210mm or 240mm for 8X10

Hi,

 

I have 150mm, 300mm and 450mm lenses for my 8x10 camera. I think that

the 150mm is a bit to wide sometimes and I would like something

between 150mm and 300mm. Which focal length shall I get. The 210mm I

known of are huge, whereas the 240mm seem to be a little bit smaller(

their are still heavy and big for landscape). I am considering the

Fuji A 240mm. Good focal length to be between 150 and 300?

 

Thanks

 

Vincent Lau

Vincent I have a nikkor 210 and it barely covers the 8x10, and I mean barely...if you sneeze and move the standard you screwed up the shot. OTOH it is light and very sharp..

When I moved up to 8x10 I bought a Schneider 240/5.6 Symmar-S. Its a

great lens but has fairly limited room for movements.

Recently though, I found a Fuji-W 240mm/6.7 which has a huge image

circle of 398mm @ f22, is 1lb lighter than the schneider, and a

beautiful lens to work with. But they are hard to find.

 

The later Fuji 240/6.3 has a smaller image circle, as does the Fuji-A.

I think Tim Atherton may have also posted info on the Schneider

G-Claron 210 which sounded like a good option for a less

expensive/weighty 210mm. See the earlier thread for his comments

anyway.

 

Good wish

I use the210 G Claron for 8x10. It's very small and at F 32 or smaller has ample coverage with movements for my needs.

Vincent, I have a Fuji f9 240A. The image circle is listed as 336mm. Should be adequate for 8X10, with moderate movements. This is a very small lens. Mounted in a Copal 0 shutter, it takes a 52mm filter. Check with Jim, at Midwest Photo (mpex.com). He may have a good used one at a reasonable price.

"I have 150mm, 300mm and 450mm lenses ..."

 

That's an awfully nice arsenal for 8x10. There is a big difference between 150mm and 210mm, but not so much difference between 240mm and 300mm. So I would opt for the 210. Check out the Schneider Super-Symmar HM 210mm. Has plenty of room to cover 8x10 with ample movements. I have one and used it to take some 8x10 Velvia shots of a tree with fall colored leaves. http://www.schneideroptics.com for details.

"Super-symmar HM"

 

It weighs 1.kg, 20% cheaper then a mint 2nd hand SS 210mm XL in my location, 500gm lighter then the SS 210mm XL, 150mm smaller in the image circle. Should I get the SS 210mm XL with 20% extra cost and 500gm heavier in exchange for 150mm more image circle?

 

The 240mm/5.6s are around 700gm-1kg with 350-370mm circle, the Fuji 240 A f/9 weight around 250gm with 336mm circle. It seem that if weight is a main concern, get the 240mm esp. the Fujinon, and if covergae is the main concern, then the 210mm xl.

 

Vincent Lau

"Super-symmar HM"

 

One typing error, It weighs 1.5kg.

 

Vincent Lau

I use an older Schneider 210mm Angulon with my 8X10. The lens is small, light weight, razor sharp and has plenty of coverage for 8X10, in fact, I believe it'll cover 11X14" as well. They're hard to find and not cheap, but it's one of the finest lenses I've ever owned.

 

No, mine is NOT for sale ;-)

first, I'd beg to differ - there is quite a difference in look between 240mm and 300mm.

 

But of your choice between 210 and 240 - it depends a little on your budget.

 

See a recent post on here for the (limited) testing I did of the G-Claron 210 f9 (A tiny, tiny lens with a 49mm filter size! now I can use all those old filters I had for my OM1...). It is a nice, sharp, budget lens in a modern shutter for 8x10 with limited movements - 1' - 1 3/4" at f32/f45 - which is fine for the type of work I am doing - urban, suburban and other landscapes), but for others might not be enough movement. Another option (if you can find one) is the earliest, single coated, Fuji 210 5.6, which just covers 8x10 as well (later versions don't). In my hunting around for other 210 lenses that will cover, the lenses become significantly more expensive - Sironar W 210; Symmar XL 210mm, Grandagon 200mm; Super Angulon and Angulon 210mm (the latter somewhat cheaper, but hard to find - yes, I'm looking too!).

 

All that said, my main lens is the already mentioned Fuji 240mm f6.7 - it is a great lens, good coverage, usually decent price, tack sharp, not too big. It is equivelent to avout a 30 or 33mm lens on 35mm cameras (depending on how you chose to measure things). They are harder to find, but I have seen two on Ebay in the last couple of weeks (of course, they never show up when you are looking...). Midwest Photo often has them in and Jim seeks them out in Japan - he got 3 or 4 on his last trip. I got mine from a friendly list member...

BUT make sure it's the earlier 240 f6.7 not the new 240 f6.3 - the new one won't cover 8x10

 

I got the 210 G-Claron to be able to go just a little wider when I needed it.

 

tim

240 G-Claron. Still my favorite lens for 8X10. Immage circle at f22 1/2 is about 370mm. And it's extremely sharp. It's in a Copal 1 shutter, very light for 8X10, and generally affordable.

Vincent,

 

I agree with some comments above. It�s also important to rent both focal lengths and try them out yourself, and see which one you prefer.

 

There is not much difference between a 240mm lens and a 300mm lens for 8x10. So let�s look at 210mm. If you do color, then you might want to consider Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-W 210/5.6. It�s mounted in Copal #3 shutter and is not light (just less than 1 kg, and difficult to see shutter speed scale). It gives you about the same coverage as Schneider Super Symmar HM. Or also get a Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S 240/5.6. If you do B&W, then you have a few more choices. Schneider Angulon 210/6.8 is a good candidate. Schneider W. A. G-Claron 210/6.3 also covers 8x10. However, I think Zeiss Dagor 210/9 is a better lens, if you can find one. All of these lenses are mounted in #3 shutters. The Zeiss Dagor is the lightest, and the Angulon is the heaviest. If you want a lighter lens, consider a Goerz Dagor 81/4�/6.8 (most in barrel, some in Ilex #3 and some in Synchro-Compur #1). It can be easily mounted into a #1 sized shutter by the great SKGrimes, and covers 8x10 quite well at f45 (90 degree coverage at F45). Now go shopping. Cheers,

Tim A. are you sure you are talking about the Fuji 240A? The only 240 that Fuji now makes is the "A" series, and it has a maximum aperature of f9. It is mounted in a Copal 0 shutter. The Fuji 250 is a "W" series, now upgraded to the "CM-W" series , mounted in a Copal 1 shutter. A larger, and heavier lens. Is that the one you are refering to? So Vincent, if you want smaller and lighter go for the Fuji. It's a fine lens. I can tell the difference between the 240 and the 300 images in 4X5. It may not be so obvious in the 8X10 format, however.

whoops - I was just trying out a friends Claron 240... got 240's on the brain

 

Soooo everywhere I said Fuji 240 read Fuji 250 - just about everything else I said about it stands (including the difference between 300mm and 250mm - quite siginificant. Most of what I have been shooting for a recent project would have looked totally different - and much not really possible in the same way - with a 300mm).

 

Yes, the Fuji 250 6.7 is an excellent 8x10 lens.

Vincent,

 

I think the 210 SA or SS XL are severe overkill for 8x10 unless you are shooting substantial amounts of architectural subject matter.

 

Some of the lenses mentioned here are excellent options. If you are a field shooter, I would highly favor the portabilty of the 210 or 240 G Claron and the 240 Fuji A. I have a 210 G Claron that I use on the 8x10 at times.

 

Another lens that I prefer to the G Claron is the 210 f 9.0 Kowa (or Computar). This lens is similar to the G Claron in size, but it has an IC that is substantially larger, and I think it may be sharper than the G Claron, although I am not a lens testing type of person, so I am basing that on my impression.

 

It offers more movement than the G Claron, and is about the same size and weight. I think it'll hit the conrers of an 11x14 when stopped down.

 

Computar made a 210 'Symmetrogon' which is NOT the lens I am talking about.

 

The Kowa/Computar is often inexpensive on the used market, and isa good option for 8x10 field work to add to those already mentioned.

 

---Michael

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?14@19.fuUnauBpVRM^693272@.f30ddc2/1861

 

I would agree with Tim that there is a difference between a 240 and a 300 -- in 35 mm terms, you are talking 40 and 50mm, and it sure isn't the same thing. I used a 210 Kern Swiss Dagor for a bit -- it barely covers, and now I have picked up a wonderful, tiny lens, the 180 Carl Zeiss Jena Wide Angle F9 Dagor, which covers beautifully, has amazing resolution and renders color well. Picked it up on Ebay for a pretty penny. I don't think there are many around. The 210 Angulon is great, too, though expensive and hard to find. They are under-rated lenses.

Also worth mentioning is the 10" Wide-Field Ektar. It's large in its Ilex #5 shutter (wasn't too big and heavy for Ansel), but covers 11x14" and then some, and usually runs about $500 in good condition. I see a significant difference between the 10" (250mm) and 300mm, and 210mm is something else still. In 35mm terms, I think I use the 10" where I might use a 35mm lens, and the 300mm where I might use a 50mm and the 210mm feels more like a 28mm.

Thank you all for your answer, I think I will go for the 240 as I perfer 35mm in 135 cameras than the 28mm.

I'd like to think of the 210mm 5.6 XL Super Symmar "Aspheric" as nice lens in low light situations... Not to mention the best lens on earth..

 

Steve