Fast large format Lenses.

[P.Esquerdo]

Hi everyone,

I am looking information about fast lenses to shoot wide open or closer apertures (f5,6-11). Some months ago I watched a pictures made by a Spanish photographer called Joaquín Paredes (I recommend that you take a look, especially if you like ULF). Some of his pictures where took with a Aero Kodak, and I really liked the bokeh and DOF that lens made.
But the problems with Aero Kodak are: no shutter in lens and hard to find for a decent price.
Looking more information, I found that Scheneider and Carl Zeiss made some fast lenses with shutters back in the 50's-70's, the Planars and Xenotars. But they are also expensive, but more versatile than a Aero Kodak.
Are there more alternatives to shoot wide open? And how different are they(having a similar lens scheme)?

Thank you for your time.

[Oren Grad]

There are many, many large format lenses with a maximum aperture of f/5.6 - for example, essentially all modern general-use plasmats (various generations of Rodenstock Sironar and Schneider Symmar, Nikkor-W, Fujinon W) with a focal length of 300mm or shorter.

[Jody_S]

Best bet for an affordable lens in shutter would be a Xenar 210mm in Compound shutter. They're an extraordinary all-around lens, soft wide-open and great for portraiture, and sharp as any once you get to f11 or so. They're mostly f4.5 but you might eventually find an f3.5 version.

I would not recommend an aero-Ektar as the bokeh is ugly. You're better off with a Dallmeyer Pentac.

[P.Esquerdo]

Thank you for your reply!

Are the f5.6 plasmats good to be shoot wide open?

[P.Esquerdo]

Thank you for your reply!

I have a Xenar 300mm f5.6 but I'd never shoot wide open. How many differences are between the f3.5 and the f4.5 (apart the aperture)?

[Oren Grad]

Are the f5.6 plasmats good to be shoot wide open?

That depends entirely on your purposes and your criteria for quality, including your taste in rendering. For commercial use the manufacturers recommended middling apertures like f/22 as optimal. But that does not mean they can't be used in other ways.

[Oren Grad]

I have a Xenar 300mm f5.6 but I'd never shoot wide open.

Why not? That might help clarify what you're looking for.

[P.Esquerdo]

That depends entirely on your purposes and your criteria for quality, including your taste in rendering. For commercial use the manufacturers recommended middling apertures like f/22 as optimal. But that does not mean they can't be used in other ways.

Thank you for your explanation.

I have a Symmar-S 150mm but I have never used it below f16.

[P.Esquerdo]

Why not? That might help clarify what you're looking for.

Usually I use my lenses from f11 to f32, being f22 the one used in the majority of the cases (because it was told that modern lenses are designed to be used at that ranges).

[RJ-]

Hi everyone,

Are there more alternatives to shoot wide open? And how different are they(having a similar lens scheme)?

Thank you for your time.

Have you explored the Voigtlander Heliar 5 element f4.5 designs (150mm - 360mm+) by Hans Harting - these can be coupled with a Luc, Silens or front shutter if you are not inclined to use variable neutral density filters or slower emulsion.

Speaking to his grandson, he confirmed August Sander 's work of Antlitz Der Zeit [The Face of Our Time] was imaged on a Voigtlander 360mm f4.5 Heliar. I don't know about the prices now but they were not in demand 20 years ago and mostly used as paperweights.

Alternatively if you have some mechanical skills, mounting a front heavy Pentac 150mm (6 1/2 inches+) f2.9 - more commonly found as an 8inch variant by the British Air Ministry or made under licence by Ross or Dallmeyer as a British designed aerial lens. These share much in common with the Aero-Ektar including the fuzziness (glow) at portrait distances being less corrected than the more demandingly designed symmetrical Heliar. There are previous posts on this lens here and the rate limiting issue of using one tends to be the mounting challenges. Many of the Victorian era brass plate lenses using waterhouse stops are suitable for wide open shooting; Ross Homocentric lenses (some have apertures - which limit to f8 however can be removed to shoot wide open); many double Gauss designed six element plasmats types. You can still achieve this kind of work with a simple 4 element Tessar type lens at f4.5. I use a 250mm one made by Docter (Wetzlar) wide open mostly for portrait work. Its coverage is insufficient for the format I prefer (whole plate = 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 inch) but it covers 4x5 inch okay for simpler projects.

Here's an example of the Docter Wetzlar Tessar (used for an exhibition last year). At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters which fast lens is used so you're perhaps spot on, in avoiding the high premium associated with niche lenses like the Zeiss Planar/Xenotar 150 f3.5 which has such terrible limitations in movement potential in large format terms.

Good luck!

249546

Projector lenses - like Isco Gottingen (Germany) - make plenty of fast anamorphic lenses - the coverage isn't quite up there compared to magic lantern lenses(with an element removed). Even a single meniscus lens will work: perhaps find a shutter (Thornton Pickard, Sinar autoshutter) or a camera type (Speedgraphic) with a built in shutter then any kind of wide objective can be used.

[Oren Grad]

Usually I use my lenses from f11 to f32, being f22 the one used in the majority of the cases (because it was told that modern lenses are designed to be used at that ranges).

So the first thing you should do is make some pictures at open aperture with the lenses you already own. You might like the results. And if not, you will be better able to explain what specifically you are looking for that is different.

[Dan Fromm]

P., the reason modern lenses that open to f/5.6 are usually recommended for use at around f/22 is that they gain coverage when stopped down from wide open. As has already been mentioned, we don't know what you are trying to accomplish -- sorry, I'm too lazy to look up the photographer whose work you mentioned in your first post -- and most of us will agree that since you have lenses that open to f/5.6 and haven't shot them opened to f/5.6 you should try them first. The results might be what you want.

[Mark J]

Smaller Symmar-S/Apo-S/etc are already pretty sharp at f/8 and super-good from f/11 down. The bigger ones from 210 up need a bit more stopping down to be sharp over a decent area.
I agree with Oren and Dan though, for wider-open shooting, they will be softer in the file and more vignetted, but it depends what you want. Maybe for more softness but less vignetting, at f/5.6, you might be better with a f/4.5 Tessar.

[Daniel Unkefer]

In Linhof Advertising of the day Schneider Symmars were touted as being totally usuable wide open. Back then sheet Kodachrome and E3 Ektachrome were sloooow. Being able to use these lenses wide open was an advertising plus for Linhof. I remember a Guy standing on a rocky outcrop in pounding surf, using either a 5x7 or 8x10 Linhof camera hand held with wide open lens.

So, ditto on trying it wide open! My advertising literature says it is sharp wide open.

For my uses I prefer the f4.5 Schneider Xenars which are great IMO wide open.

[Jody_S]

The old lens comparison charts often gave lp/mm wide-open, no?

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

The photographer mentioned (http://www.joaquinparedes.com/) has wetplate portraits, figure studies, etc which are not particularly sharp. If this is what you are after I would think a f4.5 or better a f3.5 Xenar or Tessar would be fine. Your 300mm Xenar at f5.6 should also fine, maybe a bit slow.

[P.Esquerdo]

Thank you all for your replies and advices.
Before buying anything, I'm going to try all my lenses wide open to see if it fits on that look.