65mm lens choices

[DrPablo]

What is the difference between Schneider's 65mm SA lenses (MC and non-MC versions)? Thanks.

[Kirk Fry]

Let's see:
One is multicoated and one is not.
One is newer (MC ones).
The MC ones cost more.
The f8.0 ones cover less than the f5.6 ones either MC or not.
The f5.6 ones are heaver and may not fit in your smallish field camera.
The MC ones might produces pictures with less flare but it will be hard to tell.
A 65mm f8.0 SA just barely covers 4X5.

Nothing much else comes to mind.

[DrPablo]

Thanks, Kirk,

I'm trying to decide between the 65 f/5.6 MC versus non-MC. The price difference is about $300 or $400. Is flare a problem with the non-MC? And is there any difference in coverage?

[Kirk Fry]

Paul,

If it was my money I would spend it on a f5.6 for tbe coverage, unless you shoot in constrasty conditions, I doubt you can tell the difference between MC and non.
The coverage is a much more important issue. The XL versions of the angulons have substantially more coverage, but then again cost large $$$$. You need the coverage for front rise mostly. YMMV. http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/index.htm
There seems to no difference in MC vs non in f5.6 65mm SA lenses in coverage. (170mm coverage) There seem to be no muliticoated f8.0 65mm SA (155mm coverage ) lenses.

Kirk

[CXC]

I have the f/8 and can confirm that only the most miniscule movements are possible, in particular very little rise. I wish I had the f/5.6 instead. It costs more because it is better.

[Ted Harris]

OTOH, unless you absolutely need 65mm, why not consider 75mm? I have owned a 65mm single coated SA and I will also confirm barely covers 4x5, a 65mm single coated Fuji that had a bit more coverage but only a bit (it was f8 or f9). I figured that the differences between coverage of a 65 and 75 were a small price to pay for the added coverage and ase of movement on a flat board with any of my cameras. I used a 75 f5.6 SA for years and recently switched to a 75 f4.5 Grandagon-N (the deal on the Grandagon was just too good to pass up). I shot both lenses side-by-side for a month and decided to keep the Rodenstock, personalpreference as much as anything else. I also tried a 75mm f5.6 MC Fuji a few years ago and didn't like it.

[steve simmons]

I decided on a 75 rather than a 65 for the same reasons Ted described. Not much of a difference in focal length but noticeably more coverage.
steve simmons

[DrPablo]

I've leaned towards a 65 rather than a 75 because 75 feels a bit too close to the 90 I already have -- and the 75s are pretty expensive. There are some very nice architectural shots with a 65 (and down to a 47) in 'Photographing Buildings, Inside and Out', but I'm not sure how much movement was used for them.

KEH has a 72 SA XL for $1269 (Ex+), a 75 Sinaron for $789 (Bgn), a 75 Nikkor for $849 (Ex), grandagon f/6.8 for $599 (ex+), and the Fujinon for $849 (LN-). Forget the $1900 biogon. They also have some horseman 75s, but I think they only cover 2x3. What do you think of this selection?

[Ole Tjugen]

I was wondering about the same - and ended up buying a nice old Ilex Acugon 65mm f:8. Maybe because I'm an inveterate "bottom feeder"? But honestly, it's a very capable little lens. I haven't had a need for one until recently, since my previous 4x5" camera was struggling bad enough with a 90mm!

[Ron Marshall]

I've leaned towards a 65 rather than a 75 because 75 feels a bit too close to the 90 I already have -- and the 75s are pretty expensive. There are some very nice architectural shots with a 65 (and down to a 47) in 'Photographing Buildings, Inside and Out', but I'm not sure how much movement was used for them.

KEH has a 72 SA XL for $1269 (Ex+), a 75 Sinaron for $789 (Bgn), a 75 Nikkor for $849 (Ex), grandagon f/6.8 for $599 (ex+), and the Fujinon for $849 (LN-). Forget the $1900 biogon. They also have some horseman 75s, but I think they only cover 2x3. What do you think of this selection?

65mm to 90mm is a good spread. However, most 75mm lenses permit about twice the movement as 65mm lenses. If you only need 10mm of rise a 65mm is fine.

The 72mm will cover 5x7, but is heavy.

I have the f4.5 version of the Grandagon. If you don't shoot low light 6.8 will be fine.

[Brian Sims]

How about a nikon sw 65mm f4 in perfect condition. I got it as part of a package and never use it. I just haven't got around to posting it FS. Interested?

[DrPablo]

Thanks, Brian. I may need to think about this for a while.

I've got on an empty recessed lensboard that I'd love to fill, but I may end up saving up for a while and getting the 72 SA XL.

[jnantz]

hi there

it took me a while before i decided on a 65mm sa 5.6. i have mine on a recessed board ( the deep one ) used on a toyo 45cx. i use it on a speed graphic ( flat board!) from time to time too. it is much easier on the flat board, it is a major pain in the neck to adjust anything on the shutter and i end up using the plunger end of a shutter release or a pen to do my work for me when it is on the recessed board.

don't overlook the usefullness of a centerfilter. it costs a small fortune, but if you plan on doing any architectural photography with movements you will get noticable fall off and the filter will be helpful.

have fun

john

[DrPablo]

Yeah, I have the 90 f/5.6 super angulon XL on a recessed calumet lensboard, and it's really hard to get my fingers behind that 95mm fromt element.