210mm compared to 240mm

[thronobulax]

I only have the 203mm f/7.7 Ektar, the 210mm f/6.8 Caltar (Geronar), and the 8 1/2" Commercial Ektar... I feel inadequate.

 

[Ian Grant]

Congo bought the machinery and rights to manufacture lenses to the Kodak Commercial Ektar designs Although Tessar type, lenses like the Kodak Commercial Ektar,, Schneider Xenars, are not identical to the CZJ Tessars, which themselves evolved over the years.

The best CZJ Tessar's in terms of coverage and definition are the f6.3 lenses, for more general use the f4.5, then the faster f3.5 which even stopped down is not as sharp overall. The (LF) design was stretched to f2.7.

I would love to have a full range of 165mm CZJ Tessars, they were made f6.3, f5.3. f4.5, f3.5 and f2.7. the f5.3 is quite rare and appears to have been made for Kodak.

The sharpest Tessar type lenses were the very late Schneider Xenars, the 150mm f5.6, the 3210mm f6.1, and the 300mm f5.6, and around 25 years ago they were being sold off at ridiculously low prices by Robert White in the UK and Badger Graphics in the US.

Ian

 

[Francis R]

So many lenses!!!

 

[MartyNL]

So many lenses!!!

Lenses hold much more of a fascination for me than any camera. While I can admire the build quality and workmanship of camera's there's something more about the history, design and development of optics that transcends the material itself.

 

[Nas]

Thanks for the input and pictures Nas, really nice work. I found your work Of BTS documenting shoots many moons ago around the time i got my RZ67. great work!!

Thanks very much, small world . I really like the RZ67 but I've got a soft spot for the RB67 because of its lack of electronics and the need for a battery.

I find my Nikon 210mm has a 'modern' look, very sharp and contrasty. The example I posted above was on Polaroid so the contrast is higher than had I shot that image on film. To be honest I prefer the look of older lenses.

I look forward to seeing some of your results.

 

[Nas]

Interesting discussion.

I'm back in the studio on Monday and I'll be playing with a variety of lenses on 4x5" for now.

I too decided on the 200mm+/- focal lengths, at first, for all of the reasons mentioned.

I'll be using the Sinar with behind the lens shutter and flash sync. Wish me luck, I think I'm going to need it!

Lenses top left to bottom right;
Sinar to Linhof adapter lens board
Brass f8 (RR?)
8" Wray Lustrar ser.ii f8
F. Suter Aplanat no.4 f6
Brass Orthoscope f8
Computar f9
Projection/magic lantern (triplet)
Rodenstock Recti-Aplanat f8
Goerz Rectiplanat no.2 f6
P...&Rayment Rapid Euryscope Optimus f6
Heliar f4.5

That's a nice selection of lenses. I find the Sinar shutter works great for these old lenses and having flash sync is a great bonus. Please post some results. Thanks.

 

[Nas]

I would love to have a full range of 165mm CZJ Tessars, they were made f6.3, f5.3. f4.5, f3.5 and f2.7. the f5.3 is quite rare and appears to have been made for Kodak.

Ian

I like the 165mm f2.7. Here's a portrait I made with mine a few years ago along with my notes.



Graflex Speed Graphic
165mm f2.7 Carl Zeiss Tessar lens
Delta 100 @ ISO 50 (expired 2006)
ILFOSOL 3 1+9 4 mins (Jobo)

The flange diameter is too large to fit onto a Speed Graphic lens board. Steve from Chroma Camera did an excellent job of designing and 3D printing me a custom lens board which works perfectly.

 

[Nas]

Here's a test I did with some 300mm (or equivalent) lenses on 5x4 film. I moved the camera to keep the head a similar size in the frame. I wanted to compare the difference with a Schneider 135mm lens. Some people praise the Schneider Xenotar 135/3.5 as an excellent portrait lens on 5x4 and its ability for a shallow depth of field. The distortion is very obvious when compared side by side which is no surprise but I couldn't find any direct comparisons online, just lots of discussion. The proof is in the pudding.


Top left: Goerz Dagor 12 inch (Gold rim)
Top right: Emil Busch 12 inch
Bottom left: Schneider Xenar 135mm f4.7
Bottom right: Goerz Dagor 12 inch (Gold rim)

Ilford FP4 (expired 2013, frozen)
Promicrol 1+14

 

[Dave_P]

Here's a test I did with some 300mm (or equivalent) lenses on 5x4 film. I moved the camera to keep the head a similar size in the frame. I wanted to compare the difference with a Schneider 135mm lens. Some people praise the Schneider Xenotar 135/3.5 as an excellent portrait lens on 5x4 and its ability for a shallow depth of field. The distortion is very obvious when compared side by side which is no surprise but I couldn't find any direct comparisons online, just lots of discussion. The proof is in the pudding.

Not all portraits are headshots though. A fast 135mm works very well for environmental portraits, for instance.

 

[MartyNL]

Or for people who wish to appear taller and thinner!

 

[Soulstar89]

Thanks very much, small world . I really like the RZ67 but I've got a soft spot for the RB67 because of its lack of electronics and the need for a battery.

I find my Nikon 210mm has a 'modern' look, very sharp and contrasty. The example I posted above was on Polaroid so the contrast is higher than had I shot that image on film. To be honest I prefer the look of older lenses.

I look forward to seeing some of your results.

I also have a soft spot for the rz67 but it’s increase in value and like you stated the electronics make it a tricky one to decide whether to keep or move on. My misses loves the camera but even though she prefers it to her mamiya 7ii, she always grabs the mamiya 7ii as her long term project has been with the 80mm.

I noticed after i responded it was a Polaroid. That definitely increases the contrast.

I really like the 180mm on the rz67. It’s a tessar design so I think maybe once I become more familiar with large format I’ll probably pick up a portrait lens with a tessar design.

I’ll definitely share results.

 

[Soulstar89]

I like the 165mm f2.7. Here's a portrait I made with mine a few years ago along with my notes.



Graflex Speed Graphic
165mm f2.7 Carl Zeiss Tessar lens
Delta 100 @ ISO 50 (expired 2006)
ILFOSOL 3 1+9 4 mins (Jobo)

The flange diameter is too large to fit onto a Speed Graphic lens board. Steve from Chroma Camera did an excellent job of designing and 3D printing me a custom lens board which works perfectly.

I love the way tessar lens fall out of focus. Very nice frame.

 

[Soulstar89]

Here's a test I did with some 300mm (or equivalent) lenses on 5x4 film. I moved the camera to keep the head a similar size in the frame. I wanted to compare the difference with a Schneider 135mm lens. Some people praise the Schneider Xenotar 135/3.5 as an excellent portrait lens on 5x4 and its ability for a shallow depth of field. The distortion is very obvious when compared side by side which is no surprise but I couldn't find any direct comparisons online, just lots of discussion. The proof is in the pudding.


Top left: Goerz Dagor 12 inch (Gold rim)
Top right: Emil Busch 12 inch
Bottom left: Schneider Xenar 135mm f4.7
Bottom right: Goerz Dagor 12 inch (Gold rim)
Ilford FP4 (expired 2013, frozen)
Promicrol 1+14

You definitely do see a difference. It doesn’t feel as dramatic as say a 35mm headshot on 35m film compared to a 85mm. More like the subtle difference of video tight shots compared to still photography.

I may have to find me a head mannequin for my test rather than always asking someone.

 

[Soulstar89]

Not all portraits are headshots though. A fast 135mm works very well for environmental portraits, for instance.

I love an environmental portrait. I got the 90 and 135 for that exact reason. I think the reason Nas bought up headshots is my original question was about waist up to head and shoulder portraits.

 

[Nas]

Not all portraits are headshots though. A fast 135mm works very well for environmental portraits, for instance.

I completely agree. To be honest, now I think back to this test, I seem to remember grabbing the 135mm mainly because I had it at hand. I was mainly comparing the 12"/300mm lenses but as I prefer to develop four sheets at the same time I added the 135mm in.

 

[Nas]

You definitely do see a difference. It doesn’t feel as dramatic as say a 35mm headshot on 35m film compared to a 85mm. More like the subtle difference of video tight shots compared to still photography.

I may have to find me a head mannequin for my test rather than always asking someone.

I can highly recommend a mannequin for testing. They never complain or blink . I only have the head which is fine for me. I got mine many years ago from a shop which was closing down. There were shelves of them to model hats. I also picked up a female one which is smaller so I don't use it as much. Avoid the white polystyrene ones.

 

[Nas]

I love the way tessar lens fall out of focus. Very nice frame.

Thank you. I'm very pleased with this one. My mate liked this so much he used it for his work ID card.

 

[Ian Grant]

I like the 165mm f2.7. Here's a portrait I made with mine a few years ago along with my notes.



Graflex Speed Graphic
165mm f2.7 Carl Zeiss Tessar lens
Delta 100 @ ISO 50 (expired 2006)
ILFOSOL 3 1+9 4 mins (Jobo)

The flange diameter is too large to fit onto a Speed Graphic lens board. Steve from Chroma Camera did an excellent job of designing and 3D printing me a custom lens board which works perfectly.

That's an excellent image Nas, it's a pity those 165mm f2.7 Tessar lenses are so rare, and expensive, I nearly bought one in a shutter a few years ago From MW C, something about the photos put me off.

Ian

 

[Nas]

That's an excellent image Nas, it's a pity those 165mm f2.7 Tessar lenses are so rare, and expensive, I nearly bought one in a shutter a few years ago From MW C, something about the photos put me off.

Ian

Thanks, Ian. Took me a while to get mine. The first one I was outbid on at an auction house. Seemed like the buyer turned up just for that lens. I cannibalised mine from a non-functioning folding camera I bought some years later. I think it was a Contessa or something similar in name.
If you had ordered the one in shutter from MW. C, I'd bet you'd never have received it.

 

[Soulstar89]

I can highly recommend a mannequin for testing. They never complain or blink . I only have the head which is fine for me. I got mine many years ago from a shop which was closing down. There were shelves of them to model hats. I also picked up a female one which is smaller so I don't use it as much. Avoid the white polystyrene ones.

I will definitely look into this. You always want talent that follows direction, doesn't complain or blink lol.