75mm lens for 5x7?

[Ramiro Elena]

I recently made me a box camera around a 5x7 back and a Schneider Super Angulon 75mm f5,6. I knew it would clip the corners or be soft but I wanted to give it a try anyway.

I am now thinking it would be nice to have another 75mm with a larger CI. I don't mind dark corners but I seem to be getting dark edges which I don't quite like.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7315/12769596014_6d5d01eecf_z.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/kspw1w)

A vintage shutterless lens would work just fine. I am stopping down to f45 anyway. It would have to be 75mm since I am not willing to mod the box. Any ideas for such a lens?

[Roger Hesketh]

Their does not seem to be much choice at 75 mm. A Nikkor 75mm SW has an image circle of 200mm diameter as opposed to your SA's of 198mm. The diagonal of 5x7 is 208mm.

One thing you might consider is changing your film holder and film size. 13cmx18cm is slightly bigger one way and smaller the other. The aspect is slightly different so that might help. Half plate film is also still available. The film size is not that much smaller being 6.5" x 4.75" and your 75mm SA will cover that nicely. The holders have the same external dimensions as 5x7 ones and are 150mm wide. A figure derived from the Gandolfi size for Half plate film holders.

The holders will fit your camera back.

I just had a quick look and found these http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Dark-Slide-for-Film-Half-Plate-/161235599552?pt=UK_Photography_Film_Backs_Holders&hash=item258a6400c0

I have no connection with the seller.

When you buy a 5x7 camera. You are buying a multi format camera as it is capable for use with 5x7, 13x18 and Half plate without modification. Similarly 4x5 and 9x12 holders also have the same external dimensions.

[Ramiro Elena]

That sounds like a very good idea and I like the aspect ratio better. Not sure if finding film will be any easy or economic.

[Roger Hesketh]

An inexpensive source for half plate film. http://www.lumiere-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=1670

Also available on Ilfords ULF and Unusual sizes run. http://www.ag-photographic.co.uk/hp5-475x65-half-plate-sheet-film-25-2923-p.asp

Ouch!!!

[Andrew Plume]

great work, again, Ramiro

from my knowledge, vintage shutterless barrel lenses do not appear in the 75mm fl

Roger has come up with exactly what I was intending to suggest, reduce the size to say 5 x 6 or 5 x 6 1/2, in that way you can still use the same set up, and crop the neg. After all (and as I've said on here before), one Paul Strand modified his 5 x 7 Graflex to 5 x 6 although he wasn't shooting as wide as this

regards

andrew

[vinny]

72mm sa xl

[Professional]

Yes, 72mm has greater IC than 75mm and it is vert slightly wider, that is why i bought 72mm first place, just i have to find a lens on the other side, LONG, not sure if it should be 240/250 or 300 or 210.

I feel if i got used to 4x5 in the future then should i try 5x7 or go direct to 8x10?

[RawheaD]

Yeah, 72XL and recess the lens by 3mm somehow?

The specs for Nikkor SW 75 @ 200mm seems to be at F16 so you might actually get a bit bigger stopped down further.

[8x10 user]

The grandagon N 4.5 has a slightly larger image circle then the 75mm SA, also there is less light falloff due to "pupil distortion". The 72XL of course has even more coverage but you might need a center filter.

[Ramiro Elena]

The 72mm would be a nice solution but I am not willing to spend that much cash. I am shooting the the 75mm at f45 and still get a pronounced fall off. I can live with the dark corners, it's a few millimeters anyway. The fall off makes the sides very dense.
I think I will go with the half plate solution.
I'll report back with images when I get the parts.

[Carsten Wolff]

I occasionally use a 75mm f/4.5 SW-Nikkor on my 5x7". No movements to speak of of course, but it handles 5x7" with good corners at f22.
I imagine you're asking because you only contact print/scan and really want the full neg for some reason, right? :)

[Ramiro Elena]

I don't crop Carsten. It is just my thing, I don't like it. I forgot about the Nikkor... hmmm

[Bernice Loui]

The ideal solution would be the Schneider 72mm XL with a center filter.. Yes it does cover 5x7 / 13x18cm with a very tiny amount of movement. I have one, and have yet to use it much since new.

Been down the road of this focal length for 5x7 before trying Schneider, Rodenstock and Nikkor they all don't quite cover properly and should have a matching center filter to correct for the inherent light fall off.

Since cropping is not an option, the choice is to use the 72mm XL and ideally with the matching center filter.. and expensive solution but one that will meet your needs and expectations.


Bernice




I don't crop Carsten. It is just my thing, I don't like it. I forgot about the Nikkor... hmmm

[Ramiro Elena]

Agreed, but it'll sure be a weird match for a cheap box that can't even focus :D
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7358/12683980744_7d3566b6d3_c.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/kjQHzb)

[DolphinDan]

Hi Ramiro,

I used the Nikon NIKON-SW 75mm f4.5 @ f22 when shooting 5x7 and got some vignetting *when using movements*. If you do not use movements, or possibly stop down beyond f22, then this lens should cover 5x7. I would try the lens provided that you could return it if it does not work out for you.

Namaste
Daniel

[8x10 user]

Of course no 75mm lens has more coverage then the Gorez Hypergon.

[Michael Roberts]

Another option, inexpensive, is a 90mm Extreme Wide Angle 12.5 Raptar. No need to modify the box, just add 15mm to the lens board.

[Ramiro Elena]

That idea I like a lot. The 90mm Extreme Wide Angle is in my saved searches already.



Another option, inexpensive, is a 90mm Extreme Wide Angle 12.5 Raptar. No need to modify the box, just add 15mm to the lens board.

[Roger Hesketh]

At last somebody has demonstrated an ability to think outside the box and suggest an elegant solution to the problem. Pun intended. Their was actually a commercially available 5x7 fixed focus box camera made by Burke and James utilizing a Series IIIa f12.5 EWA Wollensak lens. They however conservatively utilised the longer 4 and 5/16 inch version of the lens sold by Wollensak for use on 5x7 whilst allowing lots of movement.

I have one. Prompted by this thread I dug it out last night and tried unsuccessfully to coax the Betax 2 shutter the lens is mounted in to operate at more than one speed.

The OP has really rather boxed himself into a potentially expensive corner by trying to go quite so wide. I understand why. He had the lens, but that job really calls for a lens with an angular coverage of 115 degrees. As we have seen their are very few options at that focal length and all expensive.

Michael your simple but inspired solution opens up all sorts of other possibilities in terms of vintage and less expensive glass.These are still very wide. If you go a 1/4 of an inch longer to 82 mm a Cooke series VIIb or it's Dallmeyer equivalent will not quite cover but the lens design does not appear to mechanically vignette the image. They are 100 degree lenses really. They are however relatively inexpensive and if lucky can be had for the price of a good meal. At the same focal length a Watson Wide angle Holos will cover as it is a lens which covers an Angular field of 110 degrees. I do not have a 5x7 camera that will allow a lens that short to be focused so I can not say from experience it will cover but it's bigger brother at 4.6 inch (114mm) will cover 8x10 so it is likely.


Another option, inexpensive, is a 90mm Extreme Wide Angle 12.5 Raptar. No need to modify the box, just add 15mm to the lens board.

[Ramiro Elena]

Roger, I cannot thank you enough for all your insight. Both of your suggestions are what I was looking for.

[Ramiro Elena]

I found a thread in the forum that mentions another interesting lens (thanks Garret). The Extreme Wide angle Periscope #1. It is 2.9''FL and covers 5x7.
http://www.pce.net/idag/Gray%20Periscope%20lenses%201896.JPG

[Roger Hesketh]

It was not my suggestion it was Michael's. Very grateful to you too, but for you I would not have found that WP film. Thank you. But what I am even more grateful to you for is facilitating me to have an idea for a fixed focus camera well actually two EWA fixed focus cameras that I would not have had without yours and Michael's help. It got me thinking how to make maximum use of the wide angle coverage of the Watson Wide angle Holos lenses that I have. Seems a shame to have lenses with that wide a coverage and not utilize it to the full.

Of course the solution is a fixed focus camera and to set the focus of the lens by shimming it in the way that Michael suggests. I have three of those lenses a 3 1/4 inch which could be used on 5x7 . I also have a 4.2 inch and a 4.6 inch version. The 4.6 inch covers 8x10 not sure about the 4.2inch one I have not got an 8x10 camera that will focus that close. Now I also have two Graflex accessory focal plane shutters an 8x10 inch one and a 5x7 one . The shutters can make up the body of the camera. The 8x10 and 5x7 backs to fit them I already have. So in effect all I need to do is to make a lensboard to fit the front of the shutter with a cone shaped shim to get the lens to the correct distance for hyperfocal focusing at say f11. The maximum usable aperture of the lens. A Linhof finder could be mounted to the top of the shutter as a view finder and a bubble level fitted their too to complete the set up.

The best of it is it will only cost me a bit of plywood which I already have to do it.Thank you for helping me to have the idea. BTW the shutter cost me £60 the lens less than £30 and I managed to snag the Linhof finder at a Car boot sale last year for £3.50. Happy days.


Roger, I cannot thank you enough for all your insight. Both of your suggestions are what I was looking for.

[Ramiro Elena]

I've place an ad (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?111569-WTB-RD-Gray-Extreme-Angle-Periscope&p=1115219#post1115219) in the For Sale section for a Extreme Wide Angle Periscope although it looks like it is going to be a difficult lens to find. I wouldn't mind having the EWA Raptar either but those are also rare. You sure have quite a nice collection of "things" Roger.

One thing I didn't think of when building the 5x7 box is how accurate you need to be with measurements. My box is three millimeters short and had to add spacers to get it to focus at infinity. I actually meant to have it focus at 9 feet.
I have a Graphic back I will use to make a 4x5 fixed focus with a 65mm Sinaron W. The one thing I love about this box is how fast you can shoot since you don't need to focus or deal with movements. The whole set up is very light too.
Something I wanted to add to the camera was a Mamiya helicoid from a Super 23 but neither lens fits inside it.

[Michael Roberts]

Ramiro,
Galli's got the Wolly for sale now for $50. It's not pristine, but the shutter works....

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?111275-4-Shutters-4-Prices-Some-with-usable-glass!-90mm-Ex-WA!-83mm-Velo-II

[Roger Hesketh]

The haze in between the elements is probably quite easy to get rid of.The lens consists of two air spaced cemented doublets either side of the stop and I think the front group will unscrew quite easily. The lens design is very similar to that of the Cooke Series XV Convertible used by AA and others to good effect. I believe in the early days Wollensak or the Rochester lens company who originated the design sold it or the unstretched non wide angle version, the Royal Anastigmat, as a convertible. I believe the lens was designed by Ernst Gundlach of Turner Reich fame.

Edit Correction Just checked on mine. If you unscrew the front part of the lens from the shutter you can then easily unscrew the the rear group of cemented elements to gain access to demist the air space.

[Ramiro Elena]

Thanks Michael, I had seen that but:

the glass in this is awful. It'll make nice pictures, but it's cloudy and even has some scratches.



Ramiro,
Galli's got the Wolly for sale now for $50. It's not pristine, but the shutter works....

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?111275-4-Shutters-4-Prices-Some-with-usable-glass!-90mm-Ex-WA!-83mm-Velo-II

[mdarnton]

Ramiro, I love what you're doing with your box camera. I recently bought a 90/5.6 Super Angulon with the idea of doing something similar in 5x7, utilizing the back from my 5x7 camera and a finder from my Leica, but was going to make a calibrated folded wedge focus system for it: http://www.builderbill-diy-help.com/low-tech.html

[Ramiro Elena]

That's more advanced than what I am doing. Having fixed focus makes things a lot more simple both in the making of the camera and the process of photographing.
Now, one problem I have ran into is hyperfocal calculation.
I have used a formula to calculate the distance from the flange to film that gives me 77,7mm. Now the box I built ended up being 84mm and it could even be a couple millimeters thicker to allow closer focussing.

The formula:
Format = 5x7
Focal length = 75mm
ƒ stop = 22
Hyperfocal distance for this format and ƒ stop = 2130mm

2130mm x 75mm / 2130mm - 75mm = 77,7mm

[Roger Hesketh]

Ramiro I am just doing he same thing. Working out were to place the lens on this fixed focus camera this thread and your efforts have inspired.

Hyperfocal distance is related to the lens focal length and the aperture used. The format does not matter at all. I am not clever like you so I will not even try to work it out. Looking at some hyperfocal distance tables for a 75mm lens at f22 the figure I see is 3.41m. (At f16 it is 4.70m, at f32 it is 2.35m)

With your lens focused at 3.41m and the lens set at f22 your depth of field, the field of acceptable focus, will extend from infinity back to half that hyperfocal distance that the lens is focused at. So everything from 1.7m to infinity will be in acceptable focus . That is assuming a circle of confusion of 1/1000 of the focal length of the lens. For a circle of confusion of 1/1500 of the focal length of the lens multiply the hyperfocal distance by 1.5 for 1/2000 of the focal length multiply by 2.

[Roger Hesketh]

What I intend to do is work out the hyperfocal distnce I am going to use. Use a tape measure to measure to a brick wall that distance away. I am then going to set a camera on a tripod with the lens mounted on it. Any old camera will do. Focus on the brick wall with the widest aperture available. Then I will measure the extension of the lens. That figure I will use to determine the width of my box. I would be happy to hear any better suggestions.

I suspect because of the relatively short focal length lens required. Your 5x7 camera is hitting the sweet spot as far as fixed lens,hyperfocal distance focused cameras is concerned. Everything in acceptable focus from 1.7m to infinity is not bad at f22.
Roger

[Ramiro Elena]

Roger, I am really ignorant of equations and math in general. All I did was find an online calculator (http://www.mountainstorm.com/hyperfocal.html) for the hyperfocal distance and apply the formula.
It is however interesting that your result for hyperfocal at ƒ22 with a 75mm focal length is 3410mm. The online calculator gives 2130mm. This results in a difference of 1,5cm in body width on the short side.
I am shooting at f45 anyway but it bothers me not to be able to calculate properly the size of the box.

[Roger Hesketh]

It depends what circle of confusion size you choose to use what the hyperfocal distance comes to. The figures I quoted were from the hyperfocal distance tables found in the Focal Encyclopedia of photography. The designers of the online calculator must have used a different circle of confusion size. If you PM me your email address I will scan them and send them to you if you like but I believe I have already given you all he relevant info that is to be gleaned from them. The rest of the table refers to other focal lengths of lens.

I would not know were to begin in terms of calculating the extension required That is why I intend to measure it with a steel rule. Apart from anything else how the lens focuses and the amount of extension required will depend on where the lenses nodal points are located and those differ from lens to lens. Calculating the extension even if I knew how would not take that into account. So it is brick wall, tape measure and steel rule for me.

[Nicolasllasera]

I was planning on brick wall and measuring extension. Just like you Roger.

Im planning to do it with a Nikkor SW 120mm f8. Could you PM me the hyperfocal distance? Thanks.

[coisasdavida]

It seems I am too late, but here is my suggestion: a Protar 90mm f/18 (maybe a coated Bausch and Lomb example).
A while back I made this box camera for myself http://refotografia.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/486/
I took the box apart for something that I never finished, but I remember being very happy with the corner to corner sharpness.

[Ramiro Elena]

Nice Guilherme! Was it hard to compose at f18? I am used to bright lenses.
Roger, I think your approach makes more sense. I started chopping wood for the 4x5 fixed focus today and decided to go with the 75mm SA instead of the 65mm Sinaron. As you say format doesn't make a difference. I put the lens on my Toyo and got the same width box as for the 5x7 (84mm). The online calculator does throw different values depending on which format you choose though...
We should start a thread in the DIY section with our progress and findings.

[Roger Hesketh]

Ramiro if you are going to use the same lens why not save yourself some work and just make a reducing back for your fine and already made 5x7 camera. That is the approach I intend to use myself. The Graflex shutter I am using as the basis for a box to make my camera is the standard Kodak 2D size, also used by Burke and James and others. I have a 10x8 B&J camera and am fortunate to already have a series of reducing backs for it. The shutter and the backs are used on that camera.

Those backs will also be used on my fixed focus camera.
The Burke and James camera is great providing you do not have to take it anywhere. I have a very lightweight and portable 10x12 camera I have just managed to repair ,the bellows had fallen apart, because of that the camera cost me £60.

For 10x8 field use I am making a reducing back to 10x8 for that 10x12 camera. A reducing back that will also allow me to use the Graflex shutter on it. My intention is that the reducing back for the 10x12 camera will also serve as the front panel for the fixed focus camera with a detachable lens panel on the front incorporating a cone to hold the lens at the correct distance from the film plane.

So using the same camera with different backs. With the 4.6 inch lens. It will be Ultra wide on 10x8. Wide on 5x7 and moderately wide on 4x5. I do suspect that with this lens combination whole plate format will work best and I can see me building a whole plate reducing back for it.

As far as starting a new thread in the DIY section charting our experiences is concerned. I am not so sure. It is alright for you you are clearly a talented and skilled man. As far as camera making / repairing and me is concerned I suspect it is like sausage making and lawmaking something best done behind closed doors. I don't even like to show my photographs. Besides which I just tried to upload a snap illustrating today's progress and the upload failed.

[Ramiro Elena]

Roger, the idea was to use parts at hand and I don't have reducing backs. I precisely got the 5x7 back for this project. The other back I have is a Graphic back from a Speed Graphic. I suddenly remembered I don't like the 65mm in 4x5 format. You can almost see your feet in the picture.
I am also thinking of ways to carry a large format camera on family trips without having to drag heavy expensive cameras.
I started building a box for the 4x5 but got discouraged. It's coming out awful. I should go out and shoot with the 5x7 instead.

[coisasdavida]

Was it hard to compose at f18?

Even with proper shade it is very complicated to see anything, specially in the corners. With sunlight I used to go by the brightest objects and figure it out in my mind rather than on the groundglass. Indoors I would not use the groundglass at all. Worked for me.

[Michael Roberts]

Ramiro,
I have both 4x5 and 5x7 kits, put together on the cheap, just for the kind of casual travel you are talking about. The 4x5 is a 1947 Crown Graphic I got for $15; body only; holy bellows; copper oxide blisters under the leather like crazy--looked like ostrich skin. The camera, stripped (and mahogany sanded and refinished), weighs just 3lbs. It lives in a padded, Igloo lunch cooler case, 11x9x4 inches. A 127mm Ektar stays on the camera. In the top compartment I have a 90mm Optar, a 152mm Ektar, a 203mm Ektar, and a 305mm Raptar. All are on 3 and 3/32 in. wooden lens boards (I modified the CG to accept wooden boards). One nice thing about the CG is the wire frame viewer for shooting handheld. I only have the Graphic back, but that's fine with me.

I recently decided 4x5 is just too small, so I've been collecting cheap vintage 5x7s. So, I now have a similar 5x7 kit with a 90mm EXWA Raptar, 152 and 170 Kodak Anastigmats ($25-30 each), a 203mm Optar, and I can pull in the 305 from the 4x5 kit. I got the 5x7 free from a forum member, but paid for a new bellows. It's got a gg, and I am working on a viewfinder now for handheld. The camera only weighs 2lbs and has a 13.5 inch extension. Again, everything fits in a lunch cooler bag along with 5 5x7 filmholders.

[coisasdavida]

Michael, I like the way you think.

[Ramiro Elena]

Michael, that's quite the set up!
I went ahead and got the 90mm Wollensak EXWA from Jim. I made a 10mm thick lens board and went out to test it. For some reason I was under the impression that it did cover stopped down. Not even close. Does your 90mm Raptar cover Michael? I also have a 90mm f6.8 Wollensak Raptar that looks very similar. I wonder what the difference is between the two.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7354/13082190464_7b1b99f50e_z.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/kW2Ds1)

[Ramiro Elena]

Here's proof.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3005/13089294425_2d7379a1ab_c.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/kWE4d6)

It looks as if I may have missed calculated the hyperfocal. It seems it is focussing too close leaving the background a little off.

[Jim Galli]

Here's proof.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3005/13089294425_2d7379a1ab_c.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/kWE4d6)

It looks as if I may have missed calculated the hyperfocal. It seems it is focussing too close leaving the background a little off.

Wouldn't even cover 6X17. Bummer.

[Regular Rod]

I recently made me a box camera around a 5x7 back and a Schneider Super Angulon 75mm f5,6. I knew it would clip the corners or be soft but I wanted to give it a try anyway.

I am now thinking it would be nice to have another 75mm with a larger CI. I don't mind dark corners but I seem to be getting dark edges which I don't quite like.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7315/12769596014_6d5d01eecf_z.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/kspw1w)

A vintage shutterless lens would work just fine. I am stopping down to f45 anyway. It would have to be 75mm since I am not willing to mod the box. Any ideas for such a lens?

There you go! Nikkor SW has the right image circle if you are using f45. The 200mm image circle given is at f16 http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF5x7in.html

RR

[Carsten Wolff]

Wouldn't even cover 6X17. Bummer.
Indeed... I am actually a bit surprised by that. You have made sure that the thick additional lens board is not interfering with the light path, I guess. I have 104mm and 108mm ExWA and W.F. Raptars (yes, they seem different designs); both of those cover 5x7" with relative ease. OK, there is a significant focal length difference between your 3 1/2" and my 4 1/4" long lenses....However, my old 90mm plain Angulon of similar design does cover 5x7" stopped down - if only just. If you can go to 100mm: Kodak's WF Ektar is said to cover; Another W.A. lens that may cover is the 90mm Aristostigmat. ...There is a pattern there: Most, if not all of these older w.a. lenses are Double Gauss designs, I think. Its an offset of course: Size and price vs. coverage. Optically, they of course vary, but can be very good.

[Ramiro Elena]

You have made sure that the thick additional lens board is not interfering with the light path, I guess.

The darkening in the lower half does look like mechanical vignetting Carsten. I'll look that up. The Wollensaks 4 1/4 are meant to cover 5x7 according to Wollensak's brochures.

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/img/info/wollensak_5/wollensak_5_04.jpg

[Jim Noel]

The edges of the image look more like the thick lens board is blocking rather than image circle being too small. My EWA Wolly covers 5x7 Deardorff with no problem.

[Roger Hesketh]

I checked my 90mm EWA Wollensak. It does cover 5x7 too. The 90mm whilst sold as a 4x5 lens will at smaller stops cover 5x7. Wollensak sold them to do just that. Yours will too. If it did not somebody a long time before now would have sent it back to Wollensak to get their money back. The fact that the lens is out there would suggest that at least the original owners found that the lens suited their purpose.

[Ramiro Elena]

I looked at the lens board and it isn't that thick. I will route the back to make it thinner on the inside tomorrow. It is good to hear other user/owners experience with it.

[coisasdavida]

A friend once told me what he would do to find either what was vignetting the image or what was the source of reflections in still life photography. He used a laser pointer directly to the ground glass making a bright spot that the lens would project towards what he was photographing, moving it around the problem area in the image he could see the red light at the source of the problem.
You could try this in front of a white wall and see what you get from moving the laser pointer towards the corner of the ground glass, when does light stop to shine through the lens, if it happens because of the lens board, because of the front lip of the front group in the lens.
A few years back, in order to use a lens salvaged from inside a scanner I filed the front lip of the lens back to allow for a bigger circle of ilumination.

[Ramiro Elena]

Thanks Guilherme. I might try that if I find a laser pointer. :)

[Mark Sawyer]

A friend once told me what he would do to find either what was vignetting the image or what was the source of reflections in still life photography. He used a laser pointer directly to the ground glass...

If you're dealing with mechanical vignetting, it's easiest to take the lens off the camera, open the shutter and look though it from the rear at an angle and see what surface is blocking the light path.

[Michael Roberts]

Does your 90mm Raptar cover Michael?

yes, mine covers 5x7 wide open (f12.5).

michael

[ImSoNegative]

I know this is an old thread but today just for sh&ts and giggles I tried my grandagon 75mm (not the N version but it is multicoated) on my 5x7 rittreck view, stopped down to f32 just to be on the safe side, took the shot and developed the film tonight, I couldn't believe it, sharp from corner to corner, damn talk about wide angle..:eek:

[djdister]

I know this is an old thread but today just for sh&ts and giggles I tried my grandagon 75mm (not the N version but it is multicoated) on my 5x7 rittreck view, stopped down to f32 just to be on the safe side, took the shot and developed the film tonight, I couldn't believe it, sharp from corner to corner, damn talk about wide angle..:eek:

Good to know! I've been wondering if I could find a 75mm lens that would work for 4x5 and 5x7...

[Ramiro Elena]

Let's see the pics! :D

[Willie]

Keep watching for a 72 XL. Someone will be having a fire sale on one before too long.

[Willie]

On your light falloff - that is what happens with these wider lenses. Graduated/central neutral density filters will take care of it for you.

[Corran]

Keep watching for a 72 XL. Someone will be having a fire sale on one before too long.

There's been one or two at ridiculous prices on eBay, for some reason. Maybe people just can't afford stuff. I picked one up for 1/3 what the last one sold for here on the classifieds. It was mint...

[ImSoNegative]

the pic, 75mm grandagon non N version at f32

[ImSoNegative]

not sure why the vertical one showed up

[jnantz]

The edges of the image look more like the thick lens board is blocking rather than image circle being too small. My EWA Wolly covers 5x7 Deardorff with no problem.

the guy i bought mine from used it on his 5x7 too, covered with no problems ... ( 3 1/2" exwa f12 ) ..

[Tracy Storer]

I used to have a B&L Zeiss Series V Protar, 86mm, with a little nudge out for hyperfocal it could do nicely. At infinity it's 103 degrees corner to corner on 5"x7".
It's the Sereis V N0. 1, intended for 4.25" x 6.5" (half-plate) but "covers 5x8 with small stops"