View Full Version : 72/75mm lens vs. 90mm

Gary Smith
25-Jan-2006, 17:31
Dear All,

I searched the archives, but could not find a really good answer.

I am currently shooting with a 90mm lens, and find I use it for more than half of my shots. However, I am finding that its often not wide enough for in the places that I am shooting, old Japanese temples and shrines.

I am thinking about getting either a 72mm Schnieder or a 75mm Nikon/Rodenstock. But, I am not sure if the difference between the 90mm lens and the 72/75mm lens is really enough. I am wondering if I should be looking at something wider, like 65mm or 58mm instead of the 72/75mm class lens.

Any information or thoughts would be greatly appreciated as always.



Juergen Sattler
25-Jan-2006, 17:37
Hi Gary,

I went through the same issue. I actually bought a 75mm lens and realized that the difference between the 90 ad the 75 is marginal. I ended up selling the 75 and bought a 65mm Nikon instead, which gives me the wide view that I was looking for. I still use the 90 way more than the 65, but it's there if I need it. My advice is, get the 65mm and don't look back. Good Luck

Eric Woodbury
25-Jan-2006, 18:16
Gary, I think you're right. If you shoot half with a 90mm, then you like wide angles and 72mm is not that much wider. Besides, no such things as too wide. You can always crop; it's okay.

If you want to get some real performance out of a 72mm, however, use it with a 5x7. That is seriously wide. After I bought the 72, I sold my 90 and 121, bought the 110mm SSXL. This gives more even steps: 72, 110, 150, 210, 300, 450, 600-800. These are all for 5x7. I find if I put the camera in a vice, I can use the 58mm and it almost covers. I only lose about 3/8" in the corners.

Personally, I wouldn't get the 65. Don't have a reason, but if I could only get one, I'd go right to 58 or 47.

steve simmons
25-Jan-2006, 18:20
The problem with the 65mm lenses is that they will not allow for much in the way of movements. The 72/75 has much more movement possibility. My setup looks like 58, 75, 90.

steve simmons

25-Jan-2006, 18:54
What Steve said.

Stephen Willard
26-Jan-2006, 20:06
I have both the Nikkor 90mm and 75mm, and I use them extensively. I think there is a big difference between the two, at least for my application of shooting landscape photography in the mountains of Colorado. I even bought the 65mm, but ended up selling it because I thought is was to wide and rarely used it. I would say about 40% of my work is done using the 75mm, 10% with the 90mm, and 20% using my 120mm. The remaining 30% is split between my other 7 lenses.

I work very hard to use every square inch of the negative. I very rarely ever crop my work because I believe cropping will compromise the technical clarity of the image. Having both the 75mm and 90mm gives more flexibility in the field to fit my compositions to my 4x5 format without having to crop.

David A. Goldfarb
26-Jan-2006, 21:52
I think they are quite different as well. A 90mm lens feels like a 28mm lens on 35mm format to me--just the beginning of the wide range, good for outdoor architecturals in many cases and many architecturals. 75mm is a real necessity for interiors and some very tall structures, and I use it as my widest lens with the 6x17cm back. I have a 65mm and a 55mm too, and I tend to gravitate more toward the 55mm, because if I'm going that wide I usually want something that's as wide as possible, but the 65mm lens that I have is a more compact lens, so I have a place for it as well.

Gary Smith
30-Jan-2006, 05:51
Dear Everyone,

Thank you for the replies. I ended up buying the 72mm Schneider Super Anglon today, and I almost bought the 58mm as well, but that will have to wait for a while. I only used the lens for a couple of quick tests, but its nice, I think it was a good choice.

I am just curious if there is a consenus or not that a center filter is needed? Hoping to avoid it if I can, they seem really expensive.

Thanx Again.