What's the best 210mm lens for under $400?

[dion_m]

First, a million thanks for all the helpful info on these forums. I'm just getting into 4x5, and over the

past few weeks I must have spent 50 hours reading them for advice.

 

I recently bought a Shen Hao, a Schneider 72XL, and a Nikon W 150. I'm looking for a very good used

210mm lens for 4x5 (I may move up to 5x7 or even 8x10, but not anytime soon). For around $300 to

$400 US, on online auctions, I can get in very nice condition, any of these:

 

Fujinon W 210 mm in Copal C (EBC, I think)

 

Nikkor W 210

 

Schneider Symmar-S multicoated (are the Compur shutters better?... they go to 1/500)

 

Rodenstock APO-Sironar N (are the older ones multicoated?)

 

I haven't found a reference or discussion that compares all of these, so my question is, which one

would you choose, and do any of these perform significantly better? I'd really like a Sironar S or Apo-

Symmar, but I can't afford one anytime soon.

 

What's most important to me is the best general-purpose lens for the buck: sharp, high-contrast, low

flare, and very low color-fringing on the edges of the field. I plan to shoot mostly landscapes and

general stuff with this, but it would be nice if the lens performs well for tabletop.

 

Thanks, any suggestions would be much appreciated.

 

Dion

[christopher perez]

With the possible exception of slight differences in how they behave at the limits of their published fields of coverage, all the lenses you mention are generally equal. Noticable differences will be limited to the way each lens renders color. Even here, the differences will be slight.

 

If someone in the real world could illustrate differences between APO Sironar-S and Fuji 210 W (or any other lens listed above) I think I would need to buy them a beer. I have never been able to detect any meaningful difference between them.

 

YMMV.

[leicaglow]

I like the sharpness the Schneider's deliver, but for things like color landscapes or portraits, the Nikkor delivers a lot of saturation. I don't have any experience with the Rodenstock in this focal length, but would imagine it would be very similar to the Schneider, where the Fuji will be closer to the characteristics of the Nikkor.

 

Compur's are great shutters, but I would not say they are better than the Copals, with the exception of the Electro-Compur (electronic) shutters, which have become very difficult to find. They are, however, extremely accurate.

 

The APO's are definitely worth the money when you want sharpness, and should be no more than about $100 extra, depending on the demand at any given time. I don't think you could go wrong with any of these lenses. Keep in mind, the 210mm's are very large lenses.

[donald_brewster]

Chris has probably looked at more of these lenses than anybody and I certainly can't disagree with his advice. I think any of these will be quite good. I own the Nikkor W 210 and it has served me well for the applications you describe. I own the Rodenstock APO-Sironar N in 135mm and find it to be superb. Other than additional coverage, I don't think the extra $$$ going from N to S gets you much. My suggestion is to find the best example for the best price and go with it. Beyond that you're in "how many angels are dancing on a pinhead" territory.

[capocheny]

Dion,

 

I use an Apo-Sironar and would suggest it. But, as the other posters have said... all the

lenses you've listed are going to be pretty decent. And, no... the Compur shutters aren't

necessarily better than Copals shutters.

 

Those Fujinons are really decent lenses too... so, definitely, don't pass them up! I wouldn't

hesitate picking one of these up.

 

FWIW, I use a 240 Nikkor for 85% of my table-top shots. This is just a personal preference

and will also depend on how much bellows extension your camera has. You'll need

420mm for the 210 and 480 for the 240 assuming a 1:1 magnification. Some people use a

150 for this purpose too! Just food for thought! :)

 

Cheers

[ken_schroeder]

Dion, I wouldn't pay too much attention to the fastest speed of a shutter for a 4x5. I can't remember using anything faster than 1/60 in the field, and that's in full sun with Tri X. There aren't too many modern lenses which are bad in this length. Personally, I prefer Copal shutters. I have never had one fail. I have a Schneider 210 Symmar S, which I like very much. In recent years, the Nikon 200M is my lens of choice because it is very compact. The coverage is somewhat limited, but that has not proved a problem for me.

[nbg90455]

If you can't afford a 210mm Sironar-S, then just get an f7.7 / 203mm Ektar. They're cheap, of superior quality and have lots of coverage for movement. With the money you save in your $400 budget, get a CLA and the shutter will be like new. I used one for years (until I had the money for my Sironar-S), and still use it when I go backpacking...

Cheers,

Mike

[steve_hamley]

For 4x5, pay just a little more and get a new Nikkor 200M. Light, sharp, and plenty of movements.

 

Steve

[michael_briggs2]

All of the Apo-Sironar-N lenses are multicoated. The same lens was previously named Sironar-N -- when Rodenstock reorganized their line they renamed the lens without changing the optical design. The earliest Sironar-N lenses are single-coated -- later ones are multicoated and labeled "MC".

 

The Apo-Sironar-N is also sold by Calumet under their private label as the Caltar II-N. These sell/sold new and used for a bit less, so this is another way to meet your goal of getting a very good lens for the least cost.

 

If you want the lowest possible color fringing, you will have to pay more. Rodenstock's datasheets clearly show that the Apo-Sironar-S has improved chromatic aberration compared to the Apo-Sironar-N line. This is from the use of ED glass. Will it make a practical difference for most LF photographers? Probably not.

 

I don't think I've ever used a shutter speed faster than 1/60 with a LF lens. Faster speeds might be useful for balancing natural light with flash.

 

So many people recommend the 203 mm Ektar that I'm not sure they are such bargins any more. I'm seen several with the coating in bad condition.

[brian_ellis16]

If you go to www.largeformatphotography.info and then into the question and answer forum, scroll down about 20 messages to one titled "4x5 Equipment" you'll find a 210 Nikon W for sale for $350.

[sheldonnalos]

I think you'd do very well with any of the four that you've listed. One thought I'd add is keep your eyes open for a single coated Fuji 210mm f/5.6 as well as the more current EBC model. It'd be the only lens on your list that would be able to cover 8x10 should you decide to upgrade down the road. It has a 352mm image circle, compared to the 285-300mm image circles of the rest. However, if you're sticking to 4x5, then it's pretty much a moot point.

 

If the question is bang for the buck, I'd say the Fuji's or the Caltar II-N (Same as Rodenstock APO Sironar N) tend to run the cheapest, but it depends on the day. There's quite a few of all the brands that have sold in the last month in the $250 range.

[AaronFalkenberg]

Right at the start, Chris mentioned an interesting point: "Noticeable differences will be limited to the way each lens renders color." I very much agree with this. I recently shot a test of a wall map with the Symmar-S 210 and closer with a 90mm Nikon SW. I was surprised at the colour difference between the two, so much so, I re-shot it and got the same results. The Schneider renders slightly warm, and Nikon noticeably cooler. I can't say this for all of them across the board, but now I use an 81A on my 90mm almost all the time. I picked up my 210 at auction for $200 and have no complaints, not even where CA or edge sharpness is concerned.

[stewart_s]

I'd be very happy to have any of these, but the Fujinon was the first 210 I came across at a good price and I have not regretted buying it.

[dion_m]

Hey, thanks for all the info so far. That's excellent... this forum is so active, what a great

resource. Not to mention a great place for camera nerds to talk about the stuff everyone

else gets so tired of hearing about.

 

I'm really pleased at my decision to get into 4x5 this year, even though it broke the bank.

 

So far I put in an offer on a 210mm Symmar-S MC in a Compur shutter, because my

girlfriend is going south to Seattle on the weekend and she can pick it up.

 

However... I did try to find a 203 f7.7 on eBay. They are a bit scarce, it seems. Seems like

a lens a lucky guy might find at a garage sale. The last two on eBay went for about $130

US, and they were a bit beat up to be expected for an old lens. I'll keep my eye out for one

of those, they seem like a very cool old sharpie to have hidden up one's sleeve.

 

I'll check back later... in case anyone has any more tips that might tip the scale, that will

help finalize my decision.

 

Cheers

Dion

[dan_fromm2]

Dion, its all up to luck in shopping.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the best 210 for < $400 is the 210/7.7 Boyer Beryl S that I snagged for UKP 5 plus postage. 6/2 Dagor type, coated, optimized for 1:1 but shoots well at distance, inexpensive, what more can I ask? Mine isn't not for sale and I have no idea where another one can be found, but that's your problem.

 

More seriously, go read Chris Perez' and Kerry Thalmann's lens tests. Their message is very simple. Most decent lenses produce good enough negatives. IF (BIG IF) the lens is in good order. Coating doesn't matter much, any coating is a little better than none, and multi-coating is marginally better than single-. So, if you can buy with the right of return, buy on price. If you can't buy with the right of return, buy on price.

 

A propos of agonizing over what's best, once upon a time I sent a $30 extravagance of a 210/9 Konica Hexanon GRII to the late Steve Grimes to have an adapter for front mounting made for it. That lens had a tiny bit of internal schmutz. While Steve had it, I asked him for an estimate of the cost of taking the lens apart and deschmutzing it. His reply? "Don't be so damned neurotic." IMO, the people who agonize over which lens is best need a good dose of that advice. FYI, the GRII shoots marginally better than the Beryl S but is larger and heavier. The Beryl S gets more use.

 

Good luck, have fun, don't look back,

 

Dan

[doc_w]

As some have said, once you get into a certain category, the differences are minimal. Consider the 210 Rodenstock Sironar-N MC. It will be cheaper than the Apo-Sironar but it is, in fact, the same lens (it is apochromatic). It might be a little cheaper.

[wogears]

http://cgi.ebay.com/Kodak-Commercial-Ektar-Lens-f-6-3-8-1-2-in_W0QQitemZ7631581528QQihZ017QQcategoryZ30076QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

For the price this will probably bring, you can buy a 14" CE as well in your total budget!

 

These were the workhorse lenses of the industry for a looooong time!

[dan_baumbach]

I have a 210 Fujinon that I'm looking to sell. It's missing a rear lens cap but the glass is clean and the shutter works fine. I'll email you a jpeg of it if you're interested. I bought it from KEH a few years ago. I wanted something lighter so I replaced it with a 200mm Nikkor. I'll let it go for $300 plus shipping.

 

Email me at danb115.comcast.net if you're interested.

 

- Dan.

[michael_briggs2]

The eBay auction that Les linked to is for a 8 1/2 inch Kodak Commercial Ektar. It is already at $150 with almost 3 days to go. Dion will have to be extremely lucky to fit a 8 1/2 and a 14 inch Commercial Ektar into the budget of less than $400 -- the typical price of just a 14 inch CE will use up that budget. I certainly don't recommend using a Ilex #5 shutter (14" CE) on a 4x5 Shen Hao camera. The #3 Ilex Acme of the 8 1/2 inch CE might not fit well on the camera, I'm not sure. You would need about a 65 mm diameter hole in the lensboard and space to use a shutter of diameter about 100+ mm. Some people like the "look" the Ektars give, but the Ilex shutters of the larger ones are their weak points.

[dion_m]

There are so many valuable comments from all of you, I'm taking them all into

consideration. I'm keeping my eye on two 8.5" Ektars, and on another beat-up 203mm,

but in the meantime I'm pretty much all set to buy a Schneider Symmar-S MC (in a Compur

shutter) in nice condition for $300, free shipping.

 

Those Ektars look like nice lightweight lenses, but do they fit in a standard lensboard (on a

Shen Hao)? Is there something special about the CE Ektars compared to the other ones?

 

I am sometimes overwhelmed by how much information there is to process about all this

LF stuff, and how many possibilities for old and new lenses there are...

 

Dan B-- thanks for the offer of the 210 Fujinon. I've pretty much finalized on the 210

Schneider though, because it seems like a good deal, and I'll have it in three days.

 

Don W-- you mention that the 210 Rodenstock Sironar-N MC is apochromatic; does this

mean it is superior to the Schneider Symmar-S?

 

If I had a choice, I'd get something like Dan Fromm's 210/7.7 Boyer Beryl S for UKP 5 plus

postage... where are these deals hiding?

 

Dion

[michael_briggs2]

<p><i>"I'm keeping my eye on two 8.5" Ektars, and on another beat-up 203mm, .... Those Ektars look like nice lightweight lenses,"</i>. The 203 mm f7.7 Ektar is a a very light lens, typically in a Supermatic shutter. The glass elements of the 8 1/2 Ektar are very light, but the heavier #3 Acme shutter pulls up the weight, so that is ends up merely light. I just measured a 8.5 inch CE in Acme -- 330 g. Of this, 230 g is the No. 3 Acme shutter. This compares to Rodenstock's figure of 440 g for a 210 mm Apo-Sironar-N -- only 165 g of this weight is the shutter -- the lens cells of the f5.6 plasmat lens weigh a lot more. When buying a used lens in an Ilex shutter mail order, figure in your pricing calculation that it likely that a CLA will be needed. My opinion is that Copal and Compur shutters are better than Ilex shutters.</p>

 

 

<p><i>"... but do they fit in a standard lensboard (on a Shen Hao)?"</i> The hole diameter to mount the shutter won't be standard. Typically the only lensboards with pre-made holes are for Copal/Compur sizes 0, 1 and 3. For a No. 3 Acme, you will need to bore a hole in your lensboard of diameter 2.25 inches. (It might be best to wait until you have your lens). The overall diameter of the shutter is 85 mm, not including the controls. The values that I gave in my previous answer are a mistake, from measuring a No. 4 Acme shutter.</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

The 203 mm f7.7 Ektar is a very sharp nice lens. It really is the 8 inch F7.7 old Kodak pre ww2 #70 Kodak Anastigmat, with coated elements, maybe tweaked, maybe not!. This lens was made for the Eastman 2D view camera, and other 5x7" cameras. It is about a semimetrical design, and is well corrected for closeups too. Some folks even used these as enlarging lenses too, long ago. Here I have the 203mm F7.7 Ektar in Supermatic, and it is a gem of a lens, just abit slow for a press camera. It really is overkill for my 35megpixel scan back. <BR><BR>Hopefully Michael will get one on Ebay someday!. Sometimes they are just one of the extra old frumpy lenses that come with a chaps speed graphic kit on ebay, found be searching for "Ektar". <BR><BR>In press, I have a 210mm F3.5 Xenar in barrel that I got long ago for astrophotography. Most today are F4.5 or slower. <BR><BR>With my 4x5 press cameras, I consider my 127mm Ektars as being a "normal" lens for me, and 150 and 210 to be long lenses.