Looking for superb WA

[Leszek Vogt]

While enjoying the snow outside the window....I'm dreaming about really good WA lens. More specifically a 75mm. I don't want to flip a coin on this, but out of what's available out there (Rodenstock, Schneider, Caltar, Fuji, Nikkor, etc) what would be my best choice and why ? I'm new to LF and all qualifying opinions would be considered. Can it be said that I couldn't go wrong with any of these
choices ? Also, are there better or equally good vendors besides KEH ? Thanks for your time.

Les

[evan clarke]

72 Xl......

[Fred Heming]

Zeiss Biogon 75mm

[Lachlan 717]

72 Xl......

+1

[Nathan Potter]

Schneider 80mm SSXL would be close enough in FL to consider. I have used both the Nikon mentioned and the SSXL. The SSXL has slightly higher sharpness and contrast than the regular 75 mm Nikon f/4.5 that I use a lot. You need to check for the haze problem on some versions, although most of those lenses have been corrected or replaced I think.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Noah A]

What are you shooting? If you're doing commercial architecture work you can'd do much better than the Schneider 72XL. But it's a big lens and requires a huge center filter. If you're doing landscapes or other work that doesn't require tons of movements, then it may be overkill.

I use a 75/4.5 Grandagon-N. It's very sharp and also quite compact. I use it for urban landscape work mostly, and some interiors, but not commercial architectural work. I'd recommend it for all but the most demanding situations (For which the larger image circle of the 72XL may be required).

[David Karp]

I guess it might depend on what you are going to use it for.

My choice was a 75mm f/4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon-N. If I was buying now, I would look for the 75mm f/4.5 Caltar II-N, which is the same lens, made by Rodenstock, and relabeled with the Caltar brand for Calumet. Same quality, lower price.

[Ari]

72 Xl......


+1

yes, yes; superb-ulous lens.
I nearly sold mine this week, luckily the fever passed.

[rdenney]

KEH has a pile of 75's right now. Nothing wrong with any of them. I'd prefer the f/5.6 (or f/4.5 in the case of Rodenstock) lenses over the f/8 lenses because of their superior coverage. The newer ones will be multicoated, also a nice thing. I see Fuji SWD, Schneider Super Angulon, and Rodenstock Grandagon (some marked Caltar II-N) models--all are excellent.

The 72XL is a newer and better design with more coverage, but it's also considerably more expensive than any of the 75's at KEH.

I haven't found any vendors better than KEH, but they have the better selection and the more informative website. B&H has a lot of used stuff, but at higher prices. Midwest Photo doesn't show all of what they have and you have to call them, but they know stuff. And there are camera stores that might on any given day have something. But if you have a hankering for a 75, KEH is the best game in town at the moment.

Rick "not usually seeing so many 75s at KEH" Denney

[chassis]

Consider a Schneider 58mm SA XL. I love this lens. I have used it for outdoor (nature/landscape) and indoor portraits very successfully. Yes, portraits. They are of the environmental type, and to my eye the effect is excellent. The 58mm SA XL is very sharp. The center filter is helpful, but not mandatory IMHO, depending on the subject.

[spkennedy3000]

72 XL - fantastic lens.

[Bruce Watson]

Schneider 80mm SSXL would be close enough in FL to consider. I have used both the Nikon mentioned and the SSXL. The SSXL has slightly higher sharpness and contrast than the regular 75 mm Nikon f/4.5 that I use a lot.

+1 for the 80 SSXL. One hell of a lens. And it's like 1/4 the weight of the others you are considering (I may be exaggerating somewhat ;-). If you're going to put it in your kit, your kit on your back, and hike up the mountain, weight matters. A lot. Just sayin'.

[Bob Salomon]

I guess it might depend on what you are going to use it for.

My choice was a 75mm f/4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon-N. If I was buying now, I would look for the 75mm f/4.5 Caltar II-N, which is the same lens, made by Rodenstock, and relabeled with the Caltar brand for Calumet. Same quality, lower price.

In case people have not noticed, Calumet no longer is listing Caltar lenses on their web site.

[rdenney]

In case people have not noticed, Calumet no longer is listing Caltar lenses on their web site.

It seems a reasonable assumption that Les was in the used market, given that he mentioned Fuji (no longer on the market), Nikon (no longer on the market), and the 75mm focal length (no longer on the market from one of the two remaining manufacturers listed).

But, Les, if you want to buy a new lens right at the 75mm focal length, the Rodenstock Grandagon is your only choice. Schneider replaced their 75/5.6 (and 65/5.6) Super Angulons with the in-between 72/5.6 Super Angulon XL. Nikon and Fuji are out of the large-format lens business, though some Fuji lenses might still be found as new old stock.

Rick "who has never bought, or been able to afford, a new large-format lens" Denney

[Leszek Vogt]

Thanks much for the enlightment. I think I'll stay away from the XL models due to cost. Adorama and Midwest have 75mm Nikkor F4.5....that is if anyone else is looking for one.

I think the 75mm Caltar II-N would be the best choice. I'm still not sure if I'm venturing into too wide of an angle....and the distortion is controlled pretty well within the lens. Does anyone have one or two pic samples of this lens ? Thanks.

Les

[rdenney]

I think the 75mm Caltar II-N would be the best choice. I'm still not sure if I'm venturing into too wide of an angle....and the distortion is controlled pretty well within the lens. Does anyone have one or two pic samples of this lens ?

You'll find it's about equivalent to a 21mm lens on a 24x36 camera, when used with 4x5. That is--very wide. But you won't notice how wide it is unless the photographer uses that width to bring some element of the scene very close so that it looms large in the picture. It is almost too wide for two-point perspectives in architectural interiors, however--the convergence to the perspective vanishing points can be rather extreme in a small room. One-point perspectives don't usually display as much of that tendency.

You would not be able to tell the difference between any of these lenses in a web display.

Distortion in nearly all modern large-format lenses is extremely well controlled. It's a byproduct of the near-symmetrical design. The symmetry automatically fixes a number of issues, including coma, much lateral color, and also distortion. The concept was an attempt to improve on the reversed-telephoto wide angles (i.e. retrofocus lenses like the Curtagon, Distagon, and Flektogon of the 1950ish vicinity) by putting two together aimed away from a central aperture. Doing that provided symmetry and lots of goodness flowed from that. The downside is that the lens's rear has to be a lot closer to the film, and the design is unsuitable for reflex cameras that use a mirror. And being that close to the film increases the shallowness of the angle at which the light is approaching the film, which causes more falloff. But these lenses are all designed to minimize that by projecting a very round aperture even at the extremes of coverage. Bottom line: They are all excellent for lateral color and distortion, and they all are designed to perform very well in terms of sharpness and contrast. But they are big, bulky, heavy, and you may need a center filter, especially with transparency film.

The Caltar II-N is a Rodenstock Grandagon--an excellent lens if in good condition.

Rick "noting that Sinar also rebranded Rodenstock Grandagons" Denney

[John Olsen]

I used to have a Schneider Super Angulon 65 mm, until some jerk stole it. I loved it for the extreme views it offered. See if you can find one - you'll have a great time with it.

[Leszek Vogt]

Thanks Rick and John.

Part of my confusion is that I have not used any of the WA lenses (in LF) and the table that I have, it gives me the reference that 75mm in LF equals 24mm in 35mm format. I guess I'll have to poke around the net some more. I'm more concerned as to the actual angle of view and less so with the milliliters. I'm quite comfortable (35mm equiv) with 23-26mm angle of view but if this (the 75mm lens) does not dovetail into what I need....then I may have to look for 80mm or some such. The thing is that I just want to do this once: have 3 quality optics .....and get on down the road enjoying photography.

Les

[rdenney]

Thanks Rick and John.

Part of my confusion is that I have not used any of the WA lenses (in LF) and the table that I have, it gives me the reference that 75mm in LF equals 24mm in 35mm format. I guess I'll have to poke around the net some more. I'm more concerned as to the actual angle of view and less so with the milliliters. I'm quite comfortable (35mm equiv) with 23-26mm angle of view but if this (the 75mm lens) does not dovetail into what I need....then I may have to look for 80mm or some such. The thing is that I just want to do this once: have 3 quality optics .....and get on down the road enjoying photography.

Les

Les, there are other considerations.

The 65/5.6 is wider than the 75, of course, but it also provides more limited movements, with an image circle of 170mm. The 72XL has a much larger image circle because its design has a wider angle of view (110 degrees, as I recall, versus 105 degrees for the f/5.6 Super Angulon), so it's coverage is even better than the 75.

With large-format, people often think lenses seem wider in use than their supposed equivalents in 35mm. That hasn't so much been the case for me, but it's worth pondering.

My widest lens for 4x5 is a 65, and the next lens up is a 90. If I need a 75, I just use the 65 and crop a bit--an advantage to having all that film area. If I had the 72XL, I'd never miss the 65. If I had a 75, I might never miss the 65. But I often find I prefer the 90, because its image circle is so large that I can make other apsects of the image work and just show a bit less subject. Having wide angle is not helpful if you lack the coverage needed for a camera movement that's critical to the image.

I think you are making a mistake by saying you'll just do this once. Give yourself a chance to learn. If you make a wrong choice on a used lens, just sell it and make a different choice. 1000 posts in a thread like this will not tell you as much about what might work for youo as a week's worth of experience with any of the lenses in question.

Rick "who has Super Angulons in 47, 65, 90, and 121" Denney

[Leszek Vogt]

Hey Rick,

Appreciate your input (as always). It's all pretty much an experiment for me, I mean at least at the present. So long the 'image circle' covers the WA 75mm view....I'm content. But, I'd be more content if I really have a visual clue....and for that I may have to rent this (specific) lens to make that determination....there seem to be no other way. Also, and I should qualify this upfront, I've never been a fan of "normal lens" as 50mm (35mm equiv)....so I'm not sure what I'll do with the 210mm that I currently own....it's a conundrum of my own design (v. subjective). I likely prefer 240, but that has to be tested (and seen).

Perhaps I'm applying the lens choices as I've done with the 35mm....and then I utilize whatever I have....without lusting for more eq. As you well know, one does not need dozen lenses to take wonderful photographs....too much weight to drag around anyway:eek: .

Getting there is not easy since the used market doesn't always offer what one may need/want, while the new offerings (irregardless how fantastic) carry these humongo costs.

I'm not trying to be stubborn about it, since I may end up proving to myself that 65mm may be the way to go. Yes, at the same time, I do realize that some subjects require certain type of cropping, but the intent for me is to use the full 4x5 frame as much as that's feasible.

Les

[Bob Salomon]

Why not go to Optechs in Seattle and see if they have a rental 75mm so you could try one?

[Alan Gales]

Rick is correct in saying don't think you'll do this just once. You kind of learn what you really want as you go. The good thing is if you buy right and later decide to sell you should get close to what you paid initially.

Try out the 210mm before you sell it. A 210 is similar to a 70mm on a 35mm camera, has lots of coverage and is very versatile. You can use it for portraits, landscape, still life's, etc. They are very popular with good reason!

The most important thing? Have fun! :)

[Bob Salomon]

Why not go to Optechs in Seattle and see if they have a rental 75mm so you could try one?

Or Glazers.

[Leszek Vogt]

Thanks Bob and Alan.

The 210 is in impeccable condition....so essentially it's begging me to use it. No issue with that. Yes, I'll likely check with Glazers and Optech to see if I can give the 75 a whirl. No point of buying and then having a remorse.

It's possible that I could adjust (and perhaps desire in the future) to something wider than 75, but for time being...well, I'll just deal with what I (think) I know.

Les

[hiend61]

The Biogon 75mm is a very sharp lens wide open. Designed for aerial photography at full aperture. The image circle just covers 4x5 with no movements. I don´t think it is a good 4x5 option because the lack of movement capabilities and it is insanely priced.
There are much better options in Rodenstock, Schneider, Nikon or Fuji.