Would you replace a 90mm and 135mm with a 110XL?

[Ted Harris]

I think I am therefore going to replace it with the Rodenstock 120 Macro in the new year. I'd expect comparable sharpness. I've been extremely impressed with the Nikkor in this regard.

I'm sure the Rodenstock 1120 Macro Sironar will equal the Nikon. OTOH, I don't think you will se much difference in terms of running out of coverage. The IC of the Rodenstock is only slightly larger than the Nikkor (277 v. 250 at 1:1). Thus, for macro work you might want to consider either the Rodenstock or Schneider 180 Macro. If you want the increased image clarity for 1:1 and larger reproduction ratios offered by a macro lens and also want that lens to do duty at infinity then you'll need to go to the 180.

BTW, nice images. Don't think I have seen the second one before.

[LFdelux]

55 APO Grandagon
75/4.5 Grandagon-N
90/4.5 Grandagon-N
135 APO Sironar-S
210 APO Sironar-S
300 APO Sironar-S
120 Nikkor AM-ED

Sir:
Great gear for studio bound, where one would expect a large lens stable. In trekking, the downside is that none of your lenses is ever exploited to its full potential.

I have two-lens trekking rig now: 110mm SS-XL & 210mm APO-Symmar. At home or closer to my vehicle a 300mm/9 Nikkor-M and am looking to add a 150mm Sironar-s cammed when I want handheld.

Here, more effective travelling light... Happy new year!

[davidb]

My travel kit is the 110SS and 210 Apo-Symmar

[audioexcels]

Ted, found this one from your neck of the woods. My favorite location in NH recorded on the Arca Swiss with the 135 APO Sironar-S; 8 sec at f/32.3 on RVP-50 with a Singh Ray WT-Polarizer.

Not to get off the NH beaten track any further, but going back to the non vs. single vs. multi coated lenses, I see images like this and I have to wonder if it is the scanner/post-processing or what because the "only" other images on the net that I have seen with this level of color depth and beauty are shots with modern multi-coated lenses. "Every" single or non coated shot looks like the color has been lifted and the image just doesn't have that same level of density and richness to it. It can be "very good"...not saying it looks bad at all, but just not at the same level. So either these people with nice APO Rodenstock lenses have top of the line scanners and professional workflows for a professional webshot, or there is something of truth to the multi-coated lenses.

If I had the similar lens lineup mentioned and was debating tossing the 90/135, I would use a Grandagon 115 and toss them both...and with the $500 difference between the Grandagon and the 110XL, I'd buy a regular Sironar 135 and not the APO version, and use the rest for film

[audioexcels]

My travel kit is the 110SS and 210 Apo-Symmar

Sounds perfect, especially if whole plate or 8X10 is your camera

[Frank Petronio]

audioexcels -- it is the skill of the scanner/image prep. You can get a plastic lens Diana to have color depth and beauty too.

[Eric Leppanen]

Rather than breaking up an already nice lens set, why don't you travel light by packing only your favorites (75-135-210)?

From strictly a focal length perspective, I personally think 110-135 is too close, and I'd hate to suggest 110-150 since you have such a connection with your 135. If you don't use your 90 very much, perhaps you could replace your 75-90 with an 80XL, but then you'd have a fairly large gap between the 80 and 135.

On the other hand, if you can use the exceptionally large coverage of the 110XL, then you have a good justification for purchasing that lens while keeping everything else!

Personally I use 47-80-110-150-210-240-300-400, with the 80-110-150-240 being in my pack at all times, and the rest staying in the car for use as needed.

[Carsten Wolff]

If you use the 135mm most often (and it's a pretty small lens to start with) you might want to keep it. As much as people love the 110XL, it's not a silver bullet. If you want lightweight, check out Kerry Thalmann's site (eg 90mm Angulon, your 135 and the 210 or a 200mm Nikkor M), or if you got money to burn, you could go the 110 route with just that lens and the 210. Also perhaps look at Chris Perez' lens tests.
When I want to save weight, I only take the 2-3 lenses I use most often and leave the rest at home . Often I just run around with my 90mm Angulon (instead of my 90mm Grandagon-N, which is a great lens btw), a 135mm Symmar-S and a 210. In 5x7, I often only grab my 108mm, a 165mm and a 10". Matter of personal choice, really. Bu I found that less is often more. A bit of cropping later can fill those gaps anyway if needed. That's what LF gives you after all, too. Just my 2c.

[audioexcels]

audioexcels -- it is the skill of the scanner/image prep. You can get a plastic lens Diana to have color depth and beauty too.

I figured this is what it is. Even an image I was looking at that has wonderful color, but not quite to that level of Ted's is done on an Epson V700 and shot with a Graphic Crown or Speed and the Ektar made for the camera...

[Jay W]

Have you considered the filters for the 110? I find it a real PITA to use 52mm filters on the back of the lens. Once I get the image sharp, I'm always worried that my focus check after remounting the lens won't be quite as sharp with a heavy ND or red filter. Also, this is just a slow way of working.

If you use normal filters on the front, they will touch the front element since it bows out past the threads. Instead of buying the recommended huge and pricey filters (82?) for the front, I popped the glass out of a 67mm filter and use it as a spacer with 67mm filters...at least I think they're 67s. There's _just_ enough space with the spacer that the filters don't rub the lens element, and I don't get dark corners with the lens stopped down.

So, just a little warning that the 110 is a bit expensive or quirky with regards to filters.

Jay