PDA

View Full Version : 5x7 wide lens: a newbie's conundrum



Rraven
13-Mar-2016, 13:03
Hello!

I have recently taken my long anticipated plunge into large format with a magnificent 5x7 Norma and three lenses: a 165mm angulon, 210mm sinaron s and a 450mm nikkor m. Now I think I'm in need of a little sage advice to help complete my line up with a wide and I'll be, for the moment at least, all set!

I'm shooting 5x7 and 6x17 panoramics, and anticipate using a fair amount of movement when shooting wide in 5x7. Multiplying up from small format, I seem to gravitate towards a 100-105mm focal length, with a blank range between 120 and 150ish, but use down to 90 with occasional want for wider. Which leads to a troublesome dilemma; which compromise will leave me happiest? The lenses I am considering are:


Grandagon 115mm: Great coverage, but I fear wanting wider, especially for the panos, a bit too often.
Super symmar 110mm: Great coverage again, nice size but frankly a bit pricey.
Fuji SW 105mm: OK coverage I guess, nice focal length on paper, a bit dark and performance a tad below the others, possibly?
Super angulon xl 90: Seems to be the only 90 that makes sense on 5x7 (how conservative are the stated IC's of the 4.5 grandagon and nikkor sw, and fuji swd?), maybe a bit wide for general use but not for the pano's, and there's always scissors.


I have also considered the 4 3/8" wa dagor, but it seems that there's no deals to be had there either. I value resolution, but out of focus rendering and other facets of character are at least equally important. I don't care too much about illumination falloff, indeed I often add vignetting to my photos, so long as it's not severe enough to ruin a strip of velvia when shot straight on. What do you think? ...are there any secret options I've missed? I look forward to your opinions!

Rr.

Steve Goldstein
13-Mar-2016, 13:57
Wollensak 108mm? A tad dark at f/12.5, but it's tiny and lightweight if that matters.

Mark Tweed
13-Mar-2016, 15:52
Speaking of 90's, there is the Komura 90mm f6.3 that covers the 5X7 format, I have one and it's a great lens with its brighter f6.3 viewing and less light fall-off in the corners because of its retrofocus design. Here's some quick specs I pulled off the web.


Super-W-Komura 90mm F6.3
Wide-angle lenses for large format camera in the 1970s

- Lens construction: 8 elements in 5 groups
- Comprehensive angle: 106 °
- Image Circle: 240 mm
- Screen Size for: 5x7 inches
- Shutter: COPAL No. 0

AA+
13-Mar-2016, 16:33
I use the 72mm Super Angulon XL on 5x7 and it works very well. Watch your foot position! I also use the correct center filters for both my 90mm and 72mm Super Angulon XL, and they work very well for evening out the illumination.

Best wishes --- Allen

Greg
13-Mar-2016, 16:49
I use a 105mm f/8 FUJINON SW on my Whole Plate. Excellent lens in every way and should provide you with ample movements on your 5x7.

"Grandagon 115mm" also was marketed by Calumet under Caltar. Had a 115mm Caltar and it was an excellent lens.

Also consider the Nikkor 120mm f8 SW. It's my widest lens for my 8x10 and sharp even in the corners.

When going this wide, really, really consider a center gradated ND filter. Never used one for years, but then tried one had haven't looked back since.... rarely shoot without using one.

Norma's are great... use a 4x5 and an 8x10.Some advice: never sell it. I did for both formats and soon regretted it. Replaced both as soon as I could.

mdarnton
13-Mar-2016, 18:20
The Wolly 108mm has a stop on the aperture and will open to about 6.8 for viewing; perhaps not for focusing. There's also a 6.8 version of the same lens (I have one of each). But I don't think that they have enough movement, compared with the others.

IanG
14-Mar-2016, 02:43
I'm using my 90mm f5.6 Super Angulon as my WA lens for 7x5, I've always found that 90mm lenses are very responsive to quite small amounts of movements, a little achieves a lot. For what I shoot with 6x17 I actually found the 90mm to be a touch too long but this is mainly to do with my subject matter and need to work closer to the subject so I use a 75mm f8 SA.

Ian.

George Hart
14-Mar-2016, 06:30
The Nikkor-SW 90/8 has been available for a reasonable price. It covers 5x7 easily and is very sharp. The Super-symmar XL 110/5.6 is superb on 5x7, worth waiting for…

Luis-F-S
14-Mar-2016, 08:56
The 90 XL is a beast so never leaves the studio. I like the WA Dagor n as posted above there are plenty other 90s that cover 5x7. There's a 90 SA 5.6 on this forum very well priced.

mdarnton
14-Mar-2016, 09:29
I have to take back what I said. This morning got out my 8x10 and started hanging lenses on it. I put my Wolly 108/6.8 (not the 12.5) and was surprised that it nearly fully lights 8x10. The 115/6.8 Caltar did slightly better, as the specs would indicate. Now the interesting thing: I put on my 90/5.6 SA, and it nearly lights the whole 8x10 also--less than the others, but still pretty good. Some of you might remember my experiment with the 65/5.6 SA on 5x7, near the end of my LF Flickr stuff, but I think the 90/5.6 covers 8x10 better than that. So now I have that project to do--lug the 8x10 outside and see what the story really is. Notice I said "lights"--I have not yet determined how the sharpness is out there with any of these.

I'm starting to think that any of the suggested lenses would probably provide MORE than is required.

IanG
14-Mar-2016, 11:07
I have to take back what I said. This morning got out my 8x10 and started hanging lenses on it. I put my Wolly 108/6.8 (not the 12.5) and was surprised that it nearly fully lights 8x10. The 115/6.8 Caltar did slightly better, as the specs would indicate. Now the interesting thing: I put on my 90/5.6 SA, and it nearly lights the whole 8x10 also--less than the others, but still pretty good. Some of you might remember my experiment with the 65/5.6 SA on 5x7, near the end of my LF Flickr stuff, but I think the 90/5.6 covers 8x10 better than that. So now I have that project to do--lug the 8x10 outside and see what the story really is. Notice I said "lights"--I have not yet determined how the sharpness is out there with any of these.

I'm starting to think that any of the suggested lenses would probably provide MORE than is required.

You raise the interesting point of lenses with circles of illumination that greatly exceed their use-able image circle in terms of an acceptable level of sharpness. The other extreme is lenses that run out of coverage due to physical vignetting.

The Wollensak WA lenses are more like the early Angulons and the Meyer equivalents, greater coverage compared to the last Angulon designs and less prone to vignetting.

There's probably a need for a thread on these lenses with wide illumination and soft fall off after all Emmet Gowin and others exploited this wonderfully a few years ago.

Ian

mdarnton
14-Mar-2016, 12:12
Yes, I recently bought, sort of by accident, a recent sort of 120mm Angulon. Going to Schneider's website, I'm surprised to discover that it isn't even listed for 5x7! I haven't put it on a camera yet to see what the real story is, but they're not giving me confidence.

Willie
14-Mar-2016, 15:55
The Super Angulon 90 XL covers enough to use for 4x10 film. Works well for 5x7.

Rraven
14-Mar-2016, 15:57
It's pretty awesome to have such a vibrant and helpful community here, thank you all for offering your experience.

I had seen the wollensak 108mm and then discounted it, perhaps prematurely, on coverage grounds... Michael, if you do an 8x10 test it'd be interesting to hear your conclusions.

The Komura is new to me... thanks, I'll look it up!

Great to hear such a positive experience of the fuji sw 105... this is the one that I initially thought came closest to my ideal, but then started fretting about IC, f/8, still wanting wider for panoramics, etc. Centre filter advice is in the bank, likewise the sensitivity of 90's to movements, thank you. Great to hear your endorsement of the 72 on 5x7 too... this one for me, like the 300, has been put on the back burner for as long as can be tolerated, but I'd like eventually to have my wide needs covered by 2 lenses rather than 3, and this, or a 75, is definitely of interest. Do you find that any of these super wide designs perform particularly well, or poorly, when focussed close?

Best wishes,

Mark Tweed
15-Mar-2016, 15:42
I owned a mint version of the Wollensak 108mm f6.8, it was a very sharp lens but my sample, despite what the specs say, did not provide sufficient coverage for use on a 5X7. What I have in its place is a Rodenstock 112mm f12 Perigon; incredibly small (think 90mm f6.8 Angulon), sharp and loads of coverage for the 5X7 format.

Two23
15-Mar-2016, 16:19
Pardons for borrowing this thread, but I now have a 5x7 and have been using a Rodenstock 135mm. I also have a Nikon 90mm f4.5. Will that work on 5x7? There is a little vignetting on the GG.


Kent in SD

mdarnton
15-Mar-2016, 18:07
Vignetting on the ground glass may not be telling an accurate story. Don't believe anything until you see what it looks like on film.

IanG
16-Mar-2016, 03:13
Pardons for borrowing this thread, but I now have a 5x7 and have been using a Rodenstock 135mm. I also have a Nikon 90mm f4.5. Will that work on 5x7? There is a little vignetting on the GG.

Kent in SD

Look at the image circles listed here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF5x7in.html).

Ian