Wider than 90mm w/ movements for 4x5, low light.

[Kodachrome25]

Hi gang,

I have just picked up a magazine assignment to shoot the interior of a quarry in both a photojournalistic and artistic sense. So I will be using a combo of Leica for low light and portraits and 4x5 for everything else, pretty much have carte blanche to do this so I am really looking to create a fine print show to go along with the publishing date.

Currently on the wide end I only have a 90mm Nikkor F8 SW which I love and a very much under utilized 65mm 4.5 Grandagon with the center filter. I have been thinking about selling the 65 since it does not have a lot of room for movements, 170mm @F22 vs 235mm @F22 for the Nikkor 90.

I am going to scout it later this week but I am already thinking of maybe buying a Nikkor 90mm 4.5 SW for this since it will be a fair bit brighter with the same coverage. Another thought is a 72mm 5.6 XL but that will likely require an expensive center filter.

Beyond the 90, I have Apo Sironar S in 135 and 180 which will be great for the rest, a Macro Sironar for the details if I decide to not use my Hasselblad system for that.

Given my current lenses on the wide end, what would be a good move to go wide in a darker space with enough image circle for a good amount of rise?

[Corran]

Well the 72mm XL has the most amount of movement you can get with the widest angle. I am not aware of any 65mm lenses with more coverage than your Grandagon, but then I've never really owned any. My 58mm XL and 47mm XL have little to no movement.

You didn't mention whether you were shooting color or b&w. The 72mm on 4x5 may not need a CF if you are shooting b&w and/or not shifting a really large amount. The usual caveats apply for chromes as you well know.

All of these wide angles are going to be dim and hard to focus just due to the angle of view. If you don't have a fresnel you may want one. The 47mm and 58mm lenses I have are really hard to focus even at f/5.6. The 72mm is a bit better. I have the 90mm f/5.6 XL and it's definitely easier to focus than the Nikkor 90mm f/8, but the larger filter sucks of course. The f/4.5 Nikkor has an 82mm filter which is why I've not bothered with it, since I like the 67mm and 77mm filters lenses I have, but you may not have an issue with that.

Overall I don't think you can go wrong with the 72mm XL. I've noticed both the 72mm and 90mm XL have been going down in price used lately. I picked up my 72mm for an obscene price on eBay, complete with recessed board. BTW, someone is selling a center filter for the 72mm in the classifieds right now. That's where I got my CF.

[Kodachrome25]

Thanks Corran,

Yes, black and white film and I would likely be able to get the crew to floodlight the interior for me to hit the corners. I am hoping on the scouting mission I will see a 90mm will work for the widest shot but I have a feeling a 72 might be a good thing to have in the long run anyway to replace my 65.

[jnantz]

hi dan

i can't recommend which low light lens to get, when i documented 2 quarries for the state
i used a wollensak 90 f 6.8? ( air corps purple dot ) and a wollensak 3 1/2 inch f 12 exwa.
both worked exceptionflly well, but no low light.
nearly all the work was from the rim, grout-wall surrounding "workshops" and eventually from the interior of the quarries
after they were filled. it was loads of fun.

a little unsolicited advice: if you are going to be on a rim, i recommend getting a cord that can hold a drop,
attaching it to a "deadman" and not getting closer than 10feet from the edge, quarry-rock had the tendancy to crumble, like cast iron.
i wore a harness and the cord i wore could take a 15,000lb dead drop.
thankfully i stayed up on top and didn't lose my gear. ( it was drained and 300-350 feet down ).

have fun

[Kodachrome25]

This will all be from ground level to maybe on top of a couple of large blocks I can get to via a cherry picker. Even though I have my own sport rock and industrial climbing gear, I would defer to the company's gear for liability reasons. I'm sure I will use it if I need it, I have webbing and all sorts of anchors for my gear as it is.

It's possible a 90 will work in there, all too often super wide is super boring anyway so I'll see once I scout it.

[koh303]

Super symmar XL 80mm... huge coverage.

[Kodachrome25]

Super symmar XL 80mm... huge coverage.

Would it need a center filter for negative film?

[angusparker]

Super symmar XL 80mm... huge coverage.

I'd agree. Not sure about the need for a centerfilter. I've shot a fair amount of Velvia 50 with the 110 SSXL and never been too bothered by drop off. But I did get the center filter recently because it also works on the 80mm which I just got.

[Kodachrome25]

I'm just wondering if I should not go for a 72 XL though to really open up the wide end. Seems a fair bit more expensive.

[Corran]

I think you could get a 72mm for less than the SS 80mm. And plus, the 80mm (and 110mm) seems to develop issues with the adhesive sometimes (link)?