View Full Version : schneider 110 SSXL

27-Jul-2006, 11:32
does it cover 8x10 at infinity, and if so, at what aperture?

Jorge Gasteazoro
27-Jul-2006, 11:44
David Goldberg at APUG posted that it does cover without movement, but I dont recall the aperture. That said, that is an extreme wide angle, I have the 150 XL and I found it is more than enough in any situation and you have some movement with it. I would not buy the 110 just for the 8x10, of course if you have a 5x7 or 4x5 then it might be worth it.

27-Jul-2006, 11:49
I have the lens but I was wondering if it could be attached to one of these and cover full frame. No movement required.


27-Jul-2006, 12:06
Sounds like it's designed for the Nikon SW 120. Won't you need a recessed board then for the 110?

27-Jul-2006, 12:12
maybe, maybe not. If the 120 has an extension board on it, then it would just need an extension which 10mm less than the 120.

Oh , and Nikon don't make LF lenses anymore, so I'd need a second hand one if I went for it.

Ted Harris
27-Jul-2006, 12:27
Gettng back to the original question. I have used the SSXL 110 on both a Phillips Compact II and Wista double extension 8x10 and can also atest that it covers 8x10 with no movements. That is at f22; stopping down a bit more and you do get some movement but there is also a bit of softness at the far corners. Schneider is known to be extremely conservative with their specifications for image circles and coverage and this is one of those cases where they quote an image circle that is some 8% smaller that what most users find. You will find numerous posts to this effect starting with the introduction of the lens some 4-5 years ago.

27-Jul-2006, 12:28
B&H might still have one. They did awhile back.

I'm not sure why you would think the 120mm is mounted with an extension board? It looks designed to focus the 120mm at a certain distance. From my reading I don't think it's focussing the 120mm at infinity.

27-Jul-2006, 12:36
I think the 120 may be on extension board because if it wasn't , the 90 would require a recessed board or a shorter body.

27-Jul-2006, 12:37
thanks all,
I thought it would cover 8x10 because there is so much quoted available shift on 5x4.

27-Jul-2006, 13:57
If you have a Deardorff you do not need a recessed board at all. Simply tilt front backwards, tilt and adjust height of the lensboard and voila...you will be able to put 90mm lens close to back. Moving Back forward and backward you would able to get picture in focus. Even tilting back would allow you change plane of sharp focus, which is preferable if you have limited or no movements.

My two Canadian cents.:)

27-Jul-2006, 15:38
I had a 110SSXL that I used on 8x10 for a while, with a little bit of movement. Less of a concern than any drop-off in the corners is the savagely wide angle of view. When I noticed my Civic in the background of a shot, stretched to look like a station wagon, I decided enough was enough and traded it for a 159mm.

I also found it an awkward size for 4x5 (not quite wide enough), so it was doubly useless, despite high quality optics. Probably best suited to 5x7.

Ron Marshall
28-Jul-2006, 13:37
I also found it an awkward size for 4x5 (not quite wide enough), so it was doubly useless, despite high quality optics. Probably best suited to 5x7.

I like it on 4x5, although a 120 could substitute for it. But it is wonderful on my 5x7.