Schneider Angulon 90mm f6.8- opinions?

[claudiocambon]

I saw a cheap one for sale not too long ago, and I was curious if anyone has used this lens, and has any opinion about its relative sharpness, contrast and color accuracy compared to the Super Angulons, both the f8 and the f5.6, not to mention other 90mm's for 4x5. Any advice is greatly appreciated. Cheers!

[Jim Noel]

I have carried one in my field camera kit since the 60's. The angle of view is slightly less than the Super Angulon, but i will give that up for the savings in weight.

By the way, the rear element will focus alone giving you about 140-150mm lens.

I always use the 2 elements at f 16 r smaller, and the rear at f22 equivalent or smaller.

[Ole Tjugen]

http://www.bruraholo.no/Cameras/Angulon/

sharpness is good, newer lenses have a flatter field with a sharper drop in sharpness at the edge of the image circle. Super Angulons have less light fall-off, and a larger image circle - I use my 90/8 more on 5x7" than on 4x5". My SA is old and single-coated, and I think the plain angulon gives slightly higher image contrast.

Note that the pictures on my Angulon page were shot on 5x7" film, and that it's a good idea not to let the sun shine directly on the front lens of ANY lens! :)

[Brian Ellis]

Very little coverage (angle of coverage is about 80 degrees) so movements are limited to non-existent, something of a grab-bag in terms of quality since Schneider wasn't known for its quality control back when this lens was manufactured. But small, light, good for back-packing and fine for landscapes and other subjects that don't require much in the way of movements. Both of the Super Angulons you mention will have considerably more coverage, may be multi-coated or at worst will be single-coated, are perhaps mounted in more modern shutters than the Angulon, and are more of a known quantity in terms of quality. However, both are large and heavy, the f5.6 more so than the f8 but even the f8 is no light-weight. There have been quite a few postings about this lens here and elsewhere since it's popular with hikers so if you search here and other LF forums (e.g. photo.net) you should find a bunch of opinions. Also, if you go to www.schneideroptics.com you can find the specs for the lens and other information about it.

When buying an old lens the shutter is at least as important as the lens itself since a replacement shutter will likely cost more than you pay for the lens and repairs can be expensive as well (if a shutter isn't working properly, don't accept the seller's statement that it just needs a CLA, I've tried two older lenses with sticky shutters and both were beyond repair). So you'd want to thoroughly check the condition of the shutter if possible and if not then buy the lens with the right to return no questions asked.

[claudiocambon]

Wow, that was fast. Thanks!

How about color rendition? Any opinions on that?

[Walter Calahan]

Good lens.

[Walter Calahan]

Oh, color rendition?

Good color rendition.

I use mine on a Crown Graphic for decades.

[Bill_1856]

Color rendition is neutral to slightly warm (depending on the individual lens). I got my first one in 1953 and still love it. It is particularly good for use as a standard lens for a roll-film back (I've shot thousands of prom couples this way). You might note that a recessed lens board is generally needed for many 4x5 cameras (I have one for my GVII, and another for Techinka IV). My f:8.0 Super-Angulon is usable on flat boards, but it's a beastie.

[Ole Tjugen]

Even very old uncoated Angulons have good colour rendition - under the right circumstances. After all there are only four surfaces...

[claudiocambon]

So I picked one up, and it's even smaller than anticipated. I even wondered at first whether it was missing an element in the back, but it appears to be all there! Does anyone know what size hole lensboard it takes?

[claudiocambon]

OK, I feel like an idiot potentially, because now I am convinced it's missing the rear element, and I wanted to ask if anyone could confirm that suspicion by checking the pictures of the lens as on the auction page on Ebay, which accurately represent the lens. Is this is it, or is it in fact missing the rear element?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=015&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&viewitem=&item=250140896498&rd=1&rd=1

[Jon Shiu]

No, it's not missing. That's just the way it looks. I have one also and like how small and light it is. Corners are slightly soft on mine, but it is pretty sharp otherwise and good color. It fits in a #0 hole, but is slightly smaller. There exists some type of metal screw in lenscap for the back.

Jon

[Scott Kathe]

Looks like a complete lens to me, from the serial number it was made in 1953. I have a non-Linhof Angulon from 1954 and it is soft in the corners at f22 but better at f32. I had mine CLA'd by SK Grimes 3 years ago when I got it and it was dead on that year. I haven't used it regularly and the shutter speeds are off now by ~1 stop at most settings but VERY consistent. I have a piece of tape on the lens board with the corrected shutter speeds. This is a really nice little lens and I would love a Linhof myself but the price keeps me away. We can swap lenses if you want-mine is newer and I won't make you pay any extra;)

Scott

[Bill_1856]

Jesusz, someone paid $300 for this -- with no lens board or RF cam! There's one born...well, you know.

[Kevin Crisp]

I am sure, Bill, that the high bidder (and the question poster) appreciate that.

[seawolf66]

Every Deck come's with Jokers included!!

[Peter von Gaza]

Frustrated with the quality of my Angulon 90mm, I bought both a Congo 90mm and a Fujinon-W 105mm. With all three lenses I did identical shots at variouis f-stops. All lenses were focused at infinity and subject matter was a distant ridge of trees and power lines. Subjective analysis was done using a 22x peak loupe. "Executive Summary", the Fuji just blew away the other two lenses away. That lens is SHARP, edge to edge. I tested: f/8-f/32. I was surprised how bad my Congo and Schneider were. They just seemed blurry compared to the Fujinon. Maybe my Congo and Schneider are bad samples - who knows.

The fujinon 105mm that I have is the one with 46mm threads, Copal C shutter and I believe is EBC mulitcoated. I got it on ebay for ~$300. Wicked lens (although image circle is tight). With a 46mm-52mm step up ring it nicely matches my other fujinon lenses for filters. The lens is not as light as the others but is still very small and light (~200 grams).

For a lightweight backpacking lens and where only minimal to no camera movements are required, IMHO this lens is hard to beat.

My Schneider Angulon and Congo lenses are now being used as paper weights.

Peter

[Richard Kelham]

My Angulon is about the same (early '50s) vintage and, subjectively, I'd say it is as sharp as my S/Angulon @ f22, but lacks enough coverage for movements so doesn't get used much these days. For an ultra lightweight camera kit the saving in weight from using the Angulon may be significant, but I have to cart a hefty metal technical camera around so a few ounces here or there makes no difference.:(

All in all a nice enough little lens, but I'd say $200 was top whack.

[Ted Harris]

Another opinion. I had a early 50's vintage 90mm Angulon for a number of years. Got rid of it in the late 1980's. It was one of the worst lenses I ever owned. Soft and very low contrast. Remember that there was a time when Schneider was not known for the type of excellent QA/QC that they are known for today. So, you could get a good one or an awful one.

[Kevin Crisp]

My experience in having used maybe 6 of these of different vintages is that they do get better the newer they are. The best one I've had was a later one in early Copal 0 shutter. It was sharp edge to edge. But so was one 1950's version I had, another of that vintage was only sharp in the central area stopped down. I don't think anyone has tried enough of these for a valid conclusion, but my personal experience is consistent with the net lore that newer is better.

[A.C.]

90 f/6.8
I inherited one of these Schneider lenses with my English MPP kit - I have tried it with modern colour transparency film and been reasonably impressed, given its age. It didn't match my more modern MF Fuji and H. optics with colour, though.
But it may be that I'm easily impressed, who knows?
I'd guess it would be rather acceptable with B&W.
The lens number is 566**** (1957-59), and its coated, if that helps viewers and lens aficionados with date and opinions.
Best wishes
A.

[Sandeha]

There's a link for the age of Schneider lenses here ...
http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/age_of_lenses/index.htm

My Angulon 90 6.8 is from 1964 and I have no complaints.

[A.C.]

There's a link for the age of Schneider lenses here ...
http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/age_of_lenses/index.htm

My Angulon 90 6.8 is from 1964 and I have no complaints.
Cheers Sandeha, I've dropped the date in my (previous) post.
A.C.

[phil sweeney]

I have to agree with Kevin. I had an older one that was not that great. I have a 70s version I liked enough to install on a new copal.

[rbuck797]

just "Won" one on the -bay for $130+ and plan to use it w/ 4x5 view for b&w landscape and architectural shots. It's not too late to return. Opinions?

[IanG]

Wait and see how it performs, my first bought in the late 1980's was quite a poor across all apertures and I got rid of it and bought a 90mm f6.8 Grandagon instead.

However I won one (approx 1960) for a low price on ebay about 3 years ago and this one is quite different and a good sharp lens at f16-f32. They aren't particularly good for architecture because the image circle is small and movements are minimal.

Dean Jones (who posts in this Forum & builds Razzle cameras) has noticed that there's often variations in the cell spacing caused by the Compur shutter and he has posted that he's sometimes machined the shutter mount to give improved sharpness.

Ian

[Sevo]

Before you start machining the shutter, you might first try to unscrew the lens gradually in fractions of a turn and see whether that improves it - spacing errors will go either way, so only half will need grinding off a bit of the shutter flange. If you find the sweet spot by unscrewing, the mismatch was out- rather than inwards, and can be fixed with a matching shim from paper or sheet metal of suitable strength.

Sevo

[IanG]

Before you start machining the shutter, you might first try to unscrew the lens gradually in fractions of a turn and see whether that improves it - spacing errors will go either way, so only half will need grinding off a bit of the shutter flange. If you find the sweet spot by unscrewing, the mismatch was out- rather than inwards, and can be fixed with a matching shim from paper or sheet metal of suitable strength.

Sevo

Quite right Sevo.

Dean works in the trade, he knows what he's doing (we think :D). He's also measured quite a few 90mm f6.8 Angulon lenses and has his opinion on the best separation.

I'm not suggesting anyone do this for themselves but rather be aware this maybe a reason for the variations,

Ian