Three lens backpacking set 90mm, 240mm, and...?

[Eric Leppanen]

My lightweight 4x5 lens set is the same as Harley's: SS80XL, Sironar-S 150, Fuji 240A. I preferred the 150 because my particular shooting style uses normal lenses quite a bit, and also because my full lens set also includes a SS110XL. A nice thing about these lenses is that, while reasonably small and lightweight, they all have a decent amount of coverage. If I owned a 90 instead of an 80, I still would prefer a 150 because it's roughly midway between the 90 and 240, and because I like simply that focal length. Of course YMMV.

I do sorta regret not buying one of Kerry's ultra-light 150 Germinar-W's earlier this year, though...

[Ole Tjugen]

I have to confess that my "lightweight kit" includes two 150mm lenses!

There's a 150mm Apo-Lanthar which is just too good to leave behind, and a Germinar-W since it doesn't add much weight.

Add to that a 90/8 Super Angulon, a 121/6.3 Leimeyr Wide-angle Anastigmat, a 210/6.1 Xenar, and possibly a longer one (355 G-Claron) and a shorter one (65/8 Ilex wide angle).

[Eric James]

My three-lens set consist of a 90mm, a 240mm...and a 150mm; I agree with CXC that going long is desirable - but I would split the differance if your bellows can't focus a lens LONGER than 300mm at an appreciably-close distance. I like Eric L's spacing better than my 90 150 240, but the 80mm is over 2K with USA warranty, and I would advise staying clear of used 80mms with all the bad press they've received here and elsewhere (re: early versions soft wide open, and later version hazing over).

[David Rees]

Consider a Schneider 120mm APO Symmar, esp. the L version. This has an image circle of 189mm @f22 (conservative figure I believe), takes 52mm filters, and is very small and light. I have one mounted all the time on my Wista DX; it folds nicely inside the camera (only lens I have that does so). I find that I use it for 70% of my landscape work, and it really is an excellent performer. I got it because I couldn't afford the 110XL, and I now wouldn't swap -- it is a stellar performer, and it is far smaller and lighter. Final benefit - they seem to be fairly cheap 2nd-hand when they come up for sale - everyone wants the 110XL I guess.

If I could only have one lens for my Wista, it would be the Schneider 120mm APO L.

[Frank Petronio]

I don't know if you need a third lens at all. If you do architecture or have a specific professional need, it is nice to find the right focal length to control foreground versus background relationships. But for personal work, I tune my vision to the lens at hand, and tend to shoot with that lens - whether long or wide.

What I'm saying is that you might not make better photos simply because you have a "complete" lens kit. In fact, you may become a better photographer by having less lenses.

So even though many people have the 75/90 -- 135/150 - 210/240 combo, it doesn't mean you have to follow the herd. Afterall, if you really want to "cover" the range you'd have gotten a Canon 5D and big honking zoom.

[Colin Graham]

I wouldnt worry about it too much. I was going to stop at a 3 lens set (90, 150, 300), but ended up getting a 125, 200, and 240 too! Just cant stop progress!

[Bob McCarthy]

Without going over the top searching for ultralight lenses, I ended up with the 75SWD, 150W and 300C all Fuji. Wide is wide, not semi-wide, normal is classic 150 for 4x5 and the 300c is very sharp and light, and if I need a little longer, some cropping can save the day and work within the bellows range of my Technika. May add a pound or so over the lightest weight lenses but so what. I don't even notice the weight difference when carrying.

bob

[David Karp]

Its such a personal decision. Between the 135mm and 150mm, I would go for the 150mm. My choice would be an EBC multicoated used 150mm Fujinon W. Small, light, big image circle, very nice lens, good deals available.

The 135mm, for me, is just to "in-between." Another alternative would be a 125mm Fujinon W with EBC multicoating. Again, 52mm filters, small, lightweight, 198mm image circle, very nice.

[Mark Stahlke]

Since we're spending somebody else's money, I'll chime in here. My recommendation is to get the 135 with an eye to trading in the 240 for a 210 and a 300 in the future. That would give you an awesome 65/90/135/210/300 lens kit. (Sidebar: Is it possible to have too many lenses? I'm tying to find out. I'll let you know.)

Further random thoughts:
1.) Pick one. Buy it used. If, after trying it out, you think you might prefer the other then sell it and buy the other (used). The advantage of buying used is that you can probably resell for about the same price you paid.

2.) Do you prefer wider views or narrower? Only you can decide. If you're not sure then see random thought number 1.

Cheers,
Mark

[Ole Tjugen]

It is possible to have too many lenses, although I'm not quite ready to admit it yet.

The last time I took my 4x5" for a walk, I brought 65, 90, 121, 135, 150, 150, 165, 180, 210, 240, 300 and 355mm lenses. That's 11 lenses - and I had 10 sheets of film!

I ended up using 90, 150, 165, 210, 240 and 355mm. And the 240 converted to 420mm for good measure. Which brings me to another point: Convertibles. If your camera has enough bellows, consider a convertible lens. That gives you one good lens and one usable longer one for the same price as one, with no added weight. I have and use - ehrm - several of them.