My first 8x10

[tjaded]

Hi all--
I just bought my first 8x10 last night...a Burke & James. The price was too low for me to pass up. Anyway, the lens on the camera is a Wollensak Betax No. 3 6 1/4" f12.5. Has anyone here ever used one? Any good? I'm going to try to shoot a test or two today, the shutter speeds are off, though the 1/50th seems good enough for government work.
Adios,
Matt

[Nick Zentena]

Betax #3 is the shutter. Is it really F/12.5? I wonder if you got some wide angle lens? That's 160ishmm I think. Would need to be a wide angle to cover 8x10.

Wonder if the lens is worth more then the camera -)

[tjaded]

Let's see, it says it is a wollensak 8x10 eries IIIa EX.W.A. f12.5 6 1/4" focus. I don't know anything about Wollensak!

[climbabout]

Welcome to 8x10. I own that very lens - it just covers 8x10 with very little room for movement. It's very wide angle - 159mm - a normal 8x10 lens would be 300mm. I rarely use it, but never travel without it as it is so small and lightweight - it's a real gem - and plenty sharp when stopped down a bit. I believe mine is in an alphax shutter though.
Tim

[Pinholemaster]

If the lens is a 6 1/4" focal length, then you've got a wide angle. A 'normal' for 8x10 format is the diagonal of the film plane, so 12" to 14" lenses are usually considered "normal". I use a 300 mm as my "normal".

Enjoy the new machine.

[John Kasaian]

I've got a wolly like yours for my 8x10. As others say it is very wide and I find of limited use---but when you need wide, you need wide It offers zilch in the way of movements however, so you'll probably find a more "normal" lens easier to work with (when using wolly, the B&J's bellows are going to be crunched up something fierce!)
Fortunately there are plenty of good 8x10 lenses on the market relatively cheap. Something from, 9-1/2"(240mm) to 15"(375mm) would be more useful if your just starting out, but seriously don't sell your wolly! Really wide 8x10 lenses are expen$ive and dreadfully large and heavy.Your wolly is neither and some day you're probably going to want a wide in your kit.
Good luck!

[jmcd]

I've got one of these in an Alphax shutter, and it makes great prints. Movement may be limited, but I find that with wide angle a little movement can go a long way. I like this lens.

[ic-racer]

Congrads with you new setup. I use a 210mm as my "normal" lens on 8x10. Looks like Nicholas Nixon also uses WA lenses with 8x10, this one is probably similar to the view you will get with yours.

[tjaded]

So I got the camera, wooden tripod, lens, 4x5 reducing back, 5x7 reducing back all for $295...seems like a good deal. I just put 2 sheets of very expired E-6 in the soup, so I should know what this lens is like in a little bit!

[John Kasaian]

Mine is a f9.5 "yellow dot" in an Alphax. Perhaps the f12.5 is slightly more generous when it comes to movements. I've heard that somewhere (?) So it could it be a trade off between speed and coverage? I've also heard that the f12.5 has a screw that can be removed to make the aperture open up wider (faster?)

While a delightful wide, still not the lens I'd recommend for a newcomer to the format. At f/9.5 the gg is quite a bit dimmer when compared to a G-Claron's f/9---I'd hate to think of what 12.5 would look like. That, crunched bellows and the lack of movements are my reasons for thinking that a more normal lens would be easier on a new 8x10'er.