What should be my next lens? [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

coops

5-Dec-2007, 08:42

I am new to LF and have a Tachihara field camera with the 150mm 5.6 that came with it. I am going on vacation soon and thought I would get a second lens. I shoot pretty much landscape only, some wildlife. I know it's somewhat subjective, but what would be a decent quality lens you would recommend for a non-pro with limited funds ? I should mention that I would need to buy used.

Cheers

eric black

5-Dec-2007, 08:54

With a little more information we can probably make a few suggestions- do you find yourself wishing you could zoom in more or would you like wider angles? what kind of price range are you looking into?

Wilbur Wong

5-Dec-2007, 09:06

I use a fair range of lenses with my 4 x 5 from wide (65) to long (500) I used to tend toward the wider end, but as my vision has changed I now tend toward the other end completely.

I don't think that anyone could really give you good advice as for what to choose for your next lens, I think that comes from personal experience in the field and results on the light table.

Knowing my own history, if I were new to LF, I think that I would stay with the single 150 lens, and really learn how to see and work with that angle of view and perhaps more important to really learn how to control perspective and focal plane (scheimflug) which totally puts LF work apart from other fixed relationship photography.

my .02

Aender Brepsom

5-Dec-2007, 09:16

Hi Coops,

I guess you do not try to shoot wildlife with your LF camera, do you? For landscapes, if I could only take two lenses on a trip, it would be a 150mm and a 90mm.
Any modern lens from Rodenstock, Schneider Kreuznach, Nikon, Fuji or Caltar will be of excellent quality. 90mm lenses with f/4.5 or f/5.6 are quite large and heavy, so I would recommend an f/6.8 (or even f/8) version. I went for the Rodenstock Grandagon-N 6.8/90mm. It takes 67mm filters and is a good compromise between bulk and brightness of the image on the ground glass. With a bit of lucck, you can get one for just under 600$.

coops

5-Dec-2007, 10:09

Great responses. No, I don't try to shoot wildlife, lol. I do that with my digital camera, and don't know why I added that.
I guess the times I use my current lens, I do wish more that I could get a little closer, than I could wider. I know that ideally I will need several lenses to cover all situations. Practising with what I have is good advice, and I have to say, I am thrilled with the results I have so far. While not concentrating on composition so much, my focus and exposures look pretty darn good for a first timer. In fact I am having my first drum scan made today.
I would like to spend less than $500 if possible, and once I know what to look for, I can spend time looking online for a deal.
Thanks again.

Ernest Purdum

5-Dec-2007, 10:17

Focal length selection is an awfully personal matter. I tend towards moderately long lenses, so something in the 210mm range would be my choice. For budget-conscious folks the 203mm f7.7 Ektar is a very sound choice. The 203mm f7,5 lenses made by Wollensak tend to be even less expensive.

John Kasaian

5-Dec-2007, 10:40

Stick with what you already have unless there is some overiding factor you haven't told us about:) My point is that you know your work better than anyone else. If you often find a genuine need for, say a wider lens to shoot in cramped quarters, or maybe a longer lens in order to "reach out" beyond fences, then you pretty much already know what you want---at least a longer or shorter lens, and you can expect to get plenty of suggestions here. Until the need for a 2nd lens becomes apparent---and may very well on your trip---stick with one lens is what I suggest. Have a great vacation!

John Kasaian

5-Dec-2007, 10:57

Opps! I didn't read your reply above!
If longer is the road you want to travel, I'd have to agree with Ernest Purdum about the 210s (Schneider made a convertible Symmar thats very nice) & 203 Ektars and Optars. I have a 203 Ektar and it is sweet! Another longish bargain lens to consider might be a 215mm Ilex or Caltar.
If you want to pull out all the stops, ther was a recent post here about Schneider closing out 240 G Clarons for arond $5-600 (?) If your bellows can handle the focal length nd if you have the slightest notion of moving to an enven larger format sometime in the distant future (and you really really want to spend the $$) the 240 G Claron could well be a "legacy" lens in your kit.

Ole Tjugen

5-Dec-2007, 11:02

I like wide lenses, and (relatively) cheap lenses.

So the first wide lens I bought was a 90mm f:6.8 Angulon, which I later supplemented with a 90mm f:8 Super Angulon - mostly for 5x7" use.

Beyond that I use a 210mm f:6.1 Xenar, but a 210mm f:5.6 Symmar would be cheaper and only a little heavier - and almost as good, but with a much larger image circle. A 210mm f:4.5 Xenar is older, cheaper, but also much larger.

I have no experience with Ektars, so I can't say anything on the relative merits of Symmars, Xenars and Ektars.

Ken Lee

5-Dec-2007, 11:56

A good rule of thumb is to space your lenses by a factor of 1.5, which is also 3/2 or 2/3

Based on 150, this translates to 100mm and 225mm. For practical purposes, this means that anything in the neighborhood of 120 and a 240 would do very well. Lenses that are small and light, like the Tachihara, will be desirable.

I still have my 240 Fujinon A (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/tech.html#150). It's one of the sharpest lenses out there, both near and far - and wide open, gives nice bokeh too. If I had only one lens, that would be it.

eric black

5-Dec-2007, 12:03

there seems to be quite a few Nikkor lenses that have been coming up for sale lately including their excellent lightweight 200M and 300M lenses- I have seen several for less than $500. K. Thalmann has written some nice reviews on these lenses and I own both and use them quite often. Despite this, my most used focal length is 150mm which I typically shoot at least 70% of the time so it seems to me that you are off to a good start.

Duane Polcou

6-Dec-2007, 23:47

Andrew O'Neill

7-Dec-2007, 00:06

Sell your 150. Buy a 90mm and a 300mm. If you can't part with your 150, then get a 90.

Kirk Fry

7-Dec-2007, 00:19

A 200mm f9.0 M-Nikkor is a modern multicoated light weight optic that would work well in the 200ish focal range. I do think the advice to stick with one lens is good too.

K

Matus Kalisky

7-Dec-2007, 03:30

To make your life more complicated - you may consider instead of one more expensive wide angle or short tele lens to get bothbut a bit cheaper ones. For example Kodak Ektar Wide Field 100/6.3 (or the single coated Fujinon 90/8 SW) and Rodenstock Geronar 210/6.8 (the same is Caltar 210/6.8 II-E). I have the second one and from f/16 on does an excellent job and is light.

good luck

John Kasaian

7-Dec-2007, 09:00

A big problem with owning more than one lens is that the lens you want will usually be the one you left an home!

Frank Petronio

7-Dec-2007, 09:23

Gene McCluney

7-Dec-2007, 12:16

Why buy another lens unless you are deeply compelled to shoot another focal length? I only use one (a 150 on 4x5) and I don't fell any great need to get another... (I am swapping the 150/5.6 for a 150/3.5 though).

YMMV but I see all these rigs that people have with 4-5 $$$ lenses and... well I just don't think it matters. You shoot with what you've got and using some extreme wide or long focal length is often a crutch or gimmick.

This philosophy only works if you can fit all your subjects into the field-of-view and perspective of one lens. The wander around and find a subject that fits philosophy.

If you are doing photography of "objects", then it is different. I have a personal project photographing antique bridges. I like to shoot them from deck level as well as side views. Some bridges are 100's of feet long, others are 20 ft. Some bridges I cannot back up very far, others I have unlimited space. I find (for 5x7) I need focal lengths from 90mm ultra wide, to 300mm to always "fill the frame" with my bridges. There are often natural and man made barriers to getting to exactly the "ideal" spot to shoot from, such as fences, rocks, steep banks, poison ivy, pesky trees, etc. The more choices one has, the greater chance of getting good photos. This is particularly true in the case of long abandoned bridges, which may not even have a road to them.

Frank Petronio

7-Dec-2007, 12:56

Ahh just buck up and do it my way, you don't need no stinking wide angle

lol :)

Mark Stahlke

7-Dec-2007, 13:26

Don't listen to any of these people. They are all deeply disturbed. Some of them have THOUSANDS of posts on this website and have dozens of lenses sitting in jars in their refrigerator like a serial killer.... Run Forrest, run.
This just wrong, Wrong, WRONG. I might enjoy my Nikkor-M 200mm with fava beans and a nice chianti but I don't have thousands of posts on this website.

John Kasaian

7-Dec-2007, 14:46

I use gaffer's tape for floss! :D

Armin Seeholzer

7-Dec-2007, 14:48

I would recomand a 210 mm on the long and a 90 on the short and this will fit almost all situations.
Good luck Armin

Phong

7-Dec-2007, 15:58

Sell your 150. Buy a 90mm and a 300mm. If you can't part with your 150, then get a 90.

can you use a 300mm at reasonable distances on the Tachihara ? I think a 240mm would be much more useful on that camera.

John O'Connell

7-Dec-2007, 16:05

If you have a 150 and a double-extension field camera, don't bother with a longer lens right now. Get a 90 and see how you do with it---it's a big difference.

Mark Sawyer

7-Dec-2007, 18:13

I'll tell you what your next lens should be if you'll tell me who my next girlfriend should be...

Sheldon N

7-Dec-2007, 20:17

Fujinon A 240mm f/9 - A beautiful compact little lens, extremely sharp. Put it at the VERY top of your list. You should be able to find one for around $500 used. One of the best lenses you can buy, taking into consideration size/sharpness.

The Schneider 240mm f/9 G Claron - Can be bought brand new from Schneider right now for $595, which is a great price for a new lens. Very well regarded, but slightly larger than the Fuji.

Nikkor-M 200mm and 300mm lenses are both great, but one's a little too close to your 150 and one's a little too long and would leave a gap in the middle (IMHO). I have a 150 and a 300, but use a 240mm in the middle. I'd sell the 300 if I were forced to choose between the 240 and the 300.

Any 210mm f/5.6 from Fuji, Nikon, Schneider or Rodenstock (multicoated versions) would be a nice, middle of the road compromise and shouldn't cost more than $300 used. Everyone has one, but not everyone likes theirs since they're much larger and heavier than the other aforementioned lenses.

Jan Pedersen

7-Dec-2007, 20:34

Coops,
Lot's of good suggestions but one i would be looking fore is the inexpensive Fuji 210/5,6W in a Copal 1 They usually sell for between 250 and 300$ and are very good lenses if well taken care off.
They are not the smallest lenses you can find but for the price very difficult to beat.

Turner Reich

7-Dec-2007, 20:49

210 Schneider Symmar S convertible, gives you two longer lenses.

Armin Seeholzer

8-Dec-2007, 04:14

Hi Turner Reich

The 210 Symmar S is not a convertible the Symmar is but it would not be of use with the Tachi because you need about 390mm belows draw for the longer part and the quality is not a all usefull with today sharp films!

Armin

neil poulsen

8-Dec-2007, 05:12

How do you like the 150mm. You implied that it was not a lens you decided to purchase yourself.

Depending on your answer, you might consider selling it and getting two different lenses.

For my tastes, having a 150mm puts me in a position of making my second lens too long or too short, so as not to be too close to the 150mm. I like a 120mm and 180mm combination. A moderate wide angle and one that's moderately long.

But, that's my taste. In using other cameras, what do you find that you prefer?

As for a 150mm, I like having a 121mm, a 150mm, and a 180. But, if you only have two lenses, those are a little closely spaced.

Two other lenses worth mentioning are the 121mm Super Angulon and a 250mm f6.7 Fujinon, two single-coated lenses.. The former is a less expensive S.A., but takes excellent images. (Ansel Adams like it!) You can also find the 250mm f6.7 at reasonable prices. It has the advantage of a very wide image circle of 289mm. This is suitable for 8x10, if you future interests ever take you in that direction. Like the 240A (I think) and the G-Claron, it's not mounted in a size "1", versus the much larger size "3" lens.