Graflex.org

[cblurton]

I recently bought a Pacemaker 2x3 (actually, bought one and bought a second because the first’s rangefinder was in very bad shape and couldn’t be adjusted). The cameras came with an Optar 135/4/7, a Zeiss 105/4.5 and a Wollensak 10” telephoto 5.6.

I want to use the Pacemaker to shoot 120 b&w film (BW400CN*) handheld in Hong Kong street markets. I’ll be using a roll film back and the range finder to focus. Typically, these markets are in narrow streets between buildings and are shaded by tarps so I’ll be shooting in shade. I will also be working in close quarters at an average distance from the subject of about 6-12 feet.

While I am having the lenses CLA’ed at Panda Camera Repair, I’ve been considering purchasing a wider lens. To that end, I’ve done a small amount of research in this and other forums to see what people are recommending for a wide angle lens for the 2x3 graphic cameras. There are lots of recommendations but not a lot of consensus except that people don’t seem to like the 65/6.8 Optar. Below is a list of lens people have recommended or discussed. I am sure the list is incomplete, but it is a start. If I’ve missed something really important please let me know.

Given what I want to use this lens for, shooting B&W in street markets, and given that I have a modest budget and can’t afford the really expensive lenses like the Grandagon or Super Angulon, I’ve been thinking that perhaps the 80/6.3 WF Ektar would be a good choice if I can find one on the auction site for a reasonable price (prices for vintage camera gear in Hong Kong are absolutely absurd).

The wealth of experience and knowledge on this site is truly impressive. I would appreciate any thoughts or advice you might have about this before I buy another lens. I would also appreciate your thoughts on what a fair average price would be for whatever lens you recommend.

Best wishes,

Craig

35/4.5 Apo Grandagon
38/4.5 Biogon.
38/5.6 Super Angulon XL
47/5.6 Super Angulon
47/8.0 Ilex
53/4.5 Biogon
53/4.0 Super Angulon
58/5.6 Grandagon
60/9.0 Boyer Perle
64/6.5 Cooke Ser. VIIb
65/5.6 Schneider Super Angulon
65/6.8 Optar
65/6.8 Angulon
65/6.8 "Hamburg Anastigmat"
65/8.0 Ilex
65/8.0 Super Angulon
72/5.6 Schneider
75/8.0 Super Angulon
80/6.3 WF Ektar
80/2.8 Xenotar
80/6.3 Aristostigmat
80/6.8 Dagor
85/6.8 Boyer Beryl
80 WF Ektar
90/6.8 Boyer Beryl

*I am trying out BW400CN because I hope to be able to process it at a local 1 hour photo place. If I take in TMax or TriX to them I have at least a one to two week wait before I can see my negatives. BTW, developing my own isn't an option for many reasons.

[Les]

A few years back I shot group shots with a 23 Crown and an 80mm WF Ektar

I think an 80mm lens is about as wide as you'll get the range finder to work on but I have to admit, the WF wasn't as fun as I thought. It's sweet spot for sharpness is in the f11 f16 range, and on cloudy days I was quickly into the slower shutter speeds.

To solve that problem I went and got a few fast 80mm lenses, but never got around to finding out what they cover. There is the 80mm Planar, Xenotar and Heligon, But some if not all of these were designed for 6x6cm and might not cover 6x7 or 6x9 (which is really 6x8 on the lever roll holders)

The standard wide would be the 65mm lenses like the Angulon (the Super Angulon covers 4x5 so for you isn't worth the extra money) but I don't think this lens would rangefinder, so you'd have to find and set up a hyperfocal reference for the lens and then point and shoot.

Last year I went to NYC with a Century, a 105 and a 47mm SA, and I used the SA that way. I tried to set up a scale for it, but the distance I had to move the lens between INF and 40 feet was too small to accurately measure, so I calculated the hyperfocal distance, made a mark on the bed and used that. It worked very well. Oh and I had to drop the bed for the shot.

Les
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

[Henry]

This question has come up before, and I'll repeat myself here. I have the 65mm Optar. If you treat this little guy very carefully (and possibly apply some mojo) you can get some pretty good results if you stop it down to 11 or (preferably) smaller. It is very tricky to focus! Especially if you have a fresnel mounted. The old tried-and-true "least worst" method works most of the time. But even with a good loupe, it'll give you fits---can you spell "i-n-d-e-c-i-s-i-o-n"---and "f-r-u-s-t-r-a-t-i-o-n"?

Whoever said photography isn't hard work never had to use a WA!

[Dan Fromm]

Um, Craig, y'r list covers the range from the shortest lens known to cover 2x3 and work on a Century/2x3 Crown to lenses 10% shorter than normal.

I have no idea what prices are these days. I earn $US, spend $US and can't keep track of exchange rates or international postage. And I've been finding fewer and fewer steals on eBay.com, eBay.co.uk, eBay.fr and eBay.de. In addition the non-US eBays have been playing games with their categories and search engines that make browsing too hard.

I have and use 38/4.5 Biogon (does NOT cover 2x3), 1.75"/2.8 Elcan (ditto, in barrel, works on a 2x3 Speed), 47/5.6 Super Angulon, 58/5.6 Grandagon, 65/8 Ilex (behaves like 65/8 Super Angulon) and 80/6.3 WF Ektar. I like all but the Elcan, have some reservations about the 58 Grandy because it has separations. I've had and hated a 65/6.8 Raptar.

I use the 80 and 47 relatively a lot, the others relatively little. If I had neither I'd use the 65 more.

Since I don't know how you see, I can't make a strong suggestion about the one WA lens you should buy. If I had to use one at distances of 2 - 4 meters I think it would be a 47 SA (or a 50/6.3 Mamiya for Mamiya Press) prefocused somewhere in between. Focusing on the run makes little sense with short lenses, even if the RF will couple.

FWIW, before I got the 80 I feared it would be too close to normal. Not so. After the 38 came back remounted in a Copal (it had been in a useless AGI F135 shutter) I fell madly passionately stupidly in love with it for a couple of months and wouldn't use any other lens. Now that I've calmed down I find that it isn't the universal lens; scenics with a wide lens rarely make sense, too much foreground, too little background and the subject has to be really close before the lens will cover 2x3.

Of the lenses you listed I'd like to have a 35/4.5 Apo Grandy and a 53/4.5 Biogon. Examples of both live near me, sooner or later I'll borrow 'em and try 'em. I expect that the 35 won't be that useful and I'm not sure that the 53's rear cell will clear the bellows. Of my short lenses, only the 58 needs to have the rear cell removed (and replaced through the back of the camera) to be attached to the front standard.

[troublemaker]

Here's what I think !
I don't know about all those lenses you listed, but I've used and still use some of them.
I keep a Century Graphic set up with the 80mm Xenotar. Nice. Will cover 6x7 OK. And the Kalart adjusts nicely for the 80mm lenses.
I also used for a while the 80mm 2.8 Heligon. Probably the sharpest lens I have ever used on a 2x3 Graphic. But it also is a 6x7 lens and when I tried to it in the backcountry with 6x9 it had darkish corners even at the smallish apertures I was using (with Provia). But wow, very nice Rodenstock glass.

65mm wides start to get to be a pain in setting up the infinity stops etc... But I use them a lot backpacking and just GG focus. But it can be done for handholding if one is determined. Recently I have been impressed with the 65mm 6.8 Angulon I have been using. Doesn't allow much movement to be used, but certainly covers 6x9, esspecially stopped down. I used the 65 Optar for a couple years and it is hard to focus and has to be stopped to f16 to be at all useful.
I also have been using a 65mm f8 Super Angulon in a Copal 0 shutter. Very nice lens, and cover 6x9 with plenty of movements. Probably overkill for a walk around lens. And some or most of the 00 shutters these are in are problematic.

When I was looking for my 2.8 lenses (Xenotar and Heligon) to try out, I bought both on cameras for the same or less than one would probably pay for just the lens. I kept the Cenutry and Xenotar, and after having some fun with the Heligon I putit back on the Graflex XL it came on and sold the whole rig for more a little more then I payed for it. So there's something to think about also.

[cblurton]

Lots of good information in the replies to my post. I will try to summarize them and draw a conclusion. I apologize in advance for any errors in my summary. If I have misrepresented your message please correct me.

Les said he’s used the lens I’m considering, the 80mm WF Ektar, and he thinks that it is about as wide a lens as I’ll be able to get to work with the rangefinder. On the downside, he found he needed to stop down to f11-16 for sharpness which limited its use on cloudy days. He bought some other faster 80mm lens but hasn’t tried them and doesn’t know if they’ll cover 6x9. He recommends I consider a wider lens like the 65mm Angulon and calculate the hyperfocal distance for my venue and point and shoot.

Henry, going against the tide a bit, thinks the 65mm Optar can give good results but admits the lens must be stopped down to f11 or smaller and is tricky to focus.

Dan laments the decline of good lens deals on eBay and the deceptive descriptions. Dan also lists the WA lenses he’s used. It is clear that he has a lot of experience working with WA lenses on his camera. He notes that of the lenses he lists, he uses his 80mm WF Ektar and 47mm Super Angulon the most. If he were to choose a lens for me, he would choose either the 47mm Super Angulon or a 50mm Mamiya for the Mamiya Press. He has a 35mm Apo Grandy and a 53mm Biogon on his personal wish list.

Troublemaker has used the 80mm Xenotar and liked it. It will cover 6x7 and work with the rangefinder. He has used the 80mm 2.8 Heligon and liked it a lot, very sharp, but it didn’t cover the corners on a 6x9 even at small apertures. He has recently been shooting with a the 65mm 6.8 Angulon and likes it, too. It covers 6x9 without movements. His 65mm Super Angulon is a very nice lens with plenty of movements for 6x9 but notes that the shutter many of these are mounted in (“00”) can be problematic. Troublemaker also recommends that I keep my eye out for a camera with the lens I want. I may be able to get the whole thing for the price of a lens being sold separately.

The discussion would seem to suggest this shortlist of suitable lenses:

80mm WF Ektar (my original thought)
80mm Xenotar
65mm Angulon (2 recommendations)
65mm Super Angulon
47mm Super Angulon
50mm Mamiya for the Mamiya Press

Thanks for all of the great advice. I will look for an 80mm WF Ektar or Xenotar, or a 65mm Angulon. From what you’ve said, and what I’ve read elsewhere, those seem like the best choices given my needs and my budget. I do shoot with a 6x9 roll film back but movements are not an issue.

Thank you,

Craig

[cblurton]

After our discussion, I went to Tsim Sha Tsui to see if I could find any of the lenses under discussion at a reasonable price. Hong Kong has an area in Tsim Sha Tsui which is located at the junction of Kimberly Road and Carnarvon Road in a building named Champagne Court that has several shops that sell vintage camera gear. My experience in the past has been that the prices there are much, much higher than the auction site even including shipping. After browsing around for an hour or so, I found two lenses that would work:

Xenotar 80/2.8
Super Angulon 65/8

After a bit of bargaining, the final price for each (at two different shops) was $3,800 HKD (about $490 USD). Both are in shutters that seem okay and the glass is clear with no scratches or cleaning marks.

That price seems high to me. Are these lenses worth that much? Of the two, I like the Xenotar because it is fast and I like the SA because it is wider. Aside from those considerations, is one significantly better than the other?

Thanks,

Craig

[Dan Fromm]

Craig, they are radically different lenses.

The Xenotar's main advantage is its speed. If you're going to be working in poor light, it would be preferable any lens with maximum aperture of f/8. Its been a while since I looked hard for one, but the asking price seems high. Alternatives are the 80/2.8 Planar and (no kidding) the 80/2.8 Noritar as sold for Graflex XL. Regardless of what other posters here assert, all of these lenses are normal lenses for 6x6 and none will give good image quality in 2x3's corners, especially wide open.

The 65/8 SA's big advantage is coverage. It will just cover 4x5, so offers ample movements on 2x3. The coverage is somewhat wasted on a 2x3 but it does mean that image quality will be good in 2x3's corners. Again, its been a while since I've shopped for a 65, but again I think the price asked is high, especially for an f/8 SA. An f/5.6 SA would probably be better for your purposes than an f/8.

If you buy either of these lenses, insist on "the right of return." Even if all 80/2.8 Xenotars and 65/8 SAs were super lenses when they left the factory, used ones can be horrible. I have a badly scratched 80/2.8 Xenotar in a badly gummed up Compur 0 that's about the worst lens I own. Don't feel sorry for me; it cost all of $US 20 and the shutter can be overhauled, so in effect I bought a good (after overhaul) Compur 0 for much less than the going rate.

Good luck, have fun,

Dan

Oh, yeah. Why not look on eBay?

[troublemaker]

Dan,
Certainly. 80mm 2.8 lenses like the Xenotar and Planar are most frequently found on the front of 6x6 cameras like the Rolleiflex and Hassy, and make great squares. But I ussually use a RH-10 back on my Century with the Xenotar, and have fine results. Same with the Heligon, which almost covered 6x9. Almost. I've read aplenty where folks suggest they'll cover that format, but it's wishful thinking. Not even stopped down.
Hee hee, I got my Xenotar, IIRC, for about $125, and it had a decent Century Graphic mounted to the back of it. Though it has a very small spot on the coating, it does great. Not as sharp as the Heligon, but pretty good, and makes a great knock around town lens (not that I knock them around).
I don't know about my f~8 SA lens yet. So far I like it, but it is a pain to focus on small GG. I tried a test with it on my 4x5. Ick! 6x9 lens as Schneider suggests. Nice thing for me, and this is why I am trying it out, is I can use rise and other moves on the Crown 23 where I can't bring the image back to center. Most of the f~8's I see mounted on cameras are on dedicated wide angle 6x9 bodies. I am going to take it to Utah with me next week so we'll see.

[glennfromwy]

I have a mint in the box 80/2.8 Xenotar that I use on a Pacemaker 23. It's in a modern Compur #1 shutter. Exceptionally fine example of this lens. The camera I use it on, oddly enough, already had the focus scale for this lens and the infinity stops were set accurately. The rangefinder works perfectly. I think I paid a premium price of 295.00 for the lens. The camera was in a lot of 5 that I bought sight unseen from a camera store that was closing in the Bay area. 25 bucks each for the cameras. All of them working cameras. A couple are very, very nice, including this one. Sometimes you just luck out. The only gripe I have is that the camera will not close with that rather large Xenotar on it.
_________________
Glenn

"Wyoming - Where everybody is somebody else's weirdo"

[troublemaker]

The #1 Compur has to be in just the right place for the Century to close, but I can leave the 49-55 step up on it.
I tried it on the little Pacemaker Crown and it wouldn't work on mine either.
Soo... I compared the two and see now that the Century, having a different back and bellows, allows the front standard farther back into the body, or so it appears. About a 1/4" looks like.
That's one reason I liked that Heligon; they're in the "0' size shutter.
Still arguing with myself about letting that go, but it was a perfect match for the XL body it was on and had a nice smooth focus ring and perfect RF. Felt obligated to keep it together when I sold it. Oh boy, listen to the conscientious one...

[cblurton]

From the comments, it seems pretty clear to me that the two lenses I found here are overpriced. That's typically the case for vintage camera gear in Hong Kong, for reasons that escape me. So, as Dan suggested, I'm watching the auction site to see if something more reasonably priced is offered.

Meanwhile, when my other two lenses come back from Panda Camera Repair I'll shoot some test rolls to learn how to use the camera better. I've already shot one roll with my 10" telephoto which is in barrel to make sure the focal plane shutter was working. It is, and the exposures look very good at every speed.

Meanwhile, I checked at our local 24 our photo place in Discovery Bay on Lantau Island, the part of Hong Kong where I live, and they only develop 35mm film, so my experiment with BW400CN turns out to be pointless. I will still need to hoof it over to Central on Hong Kong Island to get it developed.

Anyway, I appreciate all of the great advice. I enjoyed reading your comments and am appreciative of the wealth of knowledge, wisdom and experience available to me on Graflex.org. I am learning a lot.

Best wishes,

Craig

[cblurton]

Hi:

Sorry to trouble you again, but if you are familar with this lens I'd be grateful if you'd give me your views about it:

Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 80mm 2.8 Wollensak Alphax Shutter

It is currently on the auction site at a BIN of $100 USD. That's easily within my pocketbook's budget.

Craig

[glennfromwy]

Craig, that lens will cover 6X6. It is not a wide angle lens. I would guess it came off a TLR. Normal for your camera would be 101 to 105mm. The Tessars are still good lenses at reasonable prices.
_________________
Glenn

"Wyoming - Where everybody is somebody else's weirdo"

[cblurton]

Dear Glenn:

Thanks for the heads up. I might have made a big mistake without your advice. Just in case anyone wants to know, I went back to look at the 80mm Xenotar again and tried to bargain the shop owner down from $3,800 HKD. I made the mistake of saying I could get it on the auction site for a lot less. His response, "This isn't the United States you know!" I'm not sure what relevance that has to the discussion, but I'm not buying the lens at that price.

Best wishes,

Craig