PDA

View Full Version : Lenses for Ultra Large Format



Pages : [1] 2

Murph
05-30-2010, 09:54 AM
I apologize up front if this has been beaten to death, I tried the search function, and could not find a thread for it.

My question is; What lenses are available that are Wide Angle, and normal for the following formats please?

12x20
16x20
20x24

I have been told that a 480mm lens is a "normal" lens for 16x20, is this true?

garysamson
05-30-2010, 10:57 AM
The Schneider G Claron 355mm lens is a popular choice for the 12x20 format along with the Nikon 450 M. these lenses are often available used at reasonable prices. I would consider 600mm the normal lens for the 16x20 format.

Michael Kadillak
05-30-2010, 11:30 AM
I only shoot up to 12x20 and a couple of lenses that I find work very well in addition to the 355 G Claron are the Fuji 600MM and the 24",30" and 35" Red Dot. The longer focal length Dagors are very rare and exceedingly expensive.

If I was shooting 16x20 and 20x24 the Schneider 550 XXL would be a fabulous choice because I hear that they cover like a big dog right to the edge and are very contrasty. The 122mm filter size of this lens would likely induce migration to an external compendium possibly affixed to the camera and large square filters. Everything operating within this unique domain is costly, but what else is new?

coriana6jp
05-31-2010, 09:10 PM
For ULF the only two true lenses currently being produced are the big buck Schneider XXLs one is 550mm and the other is 1100 if my memory is working correctly.

I only use 12x20, like Michael. I use a Fuji 600C, a Fuji 450mm CMW (not the little 450mm C), and a Schneider 355mm G-Claron. I am lusting for a 210mm Schneider Super Symmar XL which covers 12x20 and some say up to 16x20, also am after a 30 inch or 35 inch RD Artar.

Hope it helps.

Gary

jnanian
05-31-2010, 10:29 PM
if you want an older lens ...
the wollensak triple ( 13/20/25 ) covers 11x14 with ease
( i use it on a 11x14 camera )
it might cover a few of those formats you mention
in the 20" + 25" configurations.
the lens come in a betax shutter and usually don't cost much money.

sanking
06-01-2010, 11:20 AM
if you want an older lens ...
the wollensak triple ( 13/20/25 ) covers 11x14 with ease
( i use it on a 11x14 camera )
it might cover a few of those formats you mention
in the 20" + 25" configurations.
the lens come in a betax shutter and usually don't cost much money.

I owned at one time a Wollensak Raptar 13/20/25 convertible and the combined elements did not cover 11X14". Almost, but there was some vignetting on the corners. I don't remember about the single elements but generally the coverage of the single elements is not more than that of the combined elements. You have a longer focal length but the actual angle of coverage is much less.

My understanding was that the Raptar is the coated version of the older Wollensak triple convertible.

Sandy King

jnanian
06-01-2010, 12:31 PM
I owned at one time a Wollensak Raptar 13/20/25 convertible and the combined elements did not cover 11X14". Almost, but there was some vignetting on the corners. I don't remember about the single elements but generally the coverage of the single elements is not more than that of the combined elements. You have a longer focal length but the actual angle of coverage is much less.

My understanding was that the Raptar is the coated version of the older Wollensak triple convertible.

Sandy King


hi sandy

mine is a velostigmat 1a ..
and it is on a 11x14 portrait camera that i use pretty often.
i have never had vignetting or coverage issues.
maybe they changed something between the change of names ?

in any case it is a great and inexpensive lens :)

john

TheFlyingCamera
06-01-2010, 02:03 PM
I have a Turner-Reich triple, 12/19/25 that I can put on my 14x17 and see the coverage. I'll assume for now that the 12" combo will only cover 11x14, but the single cells may hit 14x17. That was snagged when things were still cheap on shopgoodwill - got it in an Ilex #4 for around $100, if memory serves correctly. Another TC I've got at home I have to make an adapter lensboard for is a turn-of-the-19th century/early 20th century Wollensak Rapid Rectigraphic 19/29/39 in a pneumatic shutter. I've never seen another one so I have to assume they're rare, but maybe not valuable. It's marked as an 11x14 lens, but it probably covers my 14x17, and maybe even something bigger. In the longer range, there's a 600 Apo-Germinar I'm saving my pennies to have put in a Copal 3.

sanking
06-01-2010, 02:58 PM
hi sandy

mine is a velostigmat 1a ..
and it is on a 11x14 portrait camera that i use pretty often.
i have never had vignetting or coverage issues.
maybe they changed something between the change of names ?

in any case it is a great and inexpensive lens :)

john

The one I had was a Raptar 1a. I don't believe they changed anything but the coating. But mine was not in a Betax but a #4 Compound as best I recall.

But have you used the camera for landscapes at infinity focus? I am pretty sure that the lens I had would have covered fine for portraits, but it just missed for landscape work.

Sandy

jnanian
06-01-2010, 05:48 PM
The one I had was a Raptar 1a. I don't believe they changed anything but the coating. But mine was not in a Betax but a #4 Compound as best I recall.

But have you used the camera for landscapes at infinity focus? I am pretty sure that the lens I had would have covered fine for portraits, but it just missed for landscape work.

Sandy


nope, never took the camera outside of the shooting space.
its one of those huge century cameras on a semi centennial stand ...
i have thought of it though ... but a little voice inside my head
told me it probably wasn't the best thing to do ;)

john

illumiquest
06-03-2010, 05:07 PM
I've got a Goerz 14" f/11 Trigor which will cover up to 20". It's a barrel lens but could be mounted in a shutter or used in a Packard type. It's for sale, pm me if interested

Murph
07-01-2010, 02:50 PM
Thanks all for the excellent replies.

eclarke
07-09-2010, 02:01 PM
I have 3 lenses for my 11x14, the 450 Fuji c which is too soft, a Nikkor 450M which does everything wonderfully and a 360 Nikkor W. The 360 supposedly has the largest image circle of the 3 lenses but I always get a top vignette with the damn thing (stopped all the way down) if I use some rise. Do you think the 355 G claron will cover more??..Evan Clarke

TheFlyingCamera
07-09-2010, 02:12 PM
I have a 355 G-Claron and it covers 14x17 with some movement stopped down to f32.

coriana6jp
07-09-2010, 06:22 PM
I use a 355mm G-Claron on 12x20 and it does cover with some movements at f/32 and beyond. Also I have grown really fond of my Fuji 450mm f/8 CMW, this is not the little C lens. It is a huge heavy plasmat, but it more than covers 12x20 with plenty of movements. Both of them are sharp across the field, so they would work very well for 11x14. Also the Fuji 600C covers up to 12x20, another great lens.

Gary

2F/2F
07-09-2010, 06:35 PM
If the G Claron will cover 12x20, then so should the Schneider Symmar 360mm f/6.8 or f/5.6, which I believe give more coverage than the G Claron. They are extremely reasonably priced in a barrel (SINAR DB or DBM mount), and give top-notch performance from what I can see, even on 4x5 (which is what I usually use it for). I got mine (f/6.8 model in DB mount) for under $300 shipped with caps in outstanding condition. LF prices are INSANE!!! This is a lens that I would used to have needed to save up for for YEARS to afford, and I got it for what amounts to allowance money in the grand scheme of things.

coriana6jp
07-10-2010, 08:29 AM
The 360mm Symmar won't cover 12x20, I tried it, at least mounted in copal 3 shutter. The Clarons have amazing amounts of coverage the farther you stop down, much more so than the Symmars.

Gary

sanking
07-10-2010, 03:48 PM
The 360mm Symmar won't cover 12x20, I tried it, at least mounted in copal 3 shutter. The Clarons have amazing amounts of coverage the farther you stop down, much more so than the Symmars.

Gary

Gary,

The 360mm f/5.6 Symmar convertible covers 12X20 as well or perhaps a tad better than the G-Claron. I have not checked in a while but I believe you get full coverage with the Symmar convertible beginning at about f/32, which is about the same as with the G-Claron.

I would personally much work with the Symmar than the G-Claron if weight and space is not a consideration because composing and focusing at f/5.6 has it all over focusing and composing at f/9.

And I frankly believe the Symmar is a better lens for landscapes than the G-Claron. And they can be real bargains. Going price in a big Compound shutter is generally $500 or less.

Sandy

Jim Fitzgerald
07-10-2010, 08:06 PM
I've been using my !4" Rodenstock Gerogon Process lens for the 8x20. Nice and sharp to the corners. Also have the 21 1/4" Ilex Process Paragon that is real sweet on 8x20. No problem with coverage and it did not cost a fortune.

Jim

eclarke
07-11-2010, 09:35 AM
I use a 355mm G-Claron on 12x20 and it does cover with some movements at f/32 and beyond. Also I have grown really fond of my Fuji 450mm f/8 CMW, this is not the little C lens. It is a huge heavy plasmat, but it more than covers 12x20 with plenty of movements. Both of them are sharp across the field, so they would work very well for 11x14. Also the Fuji 600C covers up to 12x20, another great lens.

Gary

I have the hots for the 450 CM-w but haven't seen one for sale this year (could have missed one), I have the two 450s I mentioned before and the Nikkor is great. I want something wider for my 11x14 and thought the 360 Nikkor would be the ticket. Where I have used it so far, I need rise for architectural subjects and have about 15 sheets with top corner vignettes. I'm surprised by the vignetting with the 360 because all the other Nikkor lenses I have are extremely generous in coverage..EC