Lens for 5X7"/13X18cm
I tried seaching this forum for threads on above subject but had to give up.
So which lens would be a good cheap buy for a 13X18cm camera for landscapes stillifes and perhaps a portrait now and then. 210/240mm? shorter, longer?
Since Im gonna use it for B&W and Contactprinting only I think Ill manage with an older design but which make/type will be a could choice
Hopefully upcoming LFer
Last edited by Soeren; 09-28-2006 at 07:03 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: adding to Question
Originally Posted by Soeren
Any 210 mm lens would fall close to your definition. It is considered a "normal" lens for 5x7 and is also a popular focal length for 4x5 where it is a good choice for portraits. If portraits are your main focus a 300 mm lens on 5x7 may be a reasonable choice. However I would probably start with the 210. Would recommend any 210 lens from any of the "big four" manufacturers (Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, Fujinon). Another possibilty woud be the old Kodak 203 mm Ektar. A 210 of recent vintage however often goes for a song due to the large number of available lenses, you don't necessarily have to search for a vintage lens (though those are fine also).
Last edited by haziz; 09-28-2006 at 07:40 AM. Click to view previous post history.
look out for a Symmar 210 convertible in a decent shutter. They don't go over 200 Euro most of the time (on the German version of the auction site).
Last edited by argus; 09-28-2006 at 07:35 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: added: (see PM)
Another nice lens that will cover 5x7 and does not break the bank is one of the Wollensak 190mm in Alphax shutter. Plain, nothing fancy but solid lens..use one, along with a 210mm Rodenstock Geronar (the low end one) both cover well and did not break the bank ($75 USD for the wolly and something like $225 USD for the Rodenstock)
My favorite lenses at the moment are (in order of increasin focal length):
90 and 121mm f:8 Super-Angulon - one wide, one horribly wide. Relatively cheap due to age.
165mm f:6.8 Angulon - less common, but a great little lens with tons of coverage. Wide enough to be visibly wide, but nothing extreme.
240mm and 300mm f:5.6 Symmar (old, convertible to 420 and 500mm respectively) - cheap, sharp and versatile. The 240mm I have is in a Compur #2 shutter, which is less common. That's no problem for me, since the 165mm Angulon is in the same size shutter. The 300mm is in a #3 Compound, and no it's getting big enough to be difficult on some cameras.
355mm f:9 G-Claron - there is a 360mm f:5.6 Symmar too, but that's just too big to haul around. The 355/9 G-Claron fits nicely in a "standard" Compound #3 shutter - newer ones than mine take a #3 Copal.
My first 5x7" lens was a 300mm f:4.5 Xenar. I can not recommend that to start with, as it's both big and heavy. Besides, it's easy to run out of bellows when doing close-ups.
I would suggest just about any 210 to 240mm lens: Small enough and common enough to be both portable and affordable, yet with enough coverage for most uses. Tessar-type lenses (e.g. Xenar) have less coverage, but still enough for some limited movements. Plasmat-type lenses like the Symmar have plenty of coverage - my 240mm Symmar doubles as a wide-ish lens on 8x10", the 300mm does the same on 24x30cm.
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
A nice older lens with wonderful properties is the 210 or 240 G-Claron. These are very sharp, have plenty of coverage and can be found at a decent price if you look for a while. They can do landscape or close work equally well, but may not be as cheap as some of the others listed above. Welcome to the LF world! tim
Well "Photographica.com" located in Copenhagen has LF lenses from around 266€ so say 100€ is dirtcheap, 150€ cheap and 200€ fairly lowpriced, to me that is. So 75$/65€ is really ¤#$"* cheap.
Wauv Im a slow typer 3 Post while I made mine.
Thanks everybody. a 210/240 it will be. Now I know what to look for.
BTW Lisco backs for 13X18 are they any good?
A 210mm Rodenstock Sironar-S (I don't think the N version really covers except with no movements?) would do fine if you have a little extra money, but otherwise the G-Clarons are fine and cheap performers. If you can stand to use a barrel lens while looking to get a shutter for it, I know where you can find a 210 G-Claron (for €75). With a filter and some slower film, you'll quite soon get into the exposure range of 1 second or more, where using a lenscap or bowler hat is possible.
Two months ago I had no lens in this focal length - for some reason I have three lenses now - they seem to breed in dark corners, or something!
“Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.” - Lao Tzu
They do. Breed in dark corners, that is.
Originally Posted by Jerevan
Just after I bought a brand new shutter to fit my 210/9 G-Claron in, I suddenly found myself the owner of an almost-brand-new 210/6.1 Xenar. Which replaced my 210/4.5 Xenar, so I could use that shutter for the 355/9 G-Claron. And it fit neatly in the gap between the 180 and 240 Symmars. There's also an unknown number of 210mm Aplanats and similar lurking in a dark corner of a cupboard. Quite possibly some Anastigmats of various types too.
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist