Re: Large Format Lens Question

From: Richard Knoppow ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 02/25/05-01:02:40 AM Z
Message-id: <000e01c51b08$023233e0$abfc5142@VALUED20606295>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Briggs" <MichaelBriggs@earthlink.net>
To: "Barbara Izzo" <bi3@georgetown.edu>
Cc: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: Large Format Lens Question

>
> On 24-Feb-2005 Barbara Izzo wrote:
>> ....... I am looking for lenses for a Century 6x8 and
>> a
>> Deardorf 8x10 that I inherited with no lenses.
>> .... any information on the quality, suitability, and
>> prices.
>
> The best way to get price information is to search
> completed auctions on ebay.
> After that, check the offerings of some of the online
> dealers, such as
> www.mpex.com.
>
>>
>> 2 lenses marked only Darlot Paris, 1 estimated to be c.
>> 6" ($200), 1
>> estimated to be c. 8" ($300) These have no shutter.
>
> These are old and probably of limited coverage. Their
> value is mostly as
> antiques / decorations, though no doubt some photographers
> are using lenses
> like these.
>
>> Pentc 8" f 29 (with space between the 2 and 9) ($250)
>> No shutter.
>
> A f2.9 Pentac? This is a WWII aerial lens of varying
> quality. It probably
> doesn't cover 6x8.
>
>> Kodak Commercial Ektar 10" 6.3 in original? case ($800)
>> The owner said he
>> thought this was one of the best lenses of all time
>
> This is a fine lens and would have been used by many
> professionals in the 1950s
> and 1960s. The design is the tessar design, which
> typically has coverage of 55
> degrees. For a 10 inch lens the diameter of coverage
> would be 10.4 inches,
> which just barely covers 6x8. In fact, Kodak listed the
> "Maximum Recommended
> Negative Size" for this lens as 6 1/2 x 8 1/2. The price
> is very high. The
> 14 inch version is popular for 8x10.
>
> I can't recommend any of these for your cameras. The
> high-quality lenses that I
> see going for very reasonable prices are plain Symmars.
> 210 mm and longer
> should work well for 6x8, 240 mm and up for 8x10. If you
> want enough coverage
> for movements such as front rise, the 300 mm would be an
> excellent choice for
> 8x10.
>
> --Michael

    I am familiar with the Commercial Ektar. These are
indeed excellent lenses. I think Kodak was probably building
the best lenses in the world at the time. This lens will
just cover 8x10 stopped down to around f/11. This is the
same ratio as the 127mm, f/4.7 Ektar for 4x5.
    I am not sure about the Pentac, I don't think this is
the aerial version of the lens but the older version. An OK
lens but not worth the money being asked.
    You are right about the older Symmars, they are very
good lenses, even the convertible ones, and sell cheap.

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com 
Received on Fri Feb 25 01:03:00 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 03/01/05-02:06:55 PM Z CST