Two Lens Set for 4x5 Field Camera - Choices

[EdC]

Well, thought I'd chime in with what I ultimately bought. First, I did take the advice of several posters, and went with a three lens set. That did make sense. I ultimately gave up on finding any classic lenses in a condition that I felt I could live with. Here's what I wound up getting -

210mm 5.6 Rodenstock Sironar N - Picked this up at a price well below $200. There is a coating flaw precisely in the middle of the front element about the size of a pinhead. From my research on this forum, that shouldn't matter. Marvelous condition otherwise.
135mm 5.6 Rodenstock Sironar N - Near new condition. This was the priciest of the three.
90mm 4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon - Near new condition. Larger than I was planning on, but between the condition and an extremely competitive price, and the slightly brighter focusing that I could use for interior shots when out and about, I couldn't pass it up. For the money, I'll go with the size, and use Lee filters.

Anyhow, thanks for all of the advice! It did come in handy in regards to looking at focal lengths, and the number!

Ed

[Bill_1856]

Sounds like you've got a near-perfect setup.

[Thalmees]

... What I'm in tending to do with this outfit is general landscape. One thing I like to do is take photos of some of the smaller towns in the midwest, etc.
...
Ed

It will probably be at least 75% black and white.
Ed

Hello EdC,
Welcome to photography.
It looks to me that you are about artistic photography, not after a job or business to fulfill.
So, why you do not consider Grandagon N 90/4.5 or any equivalent?
I have an older version of the lens, it has a marvelous rendering, very sharp and more than enough coverage behind and in front of the lens.
If I left with only one lens, it should be the 90/4.5.
Please consider, its not small and its in the heavier side. But, it could be your gold standard in sharpness for your other lenses.

...
And some people interchange shutter without interchanging front calibrated shim, so front to rear cell distance is not anymore the ideal one for that sample... even some ebay glass simply lacks the calibration shim, it happened to me, anyway it's easy to solve that, just unscreew until focused image it's at its best, this can be seen with an eyepiece.

Hello Pere,
Could you specify in details(if possible) the differences in image quality between the two cases, with or without spacer?
Is the difference confined to close range distance? Or not?
I still have something to add to the Rodagon 105/5.6 thread, will update later.
Thank you so much Pere.

[Pere Casals]

Hello Pere,
Could you specify in details(if possible) the differences in image quality between the two cases, with or without spacer?
Is the difference confined to close range distance? Or not?
I still have something to add to the Rodagon 105/5.6 thread, will update later.
Thank you so much Pere.

Sorry, I saw your question now.

Spacer rings were used when needed to adjust rear to front cell distance for best sharpness. For every pair of cells it may be required different ring spacers (normally) ranging from 0.5mm to 1.5mm

A lens may have no spacer, one spacer or more than one.

This is used to get best correction possible of aberrations for a particular lens. More distance makes aberrations provocated by front cell to spread more before the rear cell compensates it in the oposite way.

It is also possible that one spacing distance is better for the center and another is better for corners. Also a particular spacing can work better for near subjects or for infinite.

If I'm not mistaken, a process lens can be optimized for distant subjects by changing spacing, for example to be used for ULF.

To find best spacing you use a resolution target and an eyepiece, so you see the image "in the air". Projection on Ground Glass it is not good enough for that, as the frozen glass texture degradates the image quality.

At the end you see the resolution target through the lens with the eyepiece, and you unscreew to seek best Lp/mm in the center and/or in the corners, for macro or for distant subjects. You count the number of tours you unscreew the front cell until best image...

...and as you know the thread pitch you also know the good ring thickness.

This kind of optimization is useful for very sharp shots. If shot is not very sharp (f/32 diffraction) perhaps it won't be noticed. I've been playing with that, using a microscope 20x periplan as eyepiece, but I've pending learning about that.

[thafred]

Interesting and informative replies here! Here´s my two cents:

In my experience it´s best to look at your favourite focal length for formats you already shoot and buy appropriate for 4x5. When you start to get the hang of Large Format AND know WHAT you want to shoot with it, you will have a clear idea how to proceed with your lenses. Resale value most of the time is the same as purchase price so a little experimentation doesn´t hurt too much if on a budget.

I shot mainly with a Leica M before LF and my most used lenses were 40mm and 28mm. So as I started out I got two lenses for my field Camera, a 90mm Super Angulon MC and a 150mm APO Symmar. Surprisingly about 80% of shooting I did with the 90 SA (on Leica I used 40mm much more. BUT I was starting to shoot differently so for me the Format reflected into my photography style. Not only because of the Limitations of the Format but I started to seek other Pictures.

After a while I found 90mm just wasn't wide enough for what I wanted to shoot (a little bit landscape and a lot Urban Architecture) so I got a 75mm Nikkor f4,5. That was my kit for the last few Years. Sometime I carried all three lenses but most of the time only 75 and 150 or 90 and 150. (those WA lenses all weight about 500g...much rather carry three extra film holders)

Only last week I treated myself with a 300mm Apo Ronar and a 125mm Fujinon-W . both modern Multicoated versions so my Kit now consists of two sets. The 220IC gang (150APO and 90MC) and the 200mm IC pack (75 and 125)..the Ronar just lives in the bag, at under 300g I don't see a reason not to take it with me.

Don't worry about the first lenses for Field shooting, it will most definitely not be the last lens purchase you make!

[Sal Santamaura]

Well, thought I'd chime in with what I ultimately bought...Anyhow, thanks for all of the advice! It did come in handy in regards to looking at focal lengths, and the number!...

You're most welcome. The three you ended up with are top tier and will provide you no excuse for bad pictures.

I find the five posts immediately preceding this one to be entertaining examples of 'transmit-only mode.' None of those posters bothered to read that you've already selected and purchased the (three) lenses for your kit. If only the software had some way to verify members have read an entire thread before permitting them to post.

[EdC]

Noted here, also, Sal! Oh well.......

Thanks!

Ed

You're most welcome. The three you ended up with are top tier and will provide you no excuse for bad pictures.

I find the five posts immediately preceding this one to be entertaining examples of 'transmit-only mode.' None of those posters bothered to read that you've already selected and purchased the (three) lenses for your kit. If only the software had some way to verify members have read an entire thread before permitting them to post.

[David Karp]

Good choices. I have either owned, or own the 210mm (the Caltar II-N version) and the 90mm. Outstanding lenses. I don't own the 135mm, but I own the 150mm. Very nice.