Good value wide angle, bargain standard lens for 4x5?

[dylanear]

First post, have mercy! I just randomly found a Sinar P in my life after wanting to try large format for 25ish years. My head is spinning trying to get my head around lens options, there's lot's of great options it seems, but having never used this type gear it's all a bit mysterious to me.

First and most important I want a very wide lens with excellent coverage (Maybe somewhat usable if I get a larger rear standard, 5x7, or even 8x10?), excellent sharpness across the image. I'd like to spend about $500 US. Little more, little less. Hopefully more like a 60mm than a 75 or 90, but I'll try to be open minded. Landscape and cityscape/architecture are my intended subjects.

And secondarily a bargain standard lens. Much less budget for this one, I'm hoping something in the $150 to $200 range may still give good results? This may be more an indoor, studio(ok, my living room) lens.

Where are the go to places besides ebay? KEH seems to have an ok selection. Any other shops that would ship to BC Canada that would have good selection, prices, service?

[David Karp]

I think you would be looking at a 65mm for your wide lens, which is really WIDE on a 4x5. You might regret going that wide. There will be little room for movement with a 65. I think you will find that most architectural photographers reached for a 90mm first, and a 65mm as a last resort if they really had to go wide, wide. However, it is not for me to tell you what to do when choosing your wide angle lens.

An excellent budget normal lens would be a 150mm Caltar f/5.6 II-N (which is a re-branded Rodenstock Sironar-N or APO-Sironar-N), or a 150mm Fujinon f/5.6 NW (the multicoated one with the lettering on the outside of the lens barrel). These are available in your price range and are excellent lenses.

[interneg]

75mm Super Angulon & a 150/5.6 of any of the many choices would seem to be a good bet. 150mm Schneider Symmar or Nikon Nikkor-W to add to the above selections.

More to the point, why do you need a very wide lens? Answering this will help in terms of recommending lenses. $500 is pretty tight for the seriously wide stuff with good coverage. 75 is about a 22.5mm in the long dimension & an 18.75 in the short dimension relative to 35mm.

Personally, I'd get a good 90mm first. Lots of them around, & plenty of coverage.

[Alan9940]

As interneg suggests, I would +1 the recommendation to start with a 75mm and a 150mm. I see that David already suggested the Fuji 150/5.6 NW which I'm sure is a very nice lens, but don't discount the older 150mm with inside lettering which has a larger image circle vs the NW, though single coated. I own a copy of this lens and it's very sharp, though I'm not a fan of the Seiko shutter.

[David Hedley]

First and most important I want a very wide lens with excellent coverage (Maybe somewhat usable if I get a larger rear standard, 5x7, or even 8x10?), excellent sharpness across the image. I'd like to spend about $500 US. Little more, little less. Hopefully more like a 60mm than a 75 or 90, but I'll try to be open minded. Landscape and cityscape/architecture are my intended subjects.

The Nikkor SW 120mm is medium wide on 4x5, and will cover up to 8x10. You might now find a decent quality one for $500, given the decline in lens prices in recent years. It's an outstanding lens, and I regret having sold mine a few years back.

To the best of my knowledge, this is one of the widest lenses for 8x10; I don't think there are 75mm or 90mm lenses that will cover 8x10. But a modern 90mm is a very good and inexpensive starting point for a wide lens for 4x5.

[dylanear]

75mm Super Angulon & a 150/5.6 of any of the many choices would seem to be a good bet. 150mm Schneider Symmar or Nikon Nikkor-W to add to the above selections.

More to the point, why do you need a very wide lens? Answering this will help in terms of recommending lenses. $500 is pretty tight for the seriously wide stuff with good coverage. 75 is about a 22.5mm in the long dimension & an 18.75 in the short dimension relative to 35mm.

Personally, I'd get a good 90mm first. Lots of them around, & plenty of coverage.

Thanks for all the suggestions!

As for needing/wanting a very wide lens? That's my favored type on 35mm/Micro Four Thirds. 18 or 20mm is probably where I shoot most of my outdoor photography, going between 20 and 35mm a good bit, only occasionally wider than 18, but 14 or 16 on occasion.

Anything I get I'll probably want something else later on. It's my curse. I do want plenty of room for coverage/movement. A 75 may do the trick, but 24, 25mm certainly would leave me wanting something wider on a 35mm SLR a lot of the time.

On the more budget end for a wide, how are these? Both in the low $300s and thus tempting on price alone as starter wide.

Calumet 75mm f/6.8 Caltar II-N MC Copal BT

Nikon 65mm f/4 Nikkor SW Copal BT (35 MT)

For a bit more I see:

Rodenstock 65mm f/4.5 Grandagon MC Copal BT

And a bit more:
Nikon 75mm f/4.5 Nikkor SW Copal BT


Closer to $500:

Calumet 75mm f/4.5 Caltar-II N MC Copal BT

Getting into more than I want to spend, at about $650:

SCHNEIDER 58MM F/5.6 SUPER ANGULON XL MC LENS IN COPAL 0 BT SHUTTER

Any comments on those options (at KEH) is quite welcome. I suppose I'd consider a 90, buy perhaps I'd go looking for some example images using them.

[Alan Gales]

A very wide lens for 4x5 will not work for 8x10.

A 90mm on a 4x5 camera feels like a 25mm lens on a 35mm camera to me. Wide but not ultra wide. Quite nice! I had a 75mm once and it felt about like a 20mm on a 35mm camera to me which is wider than I care for. If a 75mm isn't wide enough you might want a 65mm.

If you buy a lens and it isn't quite wide enough for you and you decide to sell you should get most of your money back. I sold my 75mm for a slight loss and bought a 90mm. After you are a member for a month you will have access to the for sale section here on the forum. You can also advertise that you are looking for a particular lens. Welcome to the forum!

[xkaes]

I see that David already suggested the Fuji 150/5.6 NW which I'm sure is a very nice lens, but don't discount the older 150mm with inside lettering which has a larger image circle vs the NW, though single coated. I own a copy of this lens and it's very sharp, though I'm not a fan of the Seiko shutter.

The image circle of the later, EBC coated, Fujinon NW 150mm f5.6 in Copal isn't enormously smaller than it's earlier, uncoated, Seiko brother -- 245mm vs 224mm -- especially for 4x5 use. Both cover 5x7". For a look at Fuji lenses check out

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/

They made four 65mm lenses, all of which cover 4x5, but not by much. You'll find that f8 versions, from any manufacturer, are smaller, lighter, and less expensive than their wider f-stop brethren.

I concur with the idea that a good place to start is with a 150mm and decide where to go from there. The listed website has some inexpensive ways you can determine how wide you want to go. Part of it depends on your camera's capability.

[Jac@stafford.net]

First and most important I want a very wide lens with excellent coverage (Maybe somewhat usable if I get a larger rear standard, 5x7, or even 8x10?)

My two-bits worth - stick to 4x5. Why go larger? For larger format, lenses become more scarce, and generally more expensive (especially quality wide-angles) and I am guessing that you will not be printing optically. Scanning reduces output to the digital domain where little advantage will be achieved.

How wide do you want? For extreme nominal 4x5 you can use a 47 Super-Angulon, suffer its vignetting and call it art, or use a center filter. Wider? 35mm Grandagon, and suffer even more.

[interneg]

As for needing/wanting a very wide lens? That's my favored type on 35mm/Micro Four Thirds. 18 or 20mm is probably where I shoot most of my outdoor photography, going between 20 and 35mm a good bit, only occasionally wider than 18, but 14 or 16 on occasion.

Anything I get I'll probably want something else later on. It's my curse. I do want plenty of room for coverage/movement. A 75 may do the trick, but 24, 25mm certainly would leave me wanting something wider on a 35mm SLR a lot of the time.

A modern 75mm (ie an f5.6 Super Angulon or thereabouts) is probably your best chance of balancing coverage & angle of view - the wider effective vertical angle of view (because of the format shape) will make the lens feel considerably wider than you'd expect. Take an image shot with an 18mm & crop it to a 1.25:1 aspect ratio & that'll give you a very good idea of the perspective.

For a 65mm you'd be needing to get the most modern - ie a super angulon XL or similar - to have a chance of useful movement. Going below that towards 47mm & coverage becomes smaller & smaller very rapidly. Below 65mm you'll need the latest generation glass - and that puts you in the USD800 range easily.