120mm lens suggestions?

[Jack Brauer]

Hello,

My most frequently used 4x5 lens has been my Nikon 135mm W 5.6, however I am finding that oftentimes it is just a little too tight for my taste.

So I want to sell that and get a 120mm lens. I would love to get your suggestions on a good 120. My main criteria are:

1) Lightweight - Most of my photos are taken on backpacking trips in the mountains. It is crucial that my lenses be lightweight.

2) Not insanely expensive. I can't see myself spending more than about $750, new or used.

Thanks in advance for your feedback!

[Ole Tjugen]

At the risk of being repetitive, the 120mm f:6.8 Angulon is small, lightweight, cheap, and has plenty of coverage for 4x5". Same for the 121mm f:6.3 Leitmeyr Weitwinkel-Anastigmat - essentially the same lens. Good late Angulons should be around $200 - 300.

[Christopher Perez]

I agree with Ole. A 120 Angulon f/6.8 is a pretty sweet lens.

For landscape work I have heard a few photographers swear by their little Fuji W/EBC 125mm lenses.

Toward the upper end of your price range, Schneider's 120mm Super Symmar HM is a very nice lens.

You have options! :)

[Scott Rosenberg]

check out the...
125 CM-W
120 APO-Symmar L

or, if you want to stretch your budget and view, there's always the 110-XL.

are you sure the 120 will be different enough from your 135 to warrant the purchase? if you don't already have one, a 90 is a nice compliment to a 135.

[tim atherton]

not quite 120mm, but the Fuji 125mm 5.6's are very good value and nice little lenses. I use the 125mm much more than the 135mm I have for just the reason you give. 10mm might not seem like much of a difference, but it is...

[Ted Harris]

Agree with Scott and Tim. OTOH the 120 Angulon really is a nice little lens and, of that generation of lenses, was perhaps my favorite. It was the last of that generation of lenses that I sold. In fact I used it until the 110 SS XL came out.

[Walter Foscari]

My favorite lens by far is the Schenider Super Symmar HM 120. If that is hard to find these days, then go for the fuji W 125 f5.6, as many have already suggested.

[Jack Brauer]

Thanks for your responses so far.

Scott- I do think that the extra 10 - 15mm will make a difference, since I often find that the 135mm is just a little too tight. I already have a 75mm, so I'm not too concerned about going much wider than 120mm for my mid-wide lens.

Does anyone know about the APO-Symmar-L 120mm/5.6 (http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=237)? It's lightweight.

[Scott Rosenberg]

189mm image circle
210 grams
requires 116.3mm of bellows

i think jack flesher sold a 110-XL for a 120-L and has been generally pleased with it's performance.

[Ole Tjugen]

... - I do think that the extra 10 - 15mm will make a difference, since I often find that the 135mm is just a little too tight. ...

I know that it does - that's why I drag along 65, 90, 121, 135, 150, 180, 210, 240, 300, 355, 420 and 500mm lenses...

[Jack Flesher]

I recently made this very move myself. I went to the 110XL and surprisingly found it a bit wider than I wanted, not to mention a lot heavier than I wanted. I have used the Fuji 125, Schneider 120 APO and newer 120 APO L.

All were fine, but IMO the Schneider 120 APO L is the bomb -- really sharp out to the corners, extra IC for some pretty extreme movements and really small and lightweight.

I now regularly carry 65, 90, 120, 150, 210 and 300, but could make do with just the 65, 120 and 210 for 95% of my images.

[Jack Brauer]

Jack - That is exactly what i wanted to hear! : )

I like that the Schneider 120 is lighter than the Fuji 125, and your testimony sealed the deal. Just ordered one from Badger.

[Jack Flesher]

Be sure to get back to us with a follow-up after you have used it a bit!

[Bill_1856]

I'd like to have a 120 Angulon, but haven't seen one at a reasonable price on ebay, and I've been looking for a long time.
Another wonderful lens, which hasn't been mentioned, is a 120mm Dagor (not the WA Dagor) which covers 4x5 beautifully, and is tiny. Mine is coated, but I don't think that it makes much difference.

[Sal Santamaura]

Jack and Jack: in the Schneider 120 Apo L illustration the front element appears very bulbous. If either of you have used / do use a B+W 52mm filter on this lens, I'd appreciate knowing whether, when fully seated, the filter glass contacts the front element. A cross-section drawing at Schnieder Optics' Web site isn't sufficiently detailed to reach any conclusions. Thanks in advance.

[David Karp]

Consider a used Fujinon W 125mm f/5.6, the one with outer lettering and EBC coating. It is small (52mm filters), and very sharp. I think it has a bigger image circle (198mm) than the APO Symmar L. The image circle is smaller than the newer Fujinon CM-W, but the lens is much smaller. My guess is that neither you nor anyone else will know the difference, and you will save a ton of $ on the Fuji vs. the APO Symmar L. I got mine from Jim at MPEX. As always, it looks like new, better than described.

[Doug Dolde]

The Super Symmar HM is one of the sharpest lenses I ever owned. Even sharper than the 110mm Super Symmar XL. BUT it doesn't have an image circle that will allow very big movements on 4x5.

[Jack Flesher]

Jack and Jack: in the Schneider 120 Apo L illustration the front element appears very bulbous. If either of you have used / do use a B+W 52mm filter on this lens, I'd appreciate knowing whether, when fully seated, the filter glass contacts the front element. A cross-section drawing at Schnieder Optics' Web site isn't sufficiently detailed to reach any conclusions. Thanks in advance.

There's plenty of room for a filter...

[Chuck Pere]

Probably the smallest would be the 120 Congo or Osaka. Mine covers 5x7 well with no movements. Comes in a modern copal shutter. And cheap around $200-250 on the used market.

[Ole Tjugen]

I'd like to have a 120 Angulon, but haven't seen one at a reasonable price on ebay, and I've been looking for a long time.

What's "a reasonable price"? Like this one (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Schneider-Angulon-120mm-6-8-in-Compur-Verschluss_W0QQitemZ150018912145QQihZ005QQcategoryZ8277QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)?

[paulr]

The Super Symmar HM is one of the sharpest lenses I ever owned. Even sharper than the 110mm Super Symmar XL. BUT it doesn't have an image circle that will allow very big movements on 4x5.

that might be sharpest 120 lens ever made that covers 4x5 ... even if it doesn't cover much more.

[Jim Galli]

After the fact but my 125mm Fuji f5.6-W single coated is my favorite and most used 4X5 lens. Extremely sharp and covers fine for me.

[David K.]

I can recommend the 120 Super Symmar HM, a truly superb lens that has become my "standard Lens".

[ronald moravec]

The colors are dull with an Angulon compared to later designs. You also need to stop to 16.

I`m in love with my 110XL. Save your schkles `til you can get one. I never run out of coverage as it is good for almost 8x10.
e

[Ole Tjugen]

The colors are dull with an Angulon compared to later designs. You also need to stop to 16.
You must have got a bad one then. I have found colors to be bright and vibrant, and have seen no need to stop down at all (except for DoF) when using "one size up" - 120mm on 4x5", 165mm on 5x7".

[Ron Marshall]

The 110XL is a great lens, that is a good fit with a 75 and a 150 for me. I bought it mostly as a 75 equivalent for 5x7, where it is outstanding. But for dedicated 4x5 if you don't need the rise, then a 120 will save a bit of weight in the pack.

[Brad Rippe]

Jack, Be sure to check out the Fuji 125 CMW. I use one and love it, very sharp, and inexpensive. I used to have the big Nikon 120 SW, also a very nice lens, covers 8 by 10, but it's big! (77mm filters)
-Brad

[Jack Brauer]

I'm just checking back to this thread to post my findings...

I ended up buying the Schneider APO-Symmar-L 120mm/5.6. I LOVE the wider angle it gives me over the 135mm. That in itself makes all the difference for me. It is very sharp (hard to say if it's much sharper than the Nikon 135mm - they're all pretty damn sharp). It is very compact and light, lighter even than the 135mm I think - great!

On the downside, the image circle is much smaller; I've already had a few shots with the dreaded black arch at the top. That never happened with the 135mm. I'll just have to be more careful to stop down and check.

[Jack Flesher]

On the downside, the image circle is much smaller; I've already had a few shots with the dreaded black arch at the top.

How much total rise are you using and are you by any chance using a filter up front? I regularly add 25mm of rise -- at times even coupled with a few degrees of forward front tilt -- and have never encountered the "black arch" with mine. In fact, I didn't even encounter it at 25mm rise with my older non-L version...

[Jack Brauer]

I oftentimes use as much rise as my bellows allow, usually with forward front tilt too.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Nikkor 120 SW. Sharp and covers 8x10. The small max apeture can be bothersome in low light conditions as far as composing and focusing goes.

[Jack Flesher]

I oftentimes use as much rise as my bellows allow, usually with forward front tilt too.

Okay -- if you had mentioned that at the beginning of this thread I would have steered you to the 120 SA even considering the weight. But I recommended the APO L simply due to that #1 requirement... Sorry if I messed you up.