Anyone have any experience with the various 65mm out there? Any ones I should a void? Any thoughts on differences between Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor, Caltar , ect.?
Printable View
Anyone have any experience with the various 65mm out there? Any ones I should a void? Any thoughts on differences between Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor, Caltar , ect.?
I've got the older Schneider 65 f8 Super Angulon. If there is a drawback with this lens, it is the very small image circle. The lens covers 4X5 but without a lot of room, and movements, to spare. But when I look at the image circle with the more modern 65s or even 75s I'm not seeing all that larger an image circle anyway. I guess if I had a bag of money I'd look very hard at the new 72mm SA, just for the image circle.
The advantages of my 65 are that it's cheap, sharp and very very small.
My 65 Nikor SW covers very well..I very seldom bother using a center filter; it's an f4(5.6??). I paid $550 for it used, in a Copal 0..and I've seen similiar lenses @ around the same price. Check with B&H
I use a 65mm f/4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon that is one generation back from the current version and am very happy with the sharpness and coverage. I am still debating about whether or not to get the center filter. The Caltar II wide angles are Grandagons in all but name. My testing of the Caltar II 90mm f/4.5 against the Rodenstock version showed no difference. Only when necessary do I use the 0.45 Heliopan CWF with this lens
Jack Dykinga until recently shot with the Nikkor 65mm and in a phone conversation last year he told me he really liked it.