Your favourite normal lens for 4x5?

[Adrian Pybus]

Thanks everybody for the feedback.
It was good to hear that most of you really like the 150 Nikkor. I'll see if it's mounted correctly or perhaps it has gotten a heavy kiss in the past.

Adrian

[Noah A]

I recently did some real-world lens testing and compared a few Rodenstock and Schneider lenses--namely the 115 Grandagon and 120 Super Angulon in one comparison and the 135 Apo-Sironar-S and 135 Apo-Symmar in another.

I realized that at least between Rodenstock and Schneider, there are very few differences between the lenses in terms of performance. I found the Schneiders had a touch less contrast, but it was a really small difference. I was a bit surprised that in both comparisons, the Schneider seemed to resolve fine details a bit better, though again, this was only really visible upon really close inspection of a drum-scanned E100G chrome printed in a section equal to a 48"x60" print! This surprised me especially in the case of the 135 Apo-Sironar-S since it's often said to be the sharpest lens out there.

But all four lenses I tried were absolutely tack sharp, even in the edges with some movement. So my point here is that there are very few differences between performance in modern lenses. It's true that I only tested Schneider and Rodenstock but I doubt Nikon would be much different in terms of image quality, though they may have a different look in terms of color and contrast.

I think you either have a real dog of a lens, your lens was damaged somehow, or something is wrong with the lens spacing, etc.

My favorite normal focal length is 135mm, though I use a 150 most of the time because it fits in better between my overall favorite focal lengths, 120 and 210.

[Greg Y]

My #1 lens is my 8 1/2" golden Dagor on my 5x7. If I were to have only one lens this would be the one. I use it more than any other.

[John Rodriguez]

In the normalish range I've tried a Nikon 135mm, and Fujinon 125, 150, and 180mm - all f/5.6 Ws. All the Fuji's are/were very sharp. The Nikon was soft in comparison. If I could find a 90mm as sharp as those Fujis I'd be a happy man, my 90mm Caltar/Rodenstock Grandagon 6.8 isn't in the same league.

[Jody_S]

My 'normal' lens is a Symmar-S 150/5.6. I've used Xenars (135 & 150) in the past, and I can't tell the difference except none of my cameras will fold up with the Symmar. I am looking for a couple of others to try, I really want to try color film with a Fujinon. But I haven't decided the format, so I haven't bought the lens yet.

[Armin Seeholzer]

Its a 135mm and a 210mm I'm a 150mm hater!

[MIke Sherck]

For me, "normal" is either my 210mm Fuji or my 125mm fuji. About half my photographs are taken with the one, half with the other. I have a 300mm Nikon M which gets used very occasionally, and I recently bought a 90mm f/8 Fuji to see whether I would use it in addition to or in replacement of the 125mm.

Mike

[Leigh]

I was a bit surprised that in both comparisons, the Schneider seemed to resolve fine details a bit better, though again, this was only really visible upon really close inspection of a drum-scanned E100G chrome printed in a section equal to a 48"x60" print!

Usually, when you can see only very slight differences, you're seeing variation between individual samples rather than product-wide effects.

All manufactured products have tolerances. These add up to determine the final performance of the product.

- Leigh