Budget LF lenses?

[Toffle]

Over many years my most used lens on a 4x5 has been the Kodak Ektar f/7.7. 203mm. It might not do as well for those wide open portraits, though.

+1 for this lens. It is certainly affordable and nice and sharp, maybe too sharp if you want that soft wide-open look. It lacks filter threads, though. (most of my lenses are without... the problem with bargain finds)

[BrianShaw]

I've got two lenses with bent filter rings. I got them cheap because of that, and they work fine. ymmv of course.

Me too.

[Dan Quan]

KEH is a reputable source that stands behind their stuff, I would consider buying a lens from them even with filter ring damage. Just check it out and make sure it functions according to your needs. You could return it if necessary.

[pgomena]

Think long-term. Buy a good lens and keep it. 210mm plasmats (Symmar, Sironar, etc.) are plentiful and fairly cheap. Buy one with a good filter ring, you'll be happier in the long run. (Try re-selling a lens with a bent filter ring . . .) I bought my 210 Symmar-S in about 1980 and continue to use it almost every time I take my 4x5 out for some fresh air. It's a standard portrait lens as well.

Peter Gomena

[Pupfish]

210mm was the coin of the realm for college-level still life and commercial studios, so there are a ton of them circulating, many in pristine shape. Mint or near-mint examples of the (Plasmat design) 210mm APO Sironar-N's/Caltar IINs are going for under $200 these days, which seems like a rather trifling amount considering these were once north of a grand new. Since you have a Sinar you ought to be able to fully exploit the tremendous 301mm image circle for 4x5. FWIW, I'd pay as much attention to the description of the shutter's condition as I would to the glass.

[Dan Quan]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Gundlach-Tur...ht_4142wt_1398

Maybe worth looking at...

sorry, i was thinking 8x10, disregard.