeling. I end up using the

schneider G Claron 355 instead. For some reason, I think I

prefer longer lenses in the bigger formats. I don't know why yet.

As far as lenses, any lens that covers and is coated should be

fine. Remember you have a lot of film and the issue of

sharpness is not a big one. The lens I use (355 GClaron) has a

great coverage. I heard it covers 8x20, that will give you ample

movements so you can play some music with your accordion.

It is regarded as a very sharp lens. I haven't printed my large

negs yet to say for sure but the negs look amazingly detailed.

G clarons are relatively small. Since they were designed as

process lenses, they perform outsandingly from 1:5 to 5:1 ratios.

For distant landscapes all you have to do is stop down to at least

f22 to get all that sharpness. It seems that you always have to

stop down even farther to get enough depth of field, so that is not

an issue for me.

Other lenses I would use are the old Dagors and Artars. They

are very similar in desighn with the G Clarons.

Are you more confused now! I hope not!

Chris

To replace your 90mm, I would recommend, if affordable, the Super-Symmar 150mm

XL. The angle of view is slight larger than the 90mm on 4x5, which fits what you

want. For the 180, look for anything in the 360mm range, perhaps, as mentioned

above, a 355mm G-Claron would suit. If you can go a bit heavy, I have noticed that

the 360mm plasmats, such as the Symmar-S or Sironars, have been going pretty

cheaply on eBay. Although they have less image circle and are heavier, they are in my

experience for

field work, sharper and more constrasty than the process lenses such as the G-

Claron. For a longer lens,

the Nikon M

450mm is sharp and light. This would be a nice set up, although the gap between the

150mm and

355mm is pretty big.

Ann,<P>

 

I share Chris' experience in that my reaction to the same field of view is different for larger formats than it is for 4x5. At least the change from 4x5 to 8x10 is proportional. But the shape of a 7x11 image is much different from a 4x5. You may find that your 4x5 experience does not translate well. It may require a new sort of aesthetic, but you <I>will</I> find something you like.<P>

 

If you wanted to fancifully explore the mystical side of it for a moment (and expand on the golden mean theme), consider that the diagonal for your format is 13 inches. If you take the golden mean above and below that point as an indication of focal lengths to use, you'd have an 8-inch, a 13-inch (substitute a 12 or 14-inch), and a 21-inch lens. Actually sounds like rather a nice kit.<P>

 

The suggestion of G Clarons is a good one, as is the suggestion of a Nikkor M450. Dagors are always popular for both coverage and sharpness and are often available on the used market in the 8 1/4-inch and 12-inch lengths. 21-inch lenses are plentiful in barrels (but expensive in shutters). And if you will be contact printing, sharpness probably won't be an issue with just about anything.<P>

 

Cheers,<BR>

Will

Anne,

 

Any of the lenses mentioned above (if they cover 8x10) will cover 7x11. You will be doing contacts so most lenses will be sharp enough. You need to recognize that your are working a longer and narrower format then your squarer 4x5/8x10 format. You may wish to cut a mat with a window of 7x11 and then frame your shots - measure the distance from your eye to the 'mask' and that will be your focal lengths. I have found 210mm (f6.8 Angulon or f9 Computar), 270mm/10.75", 355MM/14" 450MM to be a nice 4 lens kit. I have used the 150 Super Symmar XL but it is very wide and I have very few images using that focal length. YMMV.

 

Dagors, g-Clarons, Artars, f9 Computars all work very very well. I prefer lenses in Copal 3 shutters, but some of the Dagors - even in Ilex shutters have a certain quality that just shines when contacted.

Frtom a coverage perspective and the versions of these lenses I have used:

10.75/12 and 14" (gold) Dagors cover 10x12++

210 Angulon covers 10x12" max

Computars (f9 210/240/270) cover my 7x17

150mm ssXL covers 10x12 max

355 G-Claron covers 12x20

455 Nikkor covers 12x20 (the only one that is multi coated)

 

You should allow your budget, brand preferences and what your eye sees (again use the mask) as your guide.

 

Steve

Most if not all people enlarge their 4x5 negatives, whereas many people simply contact print 8x10 (or 7x11) Comparisons between 4x5 and 8x10 therefore do not simply equal x2.

 

 

Anything wider than a "normal" lens on an 8x10 contact print (or 7x11) often looks too WIDE if focused on infinity. Unless you regularly use a loupe to look at and evaluate a print.

 

Sharpness, coverage etc??? go with the Fujinon 360-W. Enough coverage, sharpness, and contrasty to boot!

Anne,

 

Lots of good advice already - in addition to this I'll add that both my 305 G-Claron

and my 10" Wide Field Ektar cover 7x17 with good room for movements.

 

As an aside, since no one's yet asked - what 7x11 are you getting?

 

Cheers,

Roger...

'what 7x11 are you getting?' ...... I am going to build it and you are all going to assist me! ....realistically, I believe I will go custom, start with the holders and work out from there.... Wish me luck..... A.

" am going to build it and you are all going to assist me!"

 

Ann, I wish I had the skills - I would make one myself! <g>

Post jpegs of it when it's built? Best of luck!

 

Cheers,

Roger...

Hi Annie. G-Claron G-Claron G-Claron. All but the 150 will cover 711 although the 210 will be tight at f22 and get a bit wider as you stop down from there. And later coated Dagors. If you regularly use speeds 1/2 second and slower you might think about barrel lenses. I did a comparison of 6 210 graphic arts lenses and a JML that I didn't pay 30 bucks for is smoking sharp. Any of the Konica Hexanon GR II that came on copy cameras are extremely nice. Especially the 260mm. Graphic Kowa f9 210 240 270 305 360 are superb. Most of what I've emntioned here except the Clarons and Dagors don't go into shutter easily. I've got a 210 G-Claron I was going to load on E**y tonight......want me to send it up there instead?

As an addenda, your 4.5 90 is a true wide angle design. 8 elements. To do the same thing for 8X10 seems to cost 4X as much as 4X5. That's why us cheapskates tend to experiment with the graphic arts formula plasmat lenses that have been made obsolete to the printing industry by the computer. BUT make no mistake, they are not wide angle, they are "wide field" at 82+ degrees or so. A true wide angle usually sees at about 105 degrees.

Jim.... You are such a peach to give me first opportunity for your wonderful lens!! ...However, to begin I am going to try Steve's suggestion... today I am going to my favourite places with a cut mat frame and see how I see.... Then I can do some research on the lenses everyone has so kindly suggested.... Cheers Annie.