Right enough Bob, and thanks for correcting me! I was giving unfortunate credit to the Rodenstock short lenses. Your correction better underlines the point I wanted to make, that the Schneider 47 SAXL covers better than the longer Rodenstock Grandagon 55...
So, using the charts, the 47SAXL is 166 -- though in use it covers even more -- and IMO is the best choice for 4x5 ultrawideangle...
FWIW, this is why I personally sold my Rodenstock short lenses and shoot Schneider now for wides...
Cheers,
Jack, don't get up Bob's nose so much. He was only trying to help....
http://www.jeffbridges.com/perception.html "Whether you think you can, or think you can't, you are right."
Huh? Me up Bob's nose??? I thought I thanked him for correcting me...
Cheers,
Thanks to everyone for the feedback. This is just a great forum and a great group of helpful individuals. Cheers to Bob from HP as well who provided a lot of off-line technical support and patience for newbie questions.
I ended up ordering the APO Grandagon from Midwest who had one in 9+ condition for less than half the price of a new 47 XL. Being my first ultrawide on 4x5, and something of a specialized optic, I really did not want to sink over 2K into the Schneider (or $1.5K in a new Grandagon) when I still have several "core" lenses to acquire. I usually buy everything new, but made an exception in this case given the reputation that Jim at Midwest has earned on this forum. If in a years time I am frustrated with less than ample movements on the Grandagon, I know there is a strong resale market and I'll just flip it for the 47 XL (although I suspect I could end up with both if I get hooked on the 4x5 ultrawide).
How much coverage does it have at larger apertures on 4X5 and can you actually get some movement with it for architecural use? Do you use a center filter on it?Originally Posted by Jack Flesher
What 75mm can cover 5X7?
Good point. There's the 72mm SA-XL (226mm), but no 75mm lens I guess.
Although my 75mm SW Nikkor can just reach, it does so only dead-on @ f32, or so and without center filter things are starting to look less than bright in the corners.
http://www.jeffbridges.com/perception.html "Whether you think you can, or think you can't, you are right."
72mm or 80mm. My 75mm grandagon, with a 195mm image circle covers with hyperfocal focus.
Just an update on the 55mm Grandagon. Jim at Midwest described it in 9+ condition, and I have to say that when I took it out of the box yesterday it looked brand new! Not even a smudge anywhere. Everything seems to be in good working order.
Mounting it in my Arca Swiss Field camera, the corners sure get dim. So I'm wondering if anyone on this forum using Bill Maxwell's wide angle focussing screen could provide some feedback on it's efficacy. It is not a minor surgery getting one of these into the AS. In fact, I would need to buy a new holder and send it off to Precision Camera Works to have it modified to accomodate the Maxwell screen. By the time all is said and done, I'm probably looking at around $600. So before I go this route, I'd like to know from those who have gone before, is it worth it?
long dead thread, but in case anyone is looking, my 2 cents: I have shot with the Schneider 58XL and traded it for the 47XL on my Master Technika, and found both to be incredibly sharp, and a huge pain to use, though I love them dearly. I spoke with Bill Maxwell at length about this, and to cut to the chase, we concluded that if you were the kind of person who had some doubts about paying $250 for a fresnel screen, you were not in the market for his wide angle screen. I haven't personally used one, and I have no doubt its a phenomenal device, but the laws of optics dictate that you just can't have a screen that does a great job on ultra wide lenses that can still do normal and/or long. Bill said that his clients typically purchase a whole second back that's used as a dedicated ultra-wide back for this purpose. (Of course, that's around $1000 all told, so you better be doing a lot of this kind of photography.) The ultra wide fresnel only works with 47-90mm on 4x5, I believe.
Personally, I use the regular maxwell screen - which is phenomenal - and just place a linhof fresnel on top of it when I go ultra wide. Yes, you have two fresnels, and sometimes you want to just use the one to check sharpness at 10x before you shoot - but the protective sheet of glass on top of the maxwell screen gets rid of most of the moire interference, and it brightens up the image considerably when you're using this lens for dim interiors, as I do, where there's practically no image at all at the corners. This way you can do all your basic framing and movements.
If I money was no object, I just get a second back with the maxwell screen. (Of course, if money was NO object, I'd probably get out of 4x5 altogether and get an H3 outfit
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks