View Full Version : Schneider 90mm F5.6 Super Angulon XL covers whole plate?
Have been considering acquiring a Schneider 90mm F5.6 Super Angulon XL for my whole plate camera. Schneider specs its coverage to be 259mm at f/22 which is just a few mm's shy of the whole plate image coverage on the film. But if their coverage spec is on the conservative side, like with their G-Clarons, there just might be enough coverage for this optic to cover whole plate at infinity, all be it with the lens having to be aligned dead center on the film. Using apertures smaller than f/22 is no problem since I contact print my negatives and diffraction really doesn't present a problem for me.
thanks
Chauncey Walden
25-Dec-2019, 13:02
Maybe the 110mm Super Symmar XL would be a better choice.
Oslolens
25-Dec-2019, 15:14
This has been discussed before, and it seems to cover https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?39981-Schneider-S-A-90mm-XL-f5-6-and-Whole-Plate-Format
The link to the group is not working, and wayback machine has not stored it
Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk
This has been discussed before, and it seems to cover https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?39981-Schneider-S-A-90mm-XL-f5-6-and-Whole-Plate-Format
The link to the group is not working, and wayback machine has not stored it
Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk
Thanks, too bad the URL
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/who...n-90mm-xl-f5-6
is not working, and wayback machine has not stored it... sounds like it would have the answer I'm looking for.
Greg
fuegocito
25-Dec-2019, 16:09
I have tested a few different versions of 90mm lens on 8x10 to see about finding one with the nicest looking circular image (Fuji F/5.6, SA F/8, Nikkor SW F/8 and lastly a Fuji 105mm F/8). I vaguely remember the Nikkor with the largest advertised IC at 235mm missed the 810 by about 1.5" or so. Let me see if I can find my negs, but in theory with Xl's IC noted at 259mm it should cover WP.
neil poulsen
25-Dec-2019, 19:50
Why 90mm?
I have tested a few different versions of 90mm lens on 8x10 to see about finding one with the nicest looking circular image (Fuji F/5.6, SA F/8, Nikkor SW F/8 and lastly a Fuji 105mm F/8). I vaguely remember the Nikkor with the largest advertised IC at 235mm missed the 810 by about 1.5" or so. Let me see if I can find my negs, but in theory with Xl's IC noted at 259mm it should cover WP.
I actually have a 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW that I use on my 4x5. With Nikon's spec of it covering 235mm at f/16 (105 degree angle of coverage), I never thought to try it out on my whole plate because 235mm didn't come close to covering the whole plate format. So mounted the 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW on to my 8x10 camera to determine its coverage that was acceptable to me. Shot a scene that included mountains in the background and a porch rail in the foreground a few feet away from the camera. Figured that the hyperfocal distance for f/64 was about 12-16 feet away, so focused on an object about 12 feet away and shot at f/64. Developed the negative: everything on the negative was sharp. Measured coverage for me was 257mm. Not enough to cover a full whole plate negative... but the mats that I use for my whole plate images have an opening of 6x8 inches. Diagonal of a 6x8 inches is 254mm. So... will be using the 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW on my whole plate taking into account its limitations. Now if I find out that the coverage of a Schneider 90mm F5.6 Super Angulon XL exceeds the coverage of my 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW by 5-10mm, will sell the Nikkor and acquire an XL.
james zhou
27-Dec-2019, 23:08
THE 90MM XL will cover the whole plate format. I have shot a negative on 8x10 with it at infinity and f22, and the lens cast an image measuring 280mm across.
THE 90MM XL will cover the whole plate format. I have shot a negative on 8x10 with it at infinity and f22, and the lens cast an image measuring 280mm across.
James, thank you. That is exactly the information that I was looking for. Coincidently just today found one FS in mint condition at a price that I just couldn't pass up on. Should be in hand by January 4. I actually ended up paying a bit less for the lens than I did for my 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW!!!
fuegocito
30-Dec-2019, 13:04
I actually have a 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW that I use on my 4x5. With Nikon's spec of it covering 235mm at f/16 (105 degree angle of coverage), I never thought to try it out on my whole plate because 235mm didn't come close to covering the whole plate format. So mounted the 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW on to my 8x10 camera to determine its coverage that was acceptable to me. Shot a scene that included mountains in the background and a porch rail in the foreground a few feet away from the camera. Figured that the hyperfocal distance for f/64 was about 12-16 feet away, so focused on an object about 12 feet away and shot at f/64. Developed the negative: everything on the negative was sharp. Measured coverage for me was 257mm. Not enough to cover a full whole plate negative... but the mats that I use for my whole plate images have an opening of 6x8 inches. Diagonal of a 6x8 inches is 254mm. So... will be using the 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW on my whole plate taking into account its limitations. Now if I find out that the coverage of a Schneider 90mm F5.6 Super Angulon XL exceeds the coverage of my 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW by 5-10mm, will sell the Nikkor and acquire an XL.
Yeah, I have a thing(most likely just familiarity) for 90mm, at one point I have like 5 or 6 different version of 90mm with ranging IC coverage to see what work best on 810 (with what degree of vignetting may work better visually). I didn't go for the XL version because the Fuji SW 105mm was more or less in that IC range.
James, thank you. That is exactly the information that I was looking for. Coincidently just today found one FS in mint condition at a price that I just couldn't pass up on. Should be in hand by January 4. I actually ended up paying a bit less for the lens than I did for my 90mm f/4.5 Nikkor-SW!!!
Well the Schneider 90mm F5.6 Super Angulon XL arrived ahead of time. First thing, the thick rimed UV filter on the front had to go, it actually caused some vignetting. This afternoon, shot a test negative with it on my 8x10. james zhou... For me the coverage was about 277mm across at f/45, this is of course a subjective evaluation, but I can see how you arrived at 280mm across. Lens is just going to work out great on my whole plate camera.
Glad you finally got one - I've been trying to tell you for years it covers WP and just shy of 8x10! :)
Does yours have the removable rear shroud?
Glad you finally got one - I've been trying to tell you for years it covers WP and just shy of 8x10! :)
Does yours have the removable rear shroud?
Took a while to acquire one at a reasonable price. Had made the opening bids on some XLs in the past, but was either greatly over bid by others or just didn't meet the reserve price. Was very pleasantly surprised that my opening bid was not outbid this time. Could you describe the "removable rear shroud". Not familiar with what that is.
Greg - from what I understand, the first batch of 90XL lenses was discovered to have a rear element that was too large to fit through the front of many 4x5 cameras and so the very end of the rear element's protective metal "shroud" (not sure what else to call it) was made removable in later productions, allowing it to just barely fit. It just unscrews, leaving the curved glass element exposed and unprotected if you set it down bottom-first. Try unscrewing the end of the lens - it can be a bit difficult since it tends to want to just unscrew from the shutter. I'm not sure if anyone has a rough serial # guide as to when this production change happened, but I believe most 90XL lenses should have it.
Greg - from what I understand, the first batch of 90XL lenses was discovered to have a rear element that was too large to fit through the front of many 4x5 cameras and so the very end of the rear element's protective metal "shroud" (not sure what else to call it) was made removable in later productions, allowing it to just barely fit. It just unscrews, leaving the curved glass element exposed and unprotected if you set it down bottom-first. Try unscrewing the end of the lens - it can be a bit difficult since it tends to want to just unscrew from the shutter. I'm not sure if anyone has a rough serial # guide as to when this production change happened, but I believe most 90XL lenses should have it.
Mine does indeed have that removable rear shroud. Would have never thought to try to unscrew it... thanks, learn something new every day.
What I haven't figured out is if the shroud causes any mechanical vignetting. I always shoot with it off.
Bob Salomon
3-Jan-2020, 07:59
Mine does indeed have that removable rear shroud. Would have never thought to try to unscrew it... thanks, learn something new every day.
If you remove it and then place that lens down on its back end you will scratch the glass. That was what it was added after the lens was introduced originally.
It had 2 problems. 1 that unprotected rear element. 2 the rear diameter is too large to fit through 45 cameras that use the Technika type board.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.