If you were to have only one lens for 4x5 landscape photography, regardless of price, which one would it be?
If you were to have only one lens for 4x5 landscape photography, regardless of price, which one would it be?
Of course everyone will have their preferred focal length; for general lanscape mine would be the Rodenstock APO Sironar-S 135mm.
Any good triple-convertible. Ha ha ha ha.
Another vote for a 135 mm lens. Any recent vintage lens by Rodentock, Schneider, Nikon or Fuji should be fine. It won't give you massive coverage for movements but should be enough for landscape photography. The Rodenstock Sironar N (or equivalent Caltar IIN) is a particular favourite of mine, tiny (40.5 filter thread) and very sharp.
Sincerely,
Hany.
110mm SSXL.
my picture blog
ejwoodbury.blogspot.com
Agreed.
If I can't have a triple convertible, I'll take a 180mm f:5.6 Symmar convertible. The 150/256 is just a little too soft in the corners for my taste.
But I would use it on a 5x7" with an extra 4x5" back, so that I could get a "wide normal" FOV out of it too!
My second (or is that "third"?) choise is a casket set.
Sorry, I just can't do with a single focal length. But I can easily get by without multicoating!
I would go with a 150mm f5.6. And that is what I did. I like the idea that it is close to how we see...which for me, made it easier to learn how the camera/lens/film combination sees. Now it is fun to have different focal lengths for my 8x10, but I am glad that I stuck with one lens (and all "normal") for each format (4x5, 5x7, 8x10) for so long.
Vaughn
Well I don't know about long term but today I shot with only my 203mm Ektar and was happy.
Bookmarks