[LargeFormat] Ultragon 210mm vs 250mm WF Ektar

[Clive Warren]

At 05:38 23/12/2002 -0800, tripspud wrote:
>Hi Clive,
>
>      My WF Ektar 190mm in it's Ilex No.4 shutter on a board with
>cap weighs 635 grams, the WF Ektar 250mm probably even more.
>My WF Ektar 135mm weighs almost half, set up similar at
>335 grams.
>
>      I still want to get a 250mm lens for 5x7, but maybe the
>WF Ektar is too much weight.  For portraits and outdoors
>the coverage issue is not that demanding for that focal length.
>There are a lot of other choices.
>
>Cheers,
>Rich Lahrson
snip

>Clive Warren wrote:
>>
>>However if we start to talk about the "look and feel" of images shot with a
>>modern lens and those shot with a classic older lens then that would be a
>>different matter.......

Rich,

Just weighed the 250mmWF Ektar - 1031 grams - that's 2 pounds 4.4 ounces in 
real money without the lens cap!.

So the additional weight is significant. What is harder to measure is the 
quality of the resulting image and whether this is the look and feel that 
you want and like for your work. The 250mm WF Ektar is overkill for the 
5x7. You would probably like the 12" Commercial Ektar as an alternative - 
601grams with caps and a #4 Ilex shutter for a similar look and feel.

There are many modern alternatives for 5x7 - plenty of options in the 
G-Claron and Gerogon range around the 250mm focal length.

Cheers,
            Clive