View Full Version : Nikkor SW 90mm or Grandagon 90mm?
Nick Wood
19-Mar-2007, 03:13
Trying to obtain my first 90mm lens. Had a couple of dissappointments from the auction site, although fortunately managed to get my money back, so I'm thinking of just biting the bullet and buying new.
I notice from the landscape lens review on this site that both John Sparks and Kerry Thalmann chose the Nikkor as their preferred 90mm lens, with no mention of Rodenstock (or indeed Schneider).
I've tried to get some information on the Nikkor, but there's not a lot out there. One of my main questions is the size of the front filter thread. I've got several 67mm filters which I use on my 210mm Rodenstock and also on my MF Rollei lenses. I know the Grandagon 6.8 has a 67mm thread, but what size is the Nikkor?
Weight is not so much of an issue for me, so I just want to know which gives the best results - or indeed if they're as good as each other (in which case I would probably opt for the Grandagon due to it being a tad faster).
Any experience/advice?
Thanks.
Nick:confused:
Nick:
Nikkor has two 90mm SW lenses, an f4.5 and an f8. The f8 uses 67mm filters and the f4.5 82mm filters. I have both and like them. They are fine lenses. If you can live with a slightly darker view on the GG, the f8 is an excellent performer and is highly recommended by many. The f4.5 also performs well but is somewhat heavier (600gr vs 360gr) and more expensive. If I had to choose between the two I have, I would opt for the f8. I use it a lot for backpacking. I use the f4.5 for shots near the car which I do less often given that I shoot mostly landscapes.
Cheers,
Dave B.
Paul Droluk
19-Mar-2007, 06:15
Nick... as a manufacturer of cameras that lean heavily on the 90mm focal length, I have had the opportunity to see many very large prints produced by all of them. In my opinion, there is not a bad one in the bunch. Of those with a 67mm filter thread I would be hard pressed to differentiate the quality difference between the Fuji f8, Nikon f8, Rodenstock 6.8, or Schneider f8. Sadly, only the Rodenstock remains in current production.
It could take a whole photographic carrier to be able to differentiate between the two lenses - and still it would be largely just a personal opinion. This kind of questions is the direct consequence of amateurish opinions divulged happily in all photographic forums. The sooner you liberate yourself from these opinions the better for you.
GPS:
I am having a hard time understanding what it is you think we all actually do in this forum. The rest of us think that it is a place where we can ask questions about LF lenses and help each other as best we can, especially newcomers who need our help the most. It provides a chance to both learn and teach.
Don't you have something better to do with your time than lurk around here and insult us for using the forum for its intended purpose?
Cheers,
Dave B.
If it is an insulting thought for you that a novice could be freed from useless fears by well intended advice you can: take a bear, go to your doc, dance on your head or whatever else...
a beer,to be more precise for your taste...
Colin Graham
19-Mar-2007, 15:32
I agree with GPS on this one, there is so much myth perpetuated on forums about lenses it is liberating once you are shut of it. When I started out I had to have this and that lens. Wish I could have those agonized moments and dollars back! There really are few that have actually compared these lenses to one another in any meaningful way and most of them agree it's impossible to tell them apart. Of my favorite lenses one is first generation single coated and scratched all to hell and the second is one few have even heard of...(But the grandagon is a sweet lens! ;) )
Nick Wood
19-Mar-2007, 15:51
Now, now, lets think this one through.
I am indeed a LF novice - very much so - and have generally found this forum to be very helpful. LF photographers who have obviously been around for a while, taking the time to help poor simple fools such as myself.
Just a simple "difficult to differentiate between the two" would have been sufficient.
Once I have a few years experience under my belt (oh, and a limitless budget of course to try whatever I like) I'll be sure not to ask such facile questions.
In the meantime lets hope I can liberate myself from stooping to reply to such a puerile response, and hope that your other 640 posts aren't as equally astounding in their paucity of assistance!
Thank you so very much.
Kirk Gittings
19-Mar-2007, 16:13
In the meantime lets hope I can liberate myself from stooping to reply to such a puerile response, and hope that your other 640 posts aren't as equally astounding in their paucity of assistance!
Well said.
Jim Rice
19-Mar-2007, 16:19
Nick, When I was shopping for my 4x5" lenses I called Jim Andracki at Midwest Photo Exchange and asked about a Symmar-S and Super Angulon. He offered a Sironar-N and Grandagon with the comment that they were the "same thing". A lot of wisdom there. Modern examples from any of the "big four" will provide outstanding results. The half-stop here and few grams there are really the biggest differences. I hope this helps.
I've tried to get some information on the Nikkor, but there's not a lot out there. One of my main questions is the size of the front filter thread. I've got several 67mm filters which I use on my 210mm Rodenstock and also on my MF Rollei lenses. I know the Grandagon 6.8 has a 67mm thread, but what size is the Nikkor?
Weight is not so much of an issue for me, so I just want to know which gives the best results - or indeed if they're as good as each other (in which case I would probably opt for the Grandagon due to it being a tad faster).
I use Nikkor SW 90mm f8, it has 67mm filter. I believe this is not an amateurish question. I like Nikkors because of their color rendition, and wider coverage (it covers 5x7 better than both rodenstock and SK). If you buy the nikkor SW 90mm f8 used, please make sure it has the shim between the front cell and the shutter.
hope this helps.
Colin Graham
19-Mar-2007, 16:39
Nick I certainly did not intend to be offensive. I can only give advice that I personally would have like to have received. Anything else is blind speculation. In any case, 640 pardons! :-)
Hey Nick,
Just sent you a PM with a lead on a Nikkor f4.5....
Nick Wood
19-Mar-2007, 16:47
Colin,
My response was to GPS, not yourself. Sorry, for 640 read 613.
My thanks to all of you (well, nearly all) for your advice.
Nick
JW Dewdney
19-Mar-2007, 20:03
Funny how fashions change...! 10-15 years ago SCHNEIDER was the one to have... people would scoff at you for using a Roddy or, god forbid one should stoop so low as to use a Nikkor (as if suddenly you'd be associated with the throngs of press photogs using Nikkors). LF snobbery...! Aaahhhh...
Saulius
19-Mar-2007, 20:52
In the meantime lets hope I can liberate myself from stooping to reply to such a puerile response, and hope that your other 640 posts aren't as equally astounding in their paucity of assistance!
Well said.
Ditto!
Nick, besides Midwest Photo Exchange you might want to try KEH.
http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx
I purchased a 90mm F8 Fujinon last April and found the product as described and a fair price. I've been pleased with the lens too. Best of luck on whatever lens you choose and remember there are no dumb questions when starting out in lf (well hardly any ;) )
For the most part members of this forum are supportive and I've found most generous in sharing their knowledge over the years.
I agree with GPS on this one, there is so much myth perpetuated on forums about lenses it is liberating once you are shut of it. When I started out I had to have this and that lens. Wish I could have those agonized moments and dollars back! There really are few that have actually compared these lenses to one another in any meaningful way and most of them agree it's impossible to tell them apart. Of my favorite lenses one is first generation single coated and scratched all to hell and the second is one few have even heard of...(But the grandagon is a sweet lens! ;) )
Well said.
ljb0904
20-Mar-2007, 11:11
I had a Grandagon 90mm and I sold it because I wanted wider. It's a nice lens but I only used it for two images. I love my Grandagon 75 and won't trade it even though I'd like a bit more coverage. The Nikkor seems awesome because of the coverage vs weight ratio, but the images you take with either will be fine. I rarely run into coverage limits with my 75 (I tried to make an image of a church and that's when I did) when I shoot landscape. I assume if I used a 90, that would be the case also. Decide if you need the coverage, then get one based on price and availability would be my suggestion.
It could take a whole photographic carrier to be able to differentiate between the two lenses - and still it would be largely just a personal opinion. This kind of questions is the direct consequence of amateurish opinions divulged happily in all photographic forums. The sooner you liberate yourself from these opinions the better for you.
One could also spend one's whole photographic carrier to realize that:
1. Most lenses are better than most photographers.
2. There's no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
Or perhaps not... ;)
...
This kind of questions is the direct consequence of amateurish opinions divulged happily in all photographic forums. The sooner you liberate yourself from these opinions the better for you.
One could also spend one's whole photographic carrier to realize that:
1. Most lenses are better than most photographers.
2. There's no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
Or perhaps not... ;)
Marko, whoever reads my answer can see that in no way I added any adjectif to the original question. If most of your lenses are better than you as a photographer it's entirely up to your judgement. Personally, I don't compete in any way with my lenses as they are just tools that I use and I don't care if they are better than you or anybody else.
I agree with you that some answers are stupid ... ;-)
Marko, whoever reads my answer can see that in no way I added any adjectif to the original question. If most of your lenses are better than you as a photographer it's entirely up to your judgement. Personally, I don't compete in any way with my lenses as they are just tools that I use and I don't care if they are better than you or anybody else.
I agree with you that some answers are stupid ... ;-)
Q.E.D.
toyoman
23-Mar-2007, 08:50
I was reading this string out of curiosity to see if any one else had the same experience as I have had with the different 90s. Not to be the geek, but here is what I think (we all have our opinions) as to the differences:
Two styles of Fujinon F8s early single coated is lighter and has less coverage and is soft till f16, and can have a regular hard lens cap on both ends! The newer EBC is sharper slightly heavier, more coverage and has to have a slip-on cover for the back. Both have a warmish color shift for transparency work.
The Schneider (older Caltars also) was heavy but very sharp, but not as bright. Very blue in the deep shadows for color shift, and had to use color correction of some sort to get the blue out. Slipon for the back.
The Nikkor f8 falls in a happy middle between the Schnieder and the Fujinon for sharpness, and color shift. I didn't like the lens as much because of the pincusion effect (more distortion to the outer edges). This one was the lightest and most compact of the bunch. Slipon for the back.
The Rodenstock 6.8(Sironar, and for some time also Caltar) was the brightest but was heavier like the Schneider. Has good coverage with a compact size overall. Again a slipon for the back. Has almost as warm a colorshift in the shadows as does the Fujinon. Very sharp through all aperatures.
I liked the later model Fujinon (EBC), but the Rodenstock was a close second especially with the larger viewing aperature. The Nikkor was third. I had the Schneider for a while and liked the sharpness of the lens, but couldn't stand the color cast it gave my transparency work. Hope this helps...
Rich Long
26-Mar-2007, 21:01
There's no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
With no offense meant to anyone.... I was always told: "There are no stupid questions, but there are plenty of inquizative idiots.";) I'm firmly in that category myself.
Robert Skeoch
27-Mar-2007, 15:18
I like the Fujinon myself, but did own a Schneider for years and it was great too. You can't go wrong with any of the big four brands. Nikon might be harder to find new because they stopped making them. The other three are still being sold new.
--Rob Skeoch
www.bigcameraworkshops.com
Brian K
27-Mar-2007, 17:50
Trying to obtain my first 90mm lens. Had a couple of dissappointments from the auction site, although fortunately managed to get my money back, so I'm thinking of just biting the bullet and buying new.
I notice from the landscape lens review on this site that both John Sparks and Kerry Thalmann chose the Nikkor as their preferred 90mm lens, with no mention of Rodenstock (or indeed Schneider).
I've tried to get some information on the Nikkor, but there's not a lot out there. One of my main questions is the size of the front filter thread. I've got several 67mm filters which I use on my 210mm Rodenstock and also on my MF Rollei lenses. I know the Grandagon 6.8 has a 67mm thread, but what size is the Nikkor?
Weight is not so much of an issue for me, so I just want to know which gives the best results - or indeed if they're as good as each other (in which case I would probably opt for the Grandagon due to it being a tad faster).
Any experience/advice?
Thanks.
Nick:confused:
I own the 90mm 6.8 Grandagon, I recommend it not necessarily because it's any sharper or better than the other choices but it's f6.8 makes it easier to focus than the f8 lenses, especially in the corners. Having the sharpest lens in the world means nothing if you can't focus it. It's also a 67mm filter size.
naturephoto1
27-Mar-2007, 18:19
I also have a Rodenstock f6.8 Grandagon N MC. The lens is extremely sharp. It is a half stop faster than the Nikon f8, but it does weigh more. I have no personal experience with the Nikon. I have been very pleased with my Grandagon for the last 20 or so years.
Rich
Sam Crater
27-Mar-2007, 21:42
The Nikkor 90 f8 is significantly different from the SA 90 f8 and Rodenstock 90 f6.8 as it is an 8 element design and has a significantly bigger image circle. If you are using 4x5 with big movements, you may in fact see a difference in your images.
Miguel Curbelo
28-Mar-2007, 00:52
The Nikkor 90 f8 was my first LF lens. I was a novice (still am) and I remember I was worried about finding it difficult to focus in low light conditions, but it has never been an issue. I now have ten LF lenses, and the Nikkor 90 is my favourite: it is light, it has a large image circle and it is sharp as a lens should be.
Miguel Curbelo
28-Mar-2007, 07:26
I actually meant
as sharp as a lens should be
...
Tudor Vreme
28-Mar-2007, 07:47
I also have a Rodenstock f6.8 Grandagon N MC, and for landscape I find it OK, but for architecture, or furniture is not an option - it gives no linear perspective.
So depends on what kind of images you want to use. I don't know the Nikkors, but this isue must be consider.
I also have a Rodenstock f6.8 Grandagon N MC, and for landscape I find it OK, but for architecture, or furniture is not an option - it gives no linear perspective.
So depends on what kind of images you want to use. I don't know the Nikkors, but this isue must be consider.
Hello Tudor, what exactly do you mean by "it gives no linear perspective" ? Is your grandagon geometrically distorting straight lines? Do you have an example to show?
Thanks,
Petr
Tudor Vreme
28-Mar-2007, 10:29
yes Sparq, it distort strait lines in curvers at the edges of images. I had to shot some interiors with furnitures, I shot on 12 x 6 cm format and I'm disapointed about the results. My lens was bought new and comparing with my old Schneider 5.6/75mm is a big diference.
I have images to show but only tomorow morning, when I'l be in my office (now is 8.30 PM in Romania)
Ole Tjugen
28-Mar-2007, 11:03
In that case there is something wrong with your Grandagon. It should have zero distortion - at least in use. These symmetrical wide-angle lenses are as close to distortion free as it's possible to make them, and you certainly shouldn't be able to detect any distortion without some very advanced optical testing equipment!
walter23
28-Mar-2007, 12:09
yes Sparq, it distort strait lines in curvers at the edges of images. I had to shot some interiors with furnitures, I shot on 12 x 6 cm format and I'm disapointed about the results. My lens was bought new and comparing with my old Schneider 5.6/75mm is a big diference.
I have images to show but only tomorow morning, when I'l be in my office (now is 8.30 PM in Romania)
I have the Grandagon-N (caltar II-N 90 f/6.8 - same thing) and it's fantastic! Tons of room for movement (compared to a lot of other 90s), and the complete lack of distortion is a refreshing break after using small format digital SLRs for so long. Straight lines stay perfectly straight. I think the only way you could get anything "better" would be to go with a schneider SA XL or similar large circle lens, but those have their drawbacks (huge pricetag and huge filters and the size of small boulders).
I don't have any good examples scanned right now, unfortunately.
JW Dewdney
28-Mar-2007, 13:45
yes Sparq, it distort strait lines in curvers at the edges of images. I had to shot some interiors with furnitures, I shot on 12 x 6 cm format and I'm disapointed about the results. My lens was bought new and comparing with my old Schneider 5.6/75mm is a big diference.
I have images to show but only tomorow morning, when I'l be in my office (now is 8.30 PM in Romania)
Seems to me it is a defective lens and ought to have been returned...!
Tudor Vreme
28-Mar-2007, 22:46
maybe it is defective, I check it now and it is a Grandagon N 6.8/90 Rodenstock.
I can upload a image on flicr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/7383238@N05/438365936/did I mis anything? - my Sinar had the adjustments to 0.
Tudor Vreme
28-Mar-2007, 22:47
the correct address:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7383238@N05/438365936/
David Crossley
29-Mar-2007, 10:41
Based soley on the wealth of information so generously available on this site i purchased a Nikkor 90mm F8 lens.
I figured i would sell it as soon as i could justify spending the extra to pick up the 110 schneider, but now that just isn't going to happen. The Nikkor is sharp, contrasty, lightweight and reasonably priced, i would highly recommend taking a serious look at it.
David Crossley/Crossley Photography....
Jack Flesher
29-Mar-2007, 11:25
Over the years i have owned and used these 90's, in this order:
1) Nikkor f4.5
2) Nikkor f8
3) Rodenstock Grandagon f 6.8
4) Schneider Super Angulon f8
*) And not in the same class, but a 90, the Schneider Angulon f6.8 (a tiny Dagor design).
They were all excellent, period, and you cannot go wrong form an image-quality standpoint with any of them. However, the f4.5 Nikkor and to a certain extent the Grandagon are notably heavier than the f8 versions. Since I carry my lenses in the field, my personal favorites were the lighter-weight Nikkor and Schneider f8's. I personally have settled on the Schneider SA, but only because its color/tone more closely matches my other (mostly Schneider) lenses than the Nikkor did.
Cheers,
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.