Graflex.org

RichS · Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2003 5:03 am Post subject:

I know there's a lot of experience floating around here and I'd like once again to tap into it

I will be looking for a lens to cover 8x10 in the 6 to 7 inch range. I don't have much money

So I thought someone here might be able to suggest an older lens (shuttered) that I could keep an eye out for in case one falls in my budget. With such a wide angle, movements aren't too much of a concern to me, but I would like better coverage than my 65-8 S-Angulon give on 4x5...
As usual, I know I'm asking for a lot... But since I'm very happy with the Optar 90's on 4x5, I'm also pretty easy to please

Or am I asking just too much for a 6 inch lens for 8x10?

Thanks for any suggestions!
Rich...

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

Probably the one that fits the bill the best is the wolley ext wide angle f12.5 like this one
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3001466375&category=15248

Gaining in quality but losing in the "economy" and slightly out of the 6"-7" range is the 190 Wide Field ektar. It's designed to shoot 5x7 wide open but covers 8x10 nicely stopped down. You gain some movement by f32.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3001652722&category=30076

Next up is the Cooke Series VII wide angle lens. It's 158mm so it's wide, but I rarely see this in a shutter. I bought mine for $45. It's also small and light, being smaller than your shuttered 90 optar.

Lastly is the Series V Protar for 6x8 and 8x10. These show up in a Volute shutter occasionally but the price jumps significantly and the Volute is not a dependable shutter.
At f18 it can't be considered fast, so don't expect a lot for interiors, but outside on a decent day it will suprise you. The 8x10 has a 7 3/16" focal length and will cover 10x12 at f22. Unless you have a Deardorf you'll have problems getting it to shift beyond it's limitations.

The 6x8 is 5 9/16" and will cover 8x10 at f22. These are also small- about 1.5" in dia.

I'm not sure what you are shooting. But.. with asa 100 film rated at ISO 25 to get those shadows off the toe, and a #8 filter on a sunny day, I shoot f32 at 1/2"-- easily good enough for a packard shutter.

RichS · Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2003 3:51 pm Post subject:

Thanks Les. Just what I was looking for. The Ektar was about the only one on my list, but it does go for quite a bit usually when found...
We all know that I'm not a 'photographer'

But the wide lens would be for lanscapes and indoor use. Considering the 4x5/wa indoors, I'm betting the 8x10 would need a spot light to focus

I should have mention 'X-sych' also. I don't mind no x on longer lenses because they're usually used outside. But the wide lenses are used indoors to get room views and electronic flash is needed.
Unfortunately, this may take some time to put together. I've been searching for 8x10 Polaroid info and not too thrilled at the cost and procedures. I'd have to finally get my darkroom functional to do real film... And I don't even know what shape the camera is in for real yet. Luckily my 10 & 12 inch Ektars will just cover the 8x10 for normal lenses if I get the film problems solved.
I'll do some more searching for the other lenses you mentioned and keep an eye on the Ektar. A lot of options...
Thanks!
Rich...

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

You can always "open flash" a lens. Many times I've had to do multiple pops for an interior or split this flash with that. In those cases I use a country shutter. A country shutter is a box on a stick that covers the lens. This can me made out of old growth cuban mahogany, hand dovetailed with a scarfed handle with a black silk interior. Or can be as simple as an empty 4x5 film box taped to a stainless steel ruler.

You open the lens hit the first pop, put the box in front until the flashes recharge or the assistant switches lights then move the box out of the way and flash again.

In this case X sync is useless as attaching the flash to shutter disengages the open flash button in most cases.

RichS · Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2003 4:36 am Post subject:

True, open flash works just as well. Maybe not quite as conveniently though... And it's a bit tougher on people who want to be in the photo. Even tougher on people who don't want to be in the photo

Obviously from what I've seen so far, the x-synch is a costly option. Any sych costs a bit more for that matter... I'm hoping not to buy something impulsively as I usually do. I should have just bought an older camera. Then I would have felt obligated to use an older lens in barrel, and felt quite right about the whole thing...
Well, maybe I'll just dig that block of old-growth mohogany out of the basement and start carving

I'm sure that if I can just get a handle on my patience, the right lens will come along. In the meantime, I'll keep looking and do some experimenting with indoor exposures & 4x5 for a comparison. Anything over 1 second is pretty easy to handle but a bit hard on the reciprocity. Which I either misspelled or just looks odd here? Too tired to look it up...
Thanks again Les.

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2134 Location: New Jersey

RichS · Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2003 3:33 am Post subject:

To be honest, I've stayed away from barrel lenses or just cells because I was just plain afraid of the cost to have them mounted. There's also too much to keep track of. Sizes & mountings and synchs, and quality and everything else. Im sure I'll get that far some day but I've got too much to worry about as it is right now...
I did read recently of a price to add synch to a shutter and it was fairly reasonable. Somthing I would be tempted to look into. For X synch, it shouldn't be too difficult since it should fire when the shutter is fully open. No delays to worry about.
Right now, if a lens pops up, I'll jump on it. But since the camera isn't even here yet (and who knows what condition it's really in?) and I do have at least one lens that will work on it, there's no emergency. Plus I'm still looking for a 500mm tele to complete my range. And another WA around 75mm, and....

What I really should have done _before_ I bought my first 4x5 is find out where it all ends and how much it would cost. Now I see there's no limit on either, but it's too late...

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2134 Location: New Jersey

RichS · Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2003 6:34 pm Post subject:

I know about the surveys. But that's an 'average' There are people outside of any average.
In 4x5, I had to get a 65mm because the 90 just wouldn't cover a room interior. And then there's those wide field panoramics where no lens is wide enough. Not being a 'photographer' I have the freedonm to play with non-standard shooting and just having fun with the hobby. A lot of my fun is shooting very wide, or getting closer with a long lens. I really doubt I'll ever go chasing birds with my Speed and mounted 500mm, but that's what the 35mm camera is for. Although mounting the camera on a tripod, pointed and focuses on a bird feeder is a very workable option that I have also done with the 35mm setup. I have, and will always have the need for longer lenses though. And 500mm is only 3.3 times a normal lens on 4x5. Not a whole lot of magnification compared to 35mm where I can go to 1500mm over a 50mm normal.

A 500mm tele really doesn't go for any more than any other lens. I just missed a nice one that was very reasonable. If it wasn't for family obligations, I may have even won it...

I admit that on both my 2 1/4 and 4x5 I use a slightly wider than normal lens as 'standard' and most often. But that doesn't mean I don't use the very wide and long lenes when I want to. I always wished for a 500mm on the 2 1/4, but it was never made (C330) and there's nothing I can do about it. At least in 4x5 I can go longer as long as I'm willing to wait for the lens to become available and luck is on my side...
It's just what I like to do with cameras. And I never, ever, said anything about my being 'normal'!

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2134 Location: New Jersey

RichS · Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2003 5:08 am Post subject:

Ahhh, so it's more in the category of "It takes one to know one"

Don't worry, I've had some odd ideas also. My latest is trying a diopter lens mounted on the rear to increase coverage. Similar to a close-up lens on the front.
There are times when curiosity overshadows common sense, and quality. I keep an old wide angle adapter around (.42 I think) from my old video camera. It mounts on my 2 1/4 lenses and some of the 4x5. Great for w-i-d-e angle. Not so great for quality...
To me, 'playing' is more than half the fun. When I get the 8x10 working, probably the first thing I'll try is paper negatives (enlarging paper). ASA 6 if I'm lucky... And then polaroids at 10.00+ a shot... May try one box of that... After I recover from this binge... (that's a buying binge!)

Have to half blame Les for this. The other half for lack of sleep and a pill I should have taken a half hour later... But that Wollensack lens in question is now mine. So in a couple of weeks I'll know whether to thank Les or...

But playing with lenses can be fun. I tried taking the front or rear element off several of mine with surprising results. One had no change whatsoever. One went wide angle. Wish I remembered... Most wouldn't quite focus to infinity but some would. And then there's pinholes... One of the reasons I like Speeds since anything that will focus can be used as a lens...

Now all I have to do is find 8x10 holders, both film & plate, and I should be happy for a while. Until the bills come anyway

Rich...

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

"Now all I have to do is find 8x10 holders, both film & plate,"

I"m afraid to ask......why plate? considering coating your own glass?

Les

RichS · Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2003 3:02 pm Post subject:

Didn't we go through this on 4x5?

Just for future 'fun', and a bit of collecting. The plate holders have more room for someting a bit thicker than standard film. Good for glass , tin, or whatever else I can think of squeezing in there. As soon as the weather warms a bit (probably June around here), I plan on tackling my idea of re-creating the tintype look. Not wet... I think it was finally worked out to be a standard print emulsion spread on a blackened plate and then bleached...
Like everything else, just something else to play with...

Rich...

Nick · Joined: 16 Oct 2002 Posts: 494

How long are the belows on that 8x10? If it's long enough and it should be instead of trying for a long telephoto lens for the 4x5 why not get a long lens for the 8x10 and a 4x5 back?

Henry · Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 4:01 am Post subject:

Longer than the aboves....?