rgans Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 <p>I have a 240mm lens but I'm wondering if it's worth it to get a 210mm Schneider for still lifes. Is there much of a difference?</p> <p>RON</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 <p>Depends on what other lenses you have and where that fits in.<br> Kent in SD</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_batters Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 <p>Depends on the quality of your 240mm, vs the quality of the 210mm you are pondering. Not much difference in focal length, however, is there something about your 240mm that you find limiting?<br /> You may be thinking that a 210mm of better quality may be an advantage, ie...faster/larger aperture, larger image circle allowing for greater movements, better multi-coatings, sharper detail edge-to-edge, or better color performance, etc...<br /> If you only have a few lenses, or just the 240mm now, I would suggest acquiring a lens with a focal length a bit farther removed from the 240mm then the 210mm would be. Say a lens in the 150mm-180mm range, or out to 300mm-320mm, or even 360mm territory.<br> It would help to know the specifics of your 240mm, the other lenses in your kit, and film size your shooting.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgans Posted May 7, 2011 Author Share Posted May 7, 2011 <p>I only have two LF lenses: A 14" (355) Kodak Commercial Ektar and a CaltarII-N 240mm. I shoot 8x10, b&w.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_l3 Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 <p>Most normal 210mm lenses barely cover 8x10, or not at all at infinity. I've used my 210 Nikkor on 8x10 with barely usable results with no movements. For still lifes at closer distances a 210 may have enough coverage. Try to borrow a 210mm lens and make direct comparisons with your 240mm. You could also look for extra wide angle lenses in the 150mm to 210mm range but their cost is higher. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgans Posted May 7, 2011 Author Share Posted May 7, 2011 <p>Thanks. That sounds like a doable plan.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 <p>I don't see enough difference between 210mm & 240mm in large format. Think of it this way. In a Nikon 35mm camera, you are talking about a 70mm lens vs. an 80mm lens. At least, that would be the 4x5 equiv. Would the 8x10 be 35mm vs. 40mm? Whatever it is, I just doubt it would be worth it to have two lenses that close together, or to get rid of what you have unless you get something else (such as more coverage.)<br> Kent in SD</p> 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