75mm or 90mm based on the following....

[AdamD]

Hi.

Looking for your experience to guide me.

I'd like the next lens to be either the 75mm or a 90mm. The 72mm or 80mm are fine as well, just need that range.

Here's the deal. I currently have a Fuji 150 W and a set of 67mm filters. So, I'd like to stick with a 67mm thread on the wide angle lens if at all possible. If not, as long as a Step Ring will be appropriate, that's ok too. Also, I really don't want to spend more than $400 and preferably must less than that. I would like the lens to be somewhat light (definitely do not want a tank!). I have no preference on manufacturer and I don't mind the slower lenses (f/8 vs the the faster types). I imagine I would almost exclusively shoot landscapes with this wide lens. On rare occasions I might shoot an old shack in the woods. I would also prefer this lens to be easy to use.

So the first question is, which focal length is a good bet? I find my eye gravitates to wide angle lenses and the 75 and 90 are both in that range. I don't feel married to either one (both will be necessary for true decision). The 75mm might introduce distortion and edge issues...not sure.

Second question, what would you suggest for my purpose considering cost and usage?

Thx!!
Adam

[Mark Sampson]

If you're just starting, go for a 90mm. There are many threads on this forum about which one to choose; remember that these will all be professional-quality optics.
75mm is very wide, and the short F.L. might make movements difficult (depending on your camera). My personal favorite (for over 25 years) is the Nikkor-SW 90/8.

[Dan Fromm]

If you get a lens shorter than 90 mm you'll need a center filter. CFs and step rings don't get along. There are few CFs with 67 mm front threads, if you shop for one shop carefully.

I agree with Mark, you might be better off starting with a 90. A used 90/8 Fujinon will easily fit within your budget. 67 mm front threads, you might (great stress might) be able to use 67 mm filter in front of it without vignetting as long as you don't use large movements.

[Corran]

Any of the 90mm f/8 lenses will have 67mm filters. I would recommend finding one with a newer Copal #0 shutter for the best chance at a trouble-free experience. There's also the Rodenstock 90mm f/6.8 lens that also uses a 67mm filter.

IMO if you want wider than that, go to a 58mm / 65mm. I often carry 58/90/150 for my minimalist kit.

[Drew Wiley]

He's trying to stack filter, Corran. That's going to lead to some awfully dim viewing with a smaller, less bright WA lens. But's it's not you I'm trying to convince, since you seem to poo-poo everything most everyone else learned decades ago about color film. If you get nice images the hard way, I congratulate that. But there are more efficient ways of doing it.

[Corran]

Wrong thread Drew.

[Drew Wiley]

Whatever. I do know from sometimes needing to work with stacked filters on wide-angles lenses, just how hard viewing can be for young eyes, let alone older ones. The extra stops of brightness of the Superwide 90 are a real asset. And in this case, composition is contemplated with filters in place. Your own method of dodging part of the angle of view waving a darkslide in front of the lens is clever, but no doubt takes some experience and willingness to gamble with film. Reminds me of those little propeller fans on hypergon lenses - a totally mechanical solution.

[Doremus Scudder]

Back on topic :)

Get a 90mm. I've got lots of lenses; my most used are the 135mm and the 90mm, in that order. My 75mm gets used rarely simply because 90mm is wide enough 90% of the time. Plus, there will be a lot (really a lot) more room for movements with a 90mm. A 75mm just barely covers 4x5. If you get the 75mm and your next lens is 150mm, you're going to have a rather large hole between the two to fill in; you'll end up getting a 90mm anyway.

So do it the other way around; get the 90mm first.

If you need lots of coverage, go for the Nikkor SW 90mm f/8. If you don't need so much coverage, other f/8 lenses, like the Schneider Super Angulon, the Fujinon SW 90mm or the Rodenstock Grandagon 90mm f/6.8 are superb performers and usually cheaper. Go for the cheapest one of these in good condition with a newer shutter; brand doesn't matter.

There are lenses like the 90mm Schneider Angulon f/6.8 (not Super) that just barely cover 4x5 and don't allow any movements at all. These are very compact, but not nearly as versatile as their "Super" cousins. I wouldn't recommend one unless you really need lightweight.

Best,

Doremus

[Michael Roberts]

What Doremus said.

Personally, I really like the Wollensak f6.8 90mm. Tiny. $100 or under. If you want a 67mm filter, you would have to step way up.

FWIW, if you are building your first 4x5 lens kit, I would buy either a 127mm Ektar or 135mm Optar plus a 203mm Ektar. The 127/135 won't give you any movements, but they are inexpensive and will let you see if you like that fl better than 150. On 8x10, I tend to use 240-ish and 450ish twice as much as 300; that translates to around 127 and 225 as compared to 150. YMMV.

[AdamD]

As always, this forum group never lets me down. Great advice and suggestions. 90mm it is....the search is on.

[Bob Salomon]

As always, this forum group never lets me down. Great advice and suggestions. 90mm it is....the search is on.

But your question could not be properly answered since you never said what you will shoot with it. National parks? Buildings? Interiors? They all will have different requirements.

Also, make sure you get slim mount filters with front threads if you want to stack filters. Less chance of vignetting that way.

[Corran]

I imagine I would almost exclusively shoot landscapes with this wide lens. On rare occasions I might shoot an old shack in the woods.

[Two23]

I have lenses 75/90/135mm for wide. The 90mm gets the most use. I use the 75mm mostly to shoot the interiors of abandoned buildings. Make sure you camera can handle 90mm.


Kent in SD

[AdamD]

Kent, that Cambo would need the bag bellows for sure. I measured it and think 125mm is about the absolute minimum.

[Dan Fromm]

Kent, that Cambo would need the bag bellows for sure. I measured it and think 125mm is about the absolute minimum.

If you're referring to your camera -- the post I'm quoting is the first mention of Cambo in this discussion -- you may have assembled it incorrectly. See: https://static.cambo.com/Files/SC2_Manual.pdf

[Two23]

If you're referring to your camera -- the post I'm quoting is the first mention of Cambo in this discussion -- you may have assembled it incorrectly. See: https://static.cambo.com/Files/SC2_Manual.pdf

I'm pretty sure I was using a 90mm Super Angulon on it with the bag bellows.


Kent in SD

[Bernice Loui]

With 4x5, pick a 90mm lens that has enough image circle to meet the image making needs.

~Then go burn film.


Analysis-Paralysis prevents the burning of film, production print images and greatly slows the ability to travel up the learning curve.

Bernice

[AdamD]

If you're referring to your camera -- the post I'm quoting is the first mention of Cambo in this discussion -- you may have assembled it incorrectly. See: https://static.cambo.com/Files/SC2_Manual.pdf

Dan thank you so much for checking....I've looked at this sheet before and verified I do have it set up the same way as depicted. When I compress the standards as close together as I can WITH THE TRIPOD CENTER SUPPORT BETWEEN the standards, the closest I can get them from lens board to GG is about 120mm.

I'm assuming then, shortest focal length lens I could use in the configuration would be a 120mm lens (but with no allowance for movements.

Is that right?

I think the only way you an effectively use shorter focal length lenses is by moving the two standards IN FRONT of the tripod mount which would then allow them to get much more close together.

Do I have this correct???

Thanks guys!! I'd be totally lost without your help. Well, in fact I would have never tried out LF, and that would have been a shame....

[Two23]

Yes. Mount tripod block somewhere else besides between the standards. It's normally between them to better balance camera and get them out of the way.


Kent in SD

[Peter Gomena]

There's a surprising difference between 150mm and 90mm. I have both lenses, and find 90mm is more than enough for my casual use. My 150 is my most-used lens these days. I've only used a 75mm a couple of times, and found that it was so wide it was difficult to use, and it did not have a lot of coverage. On the other hand, I have a good friend who did a lot of architectural work with his 75mm and uses it as his standard wide lens. My 90 is an f/8, it is fine in most landscape situations, very useful in tight spaces or for creating a sense of space where there may not be some in reality. There are a lot of good used 90s out there, and they seem to hover around $350-400 for modern lenses in newer shutters.

[C. D. Keth]

I'd probably just go with a normal 90mm super angulon. I don't care much for lenses wider than 90mm on 4x5. Some people use them to beautiful effect (Corran comes to mind) but whenever I use very wide lenses the effect strikes me as gimicky like the "wideness" becomes the content of the photograph rather than what I intended.