Comparison of 110-125mm lenses

[Toyon]

I am looking for a lens in this focal length. I want a lot of movement (for a 4x5) and do not want to have to use a center filter.

Has anyone had experience with the following units? I would appreciate knowing what you think.

1) Fujinon f5.6 125 CM-W
2) Nikkor f8 120 SW
3) Schneider Super-Symmar XL 110
4) Schneider Super-Symmar HM 120
Thanks

[Kirk Gittings]

IME that Nikkor is a hell of a lens-will cover 8x10 with no noticeable fall off with even great movements on 4x5. I haven't used the others.

[Ari]

Not on your list, but the Grandagon 115 is a fantastically sharp lens that covers 8x10 with a little darkening of the corners.
Less expensive than all the lenses listed above except the Fujinon.

[Toyon]

The grandagon is a bit too large. Also, I want excellent coverage on a 4x5, but do not need 8x10 coverage.

[Steve Goldstein]

And the 115mm Grandagon can also be had multicoated, which seems to be an unstated requirement. It's a beast, weighing 740gm in shutter per Rodenstock's literature. The Nikkor weighs 610gm, the SSHM weighs 409gm, and the SSXL weighs 425gm. I don't have any data on the Fujinon CM-W but I'm pretty sure it's the lightest of the ones you've listed.

If single-coating will do, you might consider the original-version Fujinon-W (the one with the so-called "inside lettering", visible when looking into the lens, and the straw-colored coating). It has an 80-degree field of view, same as the SSHM (but much less than the Nikkor, SSXL, and Grandagon) and just a bit more than the Fujinon CM-W. It's a winner if size and weight are of concern, taking 46mm filters and weighing only 180gm.

[Toyon]

My default is multicoating, though an uncoated lens can be very useful under certain conditions.

[Sal Santamaura]

...I want a lot of movement (for a 4x5)...I think we need a more precise definition of "a lot of movement."

[Ari]

The grandagon is a bit too large. Also, I want excellent coverage on a 4x5, but do not need 8x10 coverage.

8x10 coverage, by default, means excellent 4x5 coverage.
But yes, the specs on the Grandagon indicate it is heavier than the other lenses.
Funny, I never noticed, though.

[Heroique]

A few observations from personal experience...

I sold my Fuji W 125mm/5.6 lens to someone who had tired of the size and weight of the Nikon SW 120mm/9 (610 grams!).

He was willing to sacrifice the Nikon's incredible 312mm IC for the Fuji's moderate 198mm IC – but he gained a great reduction in size and weight.

The IC of the (newer) Fuji CM-W 125mm/5.6 is roughly the same as my older version above, but I believe it's a little heavier.

(Also, the front thread size is a key comparison for many shooters.)

[Drew Wiley]

An awful lot depends on your specific camera and support system. Not all 4x5 front standards or tripod head will handle heavy lenses that feel like bowling balls,
specifically meaning that 120SW Nikkor and Super Symmar HM120. Then you've got the 110 Super Symmar and 120 Nikor being wide-angle designs, potentially needing center filters in certain instances due to illumination falloff, versus two "regular" lenses. All these lenses will have excellent oprics, but are otherwide sure an unrelated mixed bag. The 125 CMW Fuji will have enough image circle for modest 4x5 movements, and will be reasonably compact (though ironically adapted to an unnecessarily large 67mm filter, unlike its W predecessors), while the other three will have much larger image circles. .... Sooo you want a lot of movement and no need for a center filter? That would leave you only the relatively rare and expensive 120 Super Symmar HM, given your particular list.

[Toyon]

An awful lot depends on your specific camera and support system. Not all 4x5 front standards or tripod head will handle heavy lenses that feel like bowling balls,
specifically meaning that 120SW Nikkor and Super Symmar HM120. Then you've got the 110 Super Symmar and 120 Nikor being wide-angle designs, potentially needing center filters in certain instances due to illumination falloff, versus two "regular" lenses. All these lenses will have excellent oprics, but are otherwide sure an unrelated mixed bag. The 125 CMW Fuji will have enough image circle for modest 4x5 movements, and will be reasonably compact (though ironically adapted to an unnecessarily large 67mm filter, unlike its W predecessors), while the other three will have much larger image circles. .... Sooo you want a lot of movement and no need for a center filter? That would leave you only the relatively rare and expensive 120 Super Symmar HM, given your particular list.
Thanks for the interesting data Drew. But is the 120HM optimized as a macro lens?

[Toyon]

I think we need a more precise definition of "a lot of movement."

My camera has 4cm rise, 4cm fall.

[Bruce Watson]

I am looking for a lens in this focal length. I want a lot of movement (for a 4x5) and do not want to have to use a center filter.

I've had a Schneider SSXL 110mm since early in my LF career. It's really sharp, nicely contrasty, and has huge coverage for movements. I've never owned, used, or felt any need of a center filter for it. It's a great lens design, and first among my go-to lenses. If I could only have a single lens for 5x4, the SSXL 110mm would be that lens.

[Ed Richards]

I used the Nikon 120 for several years and loved it. But is is BIG and heavy, and f8. The 110SSXL is small and f5.6 and corrected for both near and far. I have seen no need for a center filter. It also uses smaller filters. But I still miss my 120 because it is just a very satisfying lens and focal length. It is also going to cost you less than 50% of the 110SSXL.

[Phil Hudson]

Thanks for the interesting data Drew. But is the 120HM optimized as a macro lens?

There is a Makro-Symmar 120 HM and a Super Symmar 120 HM. I guess the latter is what is being referred to.

[Carsten Wolff]

The Fujinon is a lovely lens. Tiny, good and reasonable movements. A1 travel lens.
Slightly outside your FL and lens-age range: The single-coated 108mm f6.8 Wide-angle Raptar can be pretty amazing; it covers 5x7 with movements and their Alphax shutters are amongst the most reliable beasts (and with rounder apertures than Copals), just the filter situation is a bit complicated, but you can get a, say, 52mm adapter made. Weighs less than 200g, fits ~ Copal 0 holes. I've got both it and a 103.7mm version as my normal 5x7" and 6x17cm wides when I don't want to lug the large 90mm Acugon about.

[Sal Santamaura]

I think we need a more precise definition of "a lot of movement."


My camera has 4cm rise, 4cm fall.If you wish to be able to use all 40mm, even in vertical orientation, even assuming no tilt (which would place further demands on the image circle), among the lenses in your original post only the 120mm Nikkor SW and 110mm Super-Symmar XL will cover. This page


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF4x5in.html

provides a summary of useful data.

In my opinion, your camera's front vertical movement range is only relevant if you use it. Do you? Is architecture something you regularly shoot? If so, the large-circle lens choices are worth their extra cost in weight. If not, and especially if ultimate sharpness concerns you at all, the 120mm Super Symmar HM provides a valuable option. Its 211mm image circle only restricts your front rise/fall range by approximately 1mm in horizontal and 6mm in vertical orientations. It's a bit more than half the Nikkor's weight. Should you come across a mint example at a reasonable price and decide against it, please let me know. :)

Note that I have the 120mm Nikkor SW but don't shoot architecture and instead use it on 5x7. When carrying 4x5, I try to keep things lighter and, for a similar angle of view to what the 120mm Nikkor provides on 5x7, use a 90mm version from the same series. It's important to match tools to the job as well as how one sees.

[Toyon]

I do use a lot of rise and fall. However, it looks like the HM will accommodate about 90% of what I need. Now to find one. Thanks for all the help.