Does the 72mm Super-Angulon XL need a center filter?

[Paul Cunningham]

Do you scan your slides? If so, you probably want to see how things go first, before ponying up for a center filter.

[Deval]

I do scan them. When I see something like http://tomwestbrook.com/Photography/lf_lenses.html
It gets me thinking. In bw it may be artistic. In slide color I'm not so sure..

[aflc]

I never shot colour film/slide film so I can't comment on slides.

I own a 72 XL and its centre filter and from my experience shooting b&w, the example in that link "exaggerates" the problem. I don't notice such a noticeable falloff except when using more pronounced shifts.

In practice I only use the centre filter when the image absolutely requires it. Most of the time I shoot with an yellow/orange filter and accept the fact that there will be a gradient.

[Paul Cunningham]

If you are scanning it so easy to correct vignette in post (e.g. via Lightroom), that an expensive center filter might not worth the price.

[StoneNYC]

I can't speak for the 72 XL but I have the SS 150 XL and on 8x10 at infinity it's a HUGE problem even in B&W, I would NOT chance expensive transparency film.

Even after heavy work adjusting the vignette in Lightroom and mind you this is only 4x10 this is what I got.

134026

It only seems to be an issue at infinity, on the converse, at close distances it's not really even an issue on 11x14 with no vignette adjustment in Lightroom as in this image ...

134027

So if the 72 XL is anywhere similar to the amount of falloff with the 150 XL then I would be hesitant with infinity images but suspect it would be ok at closer distances.

Ultimately you should test first and see for yourself. Test some B&W to give you an idea.

[Paul Cunningham]

Stone, that's some pretty strong vignetting. If you're on a recent version of LR you might try a radial gradient correction.
I presume that was not shot with a polarizing filter.

[Deval]

Thanks for the tip... I'll definitely try before I look further for the unicorn filter.. BH new price is mid 500...

[StoneNYC]

Stone, that's some pretty strong vignetting. If you're on a recent version of LR you might try a radial gradient correction.
I presume that was not shot with a polarizing filter.

Red or Orange filter.

Yea that image is AFTER the vignette gradient adjusting in LE4, it was much worse before.

No it wasn't vignette from the filter as I use a 77mm on the rear and it only needs a 62mm, just to cover that question.

This is the image that convinced me about the need for the CF filter.

It also convinced me that Schneider lost their vision somewhere, or just wanted to make photographers spend more. This lens should have been sold with the filter included not as an accessory.

[Paul Cunningham]

Stone, can we see the 'before' version?

[Old-N-Feeble]

Schneider didn't lose its vision. It's just a matter of physics. Two stops light loss is the norm and others with one and one half stops loss use the tilting iris trick. But this only helps by one half stop. Typically, all ultra-wide lenses without CF behave precisely the same way in that regard. If one pushes the lens beyond it's advertised limits then the light loss is even greater. Ever seen uncorrected light loss of something like a Hypergon when pushed to its limits?

[StoneNYC]

Nikkor 150 SW doesn't have this problem

Yea sure I'll pull the raw scan tonight

[Lachlan 717]

I have the 72mm and can categorically say that you DO need the CF for Chromes.

Don't kid yourself that you can correct this in LR/PS; the drop-off is too significant. The corners are just too dark if you're exposing for the centre.

[Old-N-Feeble]

All ultra-wide lenses have this issue when used as ultra-wide lenses. :)

[Paul Cunningham]

I just took a plunge on the 72 SAXL. Because I shoot a lot of slide film, I'm thinking I need a center filter. I'd love to be talked out of it...but does anyone have one for sale

Deval, what format are you shooting?

[Deval]

4x5..but I'd like to do occasional 617

[StoneNYC]

Ok, don't laugh at my crappy imagery and issues with light leaks and static, lol.

For sharing and learning purposes only... The 3 images I took that day with the 150 XL, same filter, relatively the same settings f/22-f/45 and around 1/125th or so etc, I suspect that more contrast filled bright light scene will accentuate the issue, even the close up image seems to have it a bit, though not quite as bad. That last shot of the sand I was experimenting, so sorry it's so crappy. Hope this helps the OP. Also, I thought I worked on the vignette more, but now looking at it I must not have, I think I did, didn't like how the center lost some of its "pop" and "undid" it.

134088
134089
134090

[Louis Pacilla]

Come on guys this is not the discussion portion of the forum.:(

If you want to help the guy can't you PM him? We use to do this all the time.

[Eric Leppanen]

The Super Symmar XL series has more light falloff than the Biogon-derived wide angle designs such as the Nikon SW, Super Angulons, Grandagons, etc. See Michael Brigg's post in the following thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?12760-150mm-XL-or-155-Grandagon-N

Having said all that, I would agree that if you use extensive movements you will typically want to use the SA72XL center filter with chrome film. Neg film might be more of a toss-up depending on how much edge vignetting you find aesthetically acceptable.

[StoneNYC]

Come on guys this is not the discussion portion of the forum.:(

If you want to help the guy can't you PM him? We use to do this all the time.

Sorry, I would PM the photos but you can't send images in messaged on LF Forum (though vBulletin does allows it the feature is turned off here).

I won't help any more, or post more here, but hope it was helpful.

[Oren Grad]

Discussion moved from FS/WTB section.

[Louis Pacilla]

Discussion moved from FS/WTB section.

Thanks Oren.:)

[StoneNYC]

Discussion moved from FS/WTB section.

WOW!!!!! No other moderator has ever done something as magical as this!!! You're impressing me every day sir! Sheesh, you're on fire! Just don't get burnt out!

[Deval]

Thanks oren... I'll re-post a wtb in the right section depending on how this discussion ends...

[Deval]

Stone... Its interesting... If you are looking for the vignette it starts becoming obvious. If you are glancing at the picture it might be easy to pass by

[StoneNYC]

Stone... Its interesting... If you are looking for the vignette it starts becoming obvious. If you are glancing at the picture it might be easy to pass by

True, but as others have said it's much different on transparency film, what looks "artsy" and gentle nice fall off and become the center being completely blown out while the edges go dark, or the center is properly exposed and the edges are completely contrasty and scan terribly. I just don't have any examples as I don't use it with my Velvia50 8x10 :)

[Drew Wiley]

Significant falloff is a fact. Period. It is obviously even in a 120 SA, let alone a 90. Wider still, it's only worse. So the question is simply whether you like the look
of falloff in a particular image or want to correct for it.

[Deval]

I have the 72mm and can categorically say that you DO need the CF for Chromes.

Don't kid yourself that you can correct this in LR/PS; the drop-off is too significant. The corners are just too dark if you're exposing for the centre.

Would you mind sharing some examples

[Deval]

Significant falloff is a fact. Period. It is obviously even in a 120 SA, let alone a 90. Wider still, it's only worse. So the question is simply whether you like the look
of falloff in a particular image or want to correct for it.

Drew, same thing, would you mind sharing some examples...It might be helpful for others considering these lenses.(at least to budget in for a CF and the appropriate filter size rings).

[Drew Wiley]

It's real simple. The recommended center filter for this 72mm lens requires TWO FULL STOPS of exposure compensation. Now go out and underexpose a chrome by two full stops and see what you get - virtually nothing in the midtones! Just black. A few highlights might come through. The official Schneider graphs also tell you the same thing. Falloff is dramatic. Black and white film might give you more forgiveness; but there's a limit even to that credit card. You're Zone V suddenly becomes Zone III in the corners. Sorry; but at the moment I don't have any examples I've shot WITHOUT a center filter. It's not that I'm against that kind of thing.
But my main use for Super-Angulons or any other true wide-angle lens was for chromes back in architectual photo days where even illumination was critical to
either the printing or publication.

[Bob Salomon]

I do scan them. When I see something like http://tomwestbrook.com/Photography/lf_lenses.html
It gets me thinking. In bw it may be artistic. In slide color I'm not so sure..

Click on my name and look at the shot from Arches. That was shot with the Technorama 617 SIII with 72 mm without the center filter.

[Deval]

Thanks Bob. Wow. That is very pronounced. Time to look for a filter. When I get one, I'll try to post one slide with, and one slide without to help other folks in the future.

[Lachlan 717]

Would you mind sharing some examples

Currently o/s, but will look when I get home.

[Corran]

I've used my 72XL with 617 mostly. I would say the quickest way to fix the problem without spending a ton of money is shoot two frames and blend them. Obviously this is a limited option sometimes. But if you already have the 72XL this might be a good way to test.

I shot some frames on Velvia 50 this weekend, so we'll see how they turn out. I shot some with Provia 100F though a few months ago. Here is one example:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8Ee3koJMdw4/VAXNWonkBcI/AAAAAAAAFi8/awG5OaBzGOs/s1600/langdale617-72mm-0330s.jpg

It's really not that bad. B&W was not an issue. This was the worst of it, with bright sunlit areas in the center of the frame getting accented by the falloff:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J3T0kwj18ss/VAXN1wU8NhI/AAAAAAAAFjc/adEMEBCk4pg/s1600/langdalepanf617-0335s.jpg

If you want to see more from this series go HERE (http://valdostafilm.blogspot.com/2014/09/more-withlacoochee-panoramic-images.html).

That being said, I do still want the CF. Just for ease of use and it definitely is noticeable sometimes.