Linhof marked any better?

[Christianganko]

Hello

New to LF and currently looking to build my lens set.

I have seem Linhof marked lenses going for way more than its "unmarked: counter part and wondered why they are so much more?

Surely if the lens is a good lens in great condition, what more could a brand mark add???

Thank you in advance

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Christopher Mark Perez]

During the 1950's and into the 1960's Linhof tested lenses and picked the best.

Why? Because, other than Nippon Kogaku (Nikon) and Kodak, commercial lens manufacturers didn't always "grade" their glass before grinding. Lens element shapes/curves weren't always what they could be as the indices of refraction subtly changed from glass batch to glass batch. Eventually everyone figured out how to cost effectively (it was nearly always about cost) control quality. Nikon's 1000 and 1 Nights lens histories talk a bit about this.



Hello

New to LF and currently looking to build my lens set.

I have seem Linhof marked lenses going for way more than its "unmarked: counter part and wondered why they are so much more?

Surely if the lens is a good lens in great condition, what more could a brand mark add???

Thank you in advance

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Christianganko]

There's also an older TECHNIKA marked lens. Talking specifically 90mm here.

So many choices but prices vary so much, makes it hard to choose. Especially for someone new with little experience.

So just go for a standard equivalent???

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Christopher Mark Perez]

If you can, test the lenses before you buy.

Unless you're going for a certain "esthetic" in your camera equipment, maybe you could broaden your search to include more modern glass?

[Bob Salomon]

During the 1950's and into the 1960's Linhof tested lenses and picked the best.

Why? Because, other than Nippon Kogaku (Nikon) and Kodak, commercial lens manufacturers didn't always "grade" their glass before grinding. Lens element shapes/curves weren't always what they could be as the indices of refraction subtly changed from glass batch to glass batch. Eventually everyone figured out how to cost effectively (it was nearly always about cost) control quality. Nikon's 1000 and 1 Nights lens histories talk a bit about this.
1 LInhof still tests and sometimes rejects lenses.
2 Nikon large format lenses didn’t appear until the early 70s.

[Bernice Loui]

Better to consider deeply what kind of images you're wanting to produce as a finished image..
Then figure out what optics could meet these needs, then camera that can properly support the needs and demands of the optics.
Once those are known, camera support can be figured out.

There was a time when lenses varied in their performance dependent on manufacturer, production, design and... Astute and demanding image makers back then would do their own lens test to decide keep or reject. Stanley Kubrick was well known for doing precisely this. Kubrick owned the lenses and at times specially modified cameras used to produce his films.

Linhof began doing in-house lens testing decades ago to weed out poor performance lenses. They are often engraved with Linhof some where on the lens. But, keep in mind that Linhof lens is likely decades old and lots could easily happen to that Linhof lens since it was initially tested, approved, purchased.

Kodak was one of the first to implement extensive testing and quality assurance for their Ektar lenses sold. This made Ektar lenses generally consistently good. Eventually, the big four (Rodenstock, Fujinon, Schneider, Nikkor) did similar due to available optics production technology and methods. It is one of the many reasons why modern lenses from the big four are far more similar than different. It is what the market back then demanded and expected. The market for LF view camera optics were often working photographers that knew what they needed for getting their images made. The manufactures understood this well and responded to meet this market demand and expectation.

In all cases, best to test the lens considered for ownership before taking ownership.


Bernice



Hello

New to LF and currently looking to build my lens set.

I have seem Linhof marked lenses going for way more than its "unmarked: counter part and wondered why they are so much more?

Surely if the lens is a good lens in great condition, what more could a brand mark add???

Thank you in advance

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Christianganko]

Well I know I need a 90 for a project I am doing.

Unfortunately I dont have physical access to a lot of the lenses I am looking to buy and generally if in store they are way more than I can stretch to.

So bang for buck is what I am going for.

If it comes with a board and caps and is mint then I am there. I purchased one lens with no caps and it's been like an extra $50 just for caps. Which is mental in my opinion.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Bernice Loui]

90mm for 4x5 would imply a wide angle lens. What is the project, what might the technical demands for this project be, what camera ?

The default choice would be to get a modern 90mm wide angle from any of the big four (Schneider, Fujinon, Rodenstock, Nikkor). Depending on possible image circle needs based on possible camera movement needs the 90mm choice could be one of the F4.5 or f5.6, 90mm wide angles as these tend to have the larger image circle with the trade off of physically large.

If a physically smaller size 90mm is needed, the choice defaults to f6.8 to f8, 90mm lenses. These are a bit dimmer on the ground glass image, typically smaller image circle (there are exceptions) performance wise stopped down to f16-f32, essentially similar to the f4.5 or f5.6, 90mm wide angle designs.

90mm being one of the most common 4x5 wide angle focal lengths and most often used 4x5 wide angle lenses used, procuring a GOOD used 90mm at a reasonable $ should not be that difficult. Right to return the lens is a good purchase perk.



Bernice



Well I know I need a 90 for a project I am doing.

Unfortunately I dont have physical access to a lot of the lenses I am looking to buy and generally if in store they are way more than I can stretch to.

So bang for buck is what I am going for.

If it comes with a board and caps and is mint then I am there. I purchased one lens with no caps and it's been like an extra $50 just for caps. Which is mental in my opinion.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[martiansea]

I have a Linhoff Technika branded 90mm f/8. It's a nice lens, plenty sharp. I also have a Linhoff Technika branded 210mm f/5,6 convertible Symmar, which is nice as well, though a bit less "modern" looking image than the 90mm, I guess I'd say it's a bit less 3D contrasty than the 90mm, which makes it look "older" somehow to my eye. Still a nice and useful lens, though.
My point is; I'm very satisfied with my Linhoff Technika branded Schneider lenses, BUT I wouldn't see any point in paying a premium price for them over a "standard" Schneider lens from the same period. I got both of mine relatively cheaply; the 90mm was around $120, including a Cambo recessed lensboard, and the 210mm was "free" with a camera I paid about $300 in total for. They fit the "bang for the buck" category for sure, as long as you don't overpay.

edit: Also, if you do end up with some variety of 90mm f/8, a fresnel for the ground glass is almost MANDATORY if you want to be able to see the image well enough to focus without undue hardship. The lens throws a very dim image. And a bag bellows as well, unless your camera already has good facilities for movements with the standards very close together.

[Corran]

Buy literally any 90mm f/8 lens in modern all-black Copal 0 shutter and you'll be fine (or f/6.8 if it's a Rodenstock). Or an f/5.6 or f/4.5 if you absolutely think you need more light for focusing, but understand they are bigger and take 82mm filters (as opposed to 67mm filters on the f/8 models).

[Christianganko]

I would be looking at a 5.6. Cant be dealing with low light business. I got a 210 5.6 and it works out perfectly for me. Anything under that and its a no.

But yes. I see your perspective. Why pay more for a marking. I guess I am curious as to if the lens is any different to the same within.

Being new to lt has got me asking a lot of questions here and to myself. Google has been my friend. And generally points me straight back here hhah



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Christianganko]

Urban shots / for a book

I know 90 would be ideal as on 120 I have the 65 and the 50 and they work great for me

I am not really going to use filters. In fact never use them. Most of my work is either in studio or a very specific time of day. Not a landscape photographer either.





Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Corran]

You should be aware that f/5.6 on the ground glass will be vastly different on a 90mm compared to a 210mm. This is because of the angles involved and other differences. There's also the variables of whether or not you have a fresnel.

An f/9 lens on my 8x10 is like looking at a computer monitor compared to an f/5.6 ultrawide on 4x5 which is hopelessly dim.

[Greg]

On a related note, I was always impressed by manufacturers who included film that was taken with their equipment. A transparency came with my NOBLEX PRO 6/150UX with the camera's serial number marked on the glassine film envelope. I can remember the same came with two other pieces of photo equipment that I purchased probably in the 1980s, I just can't recall what those two pieces of equipment were. Possibly a Swiss Alpa lens?

[Christianganko]

Buy literally any 90mm f/8 lens in modern all-black Copal 0 shutter and you'll be fine (or f/6.8 if it's a Rodenstock). Or an f/5.6 or f/4.5 if you absolutely think you need more light for focusing, but understand they are bigger and take 82mm filters (as opposed to 67mm filters on the f/8 models).

How far back in terms of lens creation date should i go would you suggest? There are silver ring ones which are mint. The all black ones cost a penny more.

Thank you again

[Corran]

I only mention the all-black Copal shutters because I, at least in my limited but not wholly dismissible experience of many dozens of lenses, have found them to be universally in good condition and working within tolerances. Meanwhile, silver-ring Copals are older and several I have had were starting to show signs of needing a CLA, and other shutters like Compurs and the like were almost always in need of service.

So a black-ring Copal may in fact cost less to you, given the very possible need for a service, despite the slightly higher upfront cost. I have at least a dozen all-black Copals that are used regularly and have had nary a hitch in hundreds of sheets of film.

If a silver-ring shutter is advertised as tested and works well and the lens is at a very attractive price, I'd still likely go for it. But most sellers on eBay and such don't know what is working within tolerances. Perhaps check the classifieds here for more educated sellers.

[Christianganko]

I didn't know there was a classified. I dont see it

[Jim Andrada]

You won't see it until you've been a member for a month.

[Corran]

You're able to access it after a month of being registered. If it doesn't show up (it's way down the list of subforums, in the Community area) contact a mod or post in the Feedback section.