Schneider Super-Symmar 80/4.5 XL - NOT sharp???

Getting back into 4x5 and I have just purchased my first lens, a new Schneider Kreuznach Super-Symmar 4.5/80 XL 105 degree Aspheric MC lens - expensive bugger by my budget standards!

Within a week of purchasing it I have been told by two separate Schneider dealers that the 80 XL is not a sharp lens if used below f8! Fortunately, if true the dealer I purchased the lens from and I agreed to a return if I don't like it.

That was a surprise to hear!

Does anyone have the 80XL that can confirm or deny these dealer claims?

I shoot landscape with slow speed B&W films and then drum scan at 8,000 res - I need very wide aperatures to get the low light images that I enjoy and I was please to find an f4.5 lens! But if the f4.5 is of no use, then the lens goes back.

I won't have my film test done for a couple of weeks to be able to run my own testing, and I want to return the lens if it is not sharp.

Your guidance is appreciated.
Jack

Regardless of what anyone has to say about this, wouldn't you want to test your particular lens and find out how it performs ? That would take care of sample-to-sample variations, as well as give you first hand knowledge. Just a thought, and hope it helps.

Regards,

Phony,

Yes, your thought is valid but as I explained in my posting, it will be several weeks before I'm set up to be able to run a critical film/resolution test.

Now, I've been out of the LF world for 15 years and I'm not up to date with what is considered excellent glass and what isn't.

IF not being sharp below f11 is a know trait of the 80XL, I would have no awareness of it due to my absense from the scene but members here would.

Thus the reason for my asking for help - ie: If I purchased a lens with a forum known trait than back it goes and the next time I ask forum members for their suggestions first.

When the first dealer mentioned the trait, I was surprised but figured I'd wait and test it. When the second dealer mentioned it last night in conversation, I felt there may be merit to the comment.

Jack

Jack,

I hope you don't call me phony as well, because what I offer is not as an expert.

I think virtually all current production LF lenses are extremely sharp. However most photographers will generally shoot stopped down at least 2 to 3 f stops. The circle of confusion and color correction improves with any lens at smaller f stops. The best designs in optics are "compromises" balancing the entire color spectrum and there is no such thing in this world as a "perfect" lens.

In addition all lenses have light fall off due to geometry of how far from the central axis the light ray path is. Add to this that at wide open apertures, there is often mechanical interference at the outer edges of the image circle which further reduces the amount of light out there, and you may want to start using a central grad filter.

The above are some reasons for not shooting at full aperture, especially with very wide angle lenses.

I tend to think of fast wide angle lenses as providing me with a much brighter image for focusing purposes. Otherwise, I would be glad to carrying much slower and lighter lenses in my kit.

Other than that, if you don't like the 80 XL, which I would love to have for it's extreme coverage. What else would you buy???

As Wilbur pointed out, the geometry of lens design ends with a lens with an optimum aperture. While someone with more knowledge can flesh this out, the optimum aperture is generally two stops down from wide open. It's my recollection there is usually only one and for example, in process lenses, its f22. Most others are f16. I suppose this brings up the other question, what is "sharp?" I agree with Wilbur you need to find out for yourself. As a side note I'd be interested to know if the two dealers know the lens is "not sharp" by testing or talking. Fortunately you can test to see if it meets your needs and if not, return it. Good luck.

Mike

Schneider had some QC problems in the first production run of these lenses but that was around 5 years ago. No one has reported any problems since.

I can't imagine there is any lens that will shoot as sharp at f8 as it will at f16 or f22. The other lens that has a great reputation near your focal length is the Nikkor-SW 90mm f8. It's a great lens, but some complain about trouble focusing at f8 and of course it really comes in to it's best performance at f22.

If the Schneider 80mm doesn't work for you, then I'd say you're out of luck.

-Ben

Is "not sharp" a misnomer of language or misplaced euphanism for out of focus? ie limited depth of field?

Opps, Sorry Phong, old fingers and a weak mind here!
I have my moments of brilliance, that was not one of them.

Jack

You are at the mercy (or lack thereof) of the accuracy of your filmholders tolerances, as well as those of the filmback itself. Furthermore, film can have a tendency to rest slightly above its assumed plane of focus. There are ways in which camera manufacturers can take some of this into account, but you still should probably assume that while photographing at wide open or near-wide open apertures, even with a "theoretically perfect" optic, at least with respect to your wanting a specific plane to come into focus, you will experience some inconsistencies into your results.

Keeping the above in mind, here's what I suggest. Tape some newspapers flat to a wall, and photograph this at a wide aperture, flat-on, then take a second photo of this newsprint, but from a slightly oblique angle, noting as you do where your zone of good focus should be from the text on the newsprint, and see if this corresponds with your actual results. The second photo will tell you something about the resolving power of your lens in a given location, as well as the "accuracy" of focus, while the first photo, assuming you have this accuracy, will tell you about edge to edge sharpness.

If you do this test or something similar, I'd be very curious to know the results. Good luck!