Does a 210mm fit on a 8x10 camera

I have a 210mm 4x5 Lens and was wondering if it could fit on an 8x10 camera?

<p>What kind is it? Almost all 210 lenses are intended as standard lenses for 5x7 (with some movement) and will not cover 8x10 (although hey will physically fit on the camera). The shortest standard lens I have that covers 8x10 is a 240 Symmar-S and this only just covers with no movements possible. Also see here:<br>

<a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/archive/index.php/t-44442.html">http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/archive/index.php/t-44442.html</a></p>

<p>It will depend on the lens. Check to see what the angle of coverage is for your lens. For example, a 210mm Kowa f9 lens will cover 8x10 film</p>

<p>The 210mm Apo Sironar S and the 210 Apo Sironar W both fully cover 8x10 and have room for some movement on 810. Very, very little with the S.</p>

Here's a brief article with a table listing the suggested maximum format for various LF lenses:

 

http://www.ebonycamera.com/articles/lenses.html

 

I had an older Schneider 6.8 210 Angulon that worked well with 8x10 at infinity and provided enough movement for landscape work. The

newer Super Angulon 210 will provide much greater coverage. I have a friend who tells me his Schneider 210 G-claron will cover 8x10 at

infinity, but only below f/22 and with very little movement. At closer-than-infinity bellows extensions, lots of lenses will cover the 8x10

format.

<p>The Schneider Super-Symmar 210 XL will fit on 8x10 and provide lots of movement, but it will set you back a pretty penny even used. It is a great lens however and will allow photos on this format that no other can match.</p>

I have a calumet caltar pro series 210mm f6.3

<p>I have a Schneider 210mm Symmar that I routinely use on a 5x7 view camera. I believe the spec sheets say it will cover 8x10, although not with a lot of movement. The symmar's (and Componons) will cover more than they are rated. I have used both 300mm and 360mm Componons (the enlarging lens versions of then Symmar) on my 11x14 and both cover. I have a 12"/21"/28" Turner Reich Triple Convertible that will cover 11x14 in the 12" configuration (as well as the 21" & 28"), so it will clearly cover 8x10. The Wollensak 15" TeleRaptar will cover 8x10 (barely), although it's made for a 4x5.</p>

<p>I use my 210mm Fujinon 5.6 on my Zone VI and on my 8x10 Kodak 2D as well 9with an adapter board).</p>

<p>Seems to work ok on the 2D. Only use rear movement on the 2D. Works for me.</p>

<p>As James Scholz mentioned, the 210 super symmar is the lens to get.</p>

<p>And there is also the 210mm Apo Sironar W. It generously covers 810 and does not require a center filter to even out it's coverage and is blindingly sharp.</p>

<p>According to <a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~eahoo/page8/lenses.html#section10">http://home.earthlink.net/~eahoo/page8/lenses.html#section10</a>, it won't have enough circle to cover, see the top of that page as well.</p>

<p>To clear up any ambiguity, Clay can't be talking about Bob's Apo Sironar W. That lens is rated for a circle of 352mm, and you only need about 325mm for 8 x 10.</p>

<p>As for Kiel's Caltar, note that he's talking about an f/6.3 lens. That's very likely to be a tessar design. I don't know who made it, and Calumet rebadged lenses from different manufacturers over the years.</p>

<p>By and large, tessars cover a bit more than their focal length. So with a 210mm, you'll be OK at 5 x 7 straight on or with slight movements. That lens might light up the corners of an 8 x 10 negative, but you couldn't expect a usable image.</p>

<p>Sorry, it was late and I was only posting about the OP's lens, it might be close to the 8x10 size. According to the page I was referring to, 8x10 needs 310mm to cover. This page lists 4 lenses by Calumet, Caltar HR ƒ5.6 (295mm), Caltar II ƒ5.6 (301mm), Caltar SII ƒ5.6 (294mm) and the Caltar HR ƒ6.8 (230mm). The closest one to 310mm is the Caltar II at 301mm.</p>

 

<p>Yep, we knew what you meant, but because of the sequence of posts, it might have been ambiguous.</p>

<p>Of the four lenses you list, the f/5.6 lenses would be six-element plasmats. The f/6.8 is a triplet lens (a rebadged Rodenstock Geronar), so it has a much smaller image circle. </p>

<p>photo.net, bless its little heart, won't let me upload my list of links to visit when looking for information on LF lenses. The problem is that photo.net views at least one of the links in the list as a spammer or other sort of bad actor. Trying to figure out which is -- they're all legit, p.n's anti-spam team is blocking a false positive -- is more work than sharing with y'all is worth, especially since there are other ways to share lists of links.</p>

<p>I've posted it as a MS Word .docx file at http://sdrv.ms/19IKMET .</p>