Best long lens for large format

[Michael S. Briggs]

The so-called telephoto compression effect is really the result of using a long focal length for the format. "long" means longer than the format diagonal. The word "telephoto" is used for this effect because of the common mistake (particularly in 35 mm photography) of calling all long lenses "telephoto". The correct definition of a telephoto lens is one that focuses with a shorter extension than the focal length.

The "wide-angle" and "telephoto compression" effects are persective distortions resulting from viewing the print at the "incorrect" viewing distance. If you viewed prints taken with short-focal lengths lenses from a very close distance and prints taken with a long-focal length lens from a large distance, the perspective distortions would disappear.

All of these effects scale with the format size, so a 600 mm lens with 4x5 doesn't give the perspective effects that a 600 mm lens does in 35 mm. This is because the angle of the scence included in the photo scales with the format size. A 600 mm lens gives a wider view with 4x5 compared to 35 mm.

As Jay says, if Bill wants the scence compression effect obtained with a 300 to 500 mm lens in 35 mm, he will need a very long focal length lens. The ratio between the format diagonals is about 3.5, so the equivalent focal lengths for 4x5 are about 1000 to 1750 mm. Extremely few 4x5 cameras have the extension and bellows to handle such lenses (some studio cameras are modular so that extra monorail and bellows can be added), so the most pratical approach is probably a telephoto lens such as the 1200 mm Nikkor-T.

Previous postings on the forum describe that such lenses are difficult to get good results with. Vibration and other issues become big problems. Most photographers decide that really long lenses (compared to the format diagonal) aren't the forte of LF photography.

If you have the bellows for it, I second the recommendation of the 450 mm Fuji-C, though it won't give a strong telephoto effect. Past that, one might consider the 600 mm Fuji-C or a Fuji, Nikon or Schneider telephoto. There are postings in the archive about these lenses.

[Paul Metcalf]

TMM- You're correct. 600mm is 600mm, independent of film size. The coverage of the lens will determine how much film you can expose sufficiently.

Bill- I have a Nikon 450mm, and this gives a 35mm size image on the film for a subject distance of something like a mile (an estimate). But I also get a lot of other image elements on a piece of 4x5 film. This lens easily covers 8x10 (in case you're thinking of going larger). If you think you might be making multiple exposures, I suggest a self cocking shutter (Prontor) in these long focal lengths. I find it hard to keep the image from shifting with my 300mm in a Copal shutter which requires manual cocking.

[Gem Singer]

Bill,

You probably shouldn't believe everything you hear. You could compare a 300-500mm telephoto lens to any of the non-tele lenses in that range of focal lengths. Teles from any of the major manufacturers are extremely sharp lenses.

Most of the softness you hear about is due to the camera operator attempting to use an extremely long tele lens, outdoors in the wind, and not using a solid enough tripod or camera support. That same problem holds true no matter what format is being used. A long lens, and a lot of bellows extension, magnifies even the slightest vibration.

Take a look at Jack Dykinga's book "Large Format Nature Photography". He points this out and offers a solution to the problem by adding an extra bracing arm to his Gitzo tripod.

Probably the reason why my Fuji 450C appears so sharp is because it was designed for the 8X10 format. It has a huge image circle. I am only using the brightest, sharpest center of the image circle when I use it on my 4X5 format camera.

I use the Fuji 400T on my Toyo 45A field camera, because the camera only has about 325mm of bellows available, and the 400T is the longest lens that will work with that amount of bellows extension.

[bill proud]

Paul,

I shouldn't be making multiple exposures with it.

Eugene,

I read some reviews on Dykinga's book this morning and probably will get it. Also, reading your post I agree, using the sweet center will provide increased sharpness on 4x5 film. I shoot 6x9cm every so often with my 4x5 lenses and they are super sharp, (qualitatively speaking).

So the 450C Fuji lens is recommended a number of times. Any publication credits I can check using this lens either by a responder or by a reference? Does Dykinga recommend or use it?

Thanks again to all.

[Gem Singer]

Bill,

In his book, Jack Dykinga uses Schneider lenses, exclusively.

I purchased my Fujinon 450C from Jim, at Midwest Photo Exchange (www.mpex.com). He has a large assortment of new, and used Fuji lenses at reasonable prices.

If you buy a lens from him, and you don't like it, he will gladly exchange it, or refund the purchase price.

[bill proud]

Eugene,

My friend here locally also recommended Midwest. Always good to have multiple recommendations.

[Ernest Purdum]

While many telephoto lenses have quite acceptable sharpness, ther is a disadvantage in using them on view cameras in that they can drive you batty if you try to use front swings and tilts. Instead of just altering the plane of sharp focus, the image goes wild. The reduced bellows draw is a major benefit, but it comes with a severe restriction.

[Christopher Condit]

I just sold my Fuji 400T for the reasons Ernest mentions. Any swing or tilt requires reframing and massive refocussing. I bought it for a modestly-bellowed camera which I have since upgraded, so I can now use the 450C.

One more shortcoming of telephotos is the bulk, as the 400T is maybe 3-4 times as large and heavy as the 450C. Sure you can take great pictures with it, and it will let you go longer than otherwise, but at the price of certain inconveniences.

If you cut out the center 24x36 mm from a 4x5 shot with a 600cm lens, it will be identical to a 35mm shot with a 600.

[bill proud]

Ernest and CXC,

Interesting comments. I do use tilts quite often.

Thanks

[David Karp]

Bill,

I also recommend the Fuji 450 C if your camera has enough bellows. It is so small it is hard to believe it is a 450mm. Don't be put off by the f/12.5 max aperture. The image looks plenty bright to me under normal circumstances, and is within the range of my other lenses (f/5.6 and f/9.0) in lower light situations. I can't explain that, but others have had the same experience. Before the Fujinon, I had a Nikkor M 450mm f/9, which is also a nice lens. However, it is in a No. 3 shutter, uses 67mm filters, and is very heavy compared to the Fujinon.

In the 300mm range, I have a Nikkor M 300mm f/9.0 which I like a lot. I was interested in either this lens, or the Fujinon C 300mm f/8.5, and purchased the first one I found used in good condition at a reasonable price. From my research, I believe that I would have been equally satisfied with either lens. Both use 52mm filters and are in No. 1 shutters.

I have also purchased several lenses from Jim at Midwest Photo Exchange, including my 450mm Fujinon. It is used, but looks brand new. The prices are always very reasonable. He is a very straight shooter, and very helpful.

Good luck on your choice.