john_kasaian1 Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 OK all you 8xtenners, what are your favorite lenses for architecture? I am rather partial to 240-250mm lenses like the G-Claron and WF Ektar, as well as the 159mm Wolly. What lenses and focal lengths do you find useful in your architectural adventures? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ernest_purdum Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 There are actually two series of G-Clarons. The earlier, non-airspaced, type is listed as providing an image circle of 320.7 for a 240mm lens at f22. This covers 8" X 10" but not by much. The later, airspaced types have only a 298mm image circle - not enough for 8" X 10". the easiest way to tell the difference is by the filter size. The earlier ones take a 46mm filter and the later ones a 52mm. I think it would be better for you to go to a longer size, 270 or 305. Both these still come in No.1 shutters, or at least the later ones do. Regarding the 159mm Wolly, here again there are two versions, the III and the IIIa. The much more frequently seen Series IIIa f12.5 is a simpler construction than the eight element Series III f9.5. The advantage Wollensak claimed for the more elaborat construction was not any greater coverage, just usability at larger aperture. They both operate at 90 degrees, which gives them enough coverage for 8" X 10", but only just. Both benefit greatly by coating, which is identified by a "w" within a "c" amongst the markings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_miller1 Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 I shoot a 8 1/4 inch Dagor. Just as has been mentioned for the G Clarons, movements are limited. However I can almost get full rise (not the lensboard) on my Deardorff. Coverage on Dagors reportedly should be checked before purchasing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_kadillak13 Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Coverage in this scenario is clearly at a premium because of the potential for utilizing movements. As a result, I reach for the Nikon 150mm SW f8 and the Fuji 250mm f6.7 for shooting architecture in 8x10 format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_galli4 Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 240mm and 270mm G-Claron. In spite of Schneider's diminutive specs I find my later air spaced 240 gives a 380mm circle on my 11X14. Yes there are trade-offs. Mtf does begin to fade out in those extremes but normally that's up in the blue sky in the corners and not noticed. Much preferred to a vignette. If $ were not an object I'd be first in line for a 210 XL, but alas, it is. Love my 210 Kyvytar. Had a 190 WF Kodak once but it vignetted too often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_atherton2 Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 "Regarding the 159mm Wolly, here again there are two versions, the III and the IIIa. The much more frequently seen Series IIIa f12.5 is a simpler construction than the eight element Series III f9.5. The advantage Wollensak claimed for the more elaborat construction was not any greater coverage, just usability at larger aperture. They both operate at 90 degrees, which gives them enough coverage for 8" X 10", but only just. Both benefit greatly by coating, which is identified by a "w" within a "c" amongst the markings." Where does the Wollensak 6 1/4" (159mm) f12.5 Anastigmat Extreme WA fall in that? (BTW - a very nice little lens). My other two favourites for this - 250 6.7 Fuji (not wide enough for a lot of stuff - but a great lens - much prefer it to the 250mm WF Ektar I tried for a while) and the 210 Kowa f9/6.8 (Kyyvytar) - lots of coverage for such a small lens and very "zingy"... I also tried a 190 WF Ektar - hated it. And I just missed a 190mm f9 Carl Zeiss Dagor that went for a comparative song on ebay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ernest_purdum Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Tim, the 159mm f12.5 lens is a Series IIIa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_atherton2 Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 "the 159mm f12.5 lens is a Series IIIa" Ernest, So it was just a change in name? They didn't change the lens in any other way? (BTW it opens up to somewhere between about f6.8 and f9, which is useful...) tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron_van_de_sande Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Not many of the lenses mentioned have enough coverage for real architectural work.. 210 super angulon comes to mind. There aren't many moderate wide angles with huge coverage in 8x10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_kasaian1 Posted August 29, 2003 Author Share Posted August 29, 2003 This kind of got me wondering what lenses Hedrich-Blessing(did I spell that right?) the famous Chicago architecture photography studio used on the 8x10 'dorffs that was thier standard camera back in the 30's and 40's? The B+W images I've seen are pretty imppressive. Anyone have any idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_atherton2 Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Aaron, Some say the Kowa 210mm has a 460mm image circle @f22 - personally I'd say less than that - maybe 380/400. But lets say that at f45 I've run out of rise before I've run out of coverage. And it also depends on what kind of architecture you are photogrpahing. The Fuji 250mm also has around 400 @f22 - again, I've found more at f32/45. Not quite the 500mm you are talking about though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_sampson Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 I have a 165mm f/8 Schneider Super-Angulon here at work. It's a "chrome" one from the '60s. We rarely use it, there's no call for 8x10 architectural photographs these days. But it's very sharp, has good color rendition, and has plenty of coverage. Given that the majority of my 4x5 architecture work calls for a 90mm lens, the 165 SA would be the first choice if I was going to shoot 8x10. I wish I had an excuse to use it more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ole_tjugen Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 If I were to try it, I would try a 14cm/f:18 Zeiss Protar. But I don't have a 8x10" camera - just the lens... I believe it will cover with moderate movements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now