Rate my Lenses...please

[DaveAlbano]

Please evaluate my lenses and tell me the quality of the glass (1-5 scale, 5 being best), additional comments are encouraged. I shoot B&W Tri-x 320 (70%) and Readyload Kodak VC Slide 100 (30%).

1. Schneider Super-Angulon, 90mm F8
2. Fujinon W 150mm F5.6
3. Nikkor W 210mm F5.6 (keep)
4. Fujinon T 400mm F8

I have the funds for "better" glass, just not sure if I get "better" results with the following. i.e would you make the transition from what I have to the following...

1. Schneider SA-XL 72mm 5.6 (replace SA 90)
2. Rodenstock APO Sironar-N 150mm F5.6 (replace Fuji W 150)
3. Nikkor T 360/500/720 (replace Fuji Telephoto)

I read a lot about the "XL" from Schneider and Sironar-N from Rodenstock as being "must have". Any advice?

[Ralph Barker]

I think a lot depends on the motivation for "upgrading" each individual lens, Dave.

On the 90mm, for example, do you want a wider lens, or a brighter one?

On the 150mm, are you after better resolution? I'm not sure that you'd see much difference between the Fuji and the Rodenstck Sironar-N, but you mig.

On the tele, I assume you are aware that Nikon is no longer making LF lenses. So, you're looking at either remaining stock or used on the Nikkor-Ts. I've seen a few 360s pop up, and a couple of 500mm rear elements recently. But, I've been (casually) looking for a 720mm rear element for several years with no luck.

You may find this info helpful:

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

[David A. Goldfarb]

A 72-75mm lens isn't a replacement for a 90mm lens. They are each useful in their own right.

[Alan Davenport]

There's nothing wrong with any of the lenses you already have. Stop obsessing and go take some pictures.

[paulr]

My rating for your lenses is 687.
(margin of error plus or minus 22)

[Rob_5419]

I read a lot about the "XL" from Schneider and Sironar-N from Rodenstock as being "must have". Any advice?

I can't really tell any difference between the Sironar N series versus the Nikkor W series. I'm as blind as not being able to tell the difference between the Sironar N series; the Nikkor W series and the Sironar S series in black and white photography. (The Nikkor W is definitely cooler in colour contrast/temperature rendition).

For colour photography, I like my Sironar S. I can't tell why in any precise scientific terms other than a warm glowy chromy feeling. As far as resolution goes, I can't tell the difference between any of them at 20x24" enlargement sizes.

Since you shoot 70% black & white, if you're happy with a 90mm being the widest lens you have, that's okay.

Have you thought of changing film to explore the limits of your results? Your film selection is more limiting than your lens' resolutions. You would probably get better results from shooting with finer grained film, like Fuji Acros, Adox 25, Rollei R3 than with Tri-X, and Fuji Velvia or even Fuji 160C sheet film instead of the grainier Kodak variety. $0.02.

[Walter Calahan]

6.8 on the pinhole scale.

Grin

[IanG]

Save your money on upgrading, they are all excellent lenses. Changing any of them won't help you take better images.

You might want to get a wider lens than the 90mm, but the 75mm SA's are superb and cost a lot less than the 72mm SA-XL, and there are some excellent 65mm's as well.

Ian

[Armin Seeholzer]

I would only ad the 72 XL if you can aford it!

Everything is totaly fine in my opinion. Armin

[Salty]

It's not always the quality of the glass you have. Having the experience and the right technique matters. There are a number of photographers on this site who can take a "mud sucker" and make wonderful negatives.

[timparkin]

From a logical point of view, it might make sense to upgrade the Fujinon 400 to the Nikkor 360/500 (I don't know what the 720 is like but I imagine it's difficult to handle even if it isn't soft). It is heavier than the 400T (800g instead of 600g) but you can then have an extra 500mm lens for an extra 200ish grams (?guessed weight). However if you're backpacking, it might make sense just to keep the 400.

Then you could add the 72 at the other end but I wouldn't replace the 90 (good backpacking lens too). If you want to replace the 90 with something a little more expensive, you could get the 110XL.. lots of people seem to like it (I do)

The only 150 I'd replace with is the S rather than the N as it's the one lens I've used and gone 'bloody hell!' and I agree it's not just perceived sharpness but it just renders amazingly (at least on Velvia).

None of these comments really answers your question though... They only suggest that if the thing your are missing is range, then possibly extend it and from my experience, only one lens has made me go wow (although it may be my photograpy on that particular day - then again probably not so I'll give it to the lens)

[Sheldon N]

I'd only consider upgrading your 90mm and 150mm if they are the older, single coated versions. If they are the newer multicoated versions (Schneider will say Multicoating on it, Fuji will have the writing on the outside of the lens barrel) then there's no need. The one caveat would be if you regularly run out of coverage when shooting, then you could look for a lens in the desired focal length with more coverage.

On the 400 telephoto, I might consider switching to a conventional lens design for lighter weight and a more compact package. Consider a 300mm Nikkor-M or Fuji-C, or a 450mm Fuji-C, depending on what camera you shoot with.

All this being said, your current lenses are fine for taking photos. The real question should be whether they are failing you in any capacity.

[Robbie Shymanski]

They aren't worth the sand they were made with, but i'll give you $100 for the bunch.

[walter23]

These kinds of questions are meaningless You can't get an actual answer to your question unless you identify what you're not satisfied with and what you want instead. Do you want more image circle for movements? What are you after? The magic "ansel adams" lens?

[Bill_1856]

If you don't know what you need, then you don't need it.

[Louie Powell]

Dave -

Sounds like a case of GAS to me.

(GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome)

That's a condition that tends to occur in the winter when the weather is too lousy to go out and actually use what we have, so instead we start lusting for what we would rather have instead.

[Salty]

Dave -

Sounds like a case of GAS to me.

(GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome)

That's a condition that tends to occur in the winter when the weather is too lousy to go out and actually use what we have, so instead we start lusting for what we would rather have instead.

I think it's more close to being the "Chasing the Magic Bullet Syndrome."

[jetcode]

There's nothing wrong with any of the lenses you already have. Stop obsessing and go take some pictures.

I agree - I've had the 90mm and the 400mm and they don't need to be replaced

[Ron Marshall]

All are excellent lenses, assuming they are the MC versions, I would'n change any, unless those particular focal lengths don't suit your preferred subjects, or you find you need a larger image circle or would prefer lighter weight.

72mm is a signifigant difference from 90mm.

[John Kasaian]

Demand more from yourself and less from your gear. See:
www.korchenko.com

[timparkin]

I think the guy gets the message about not needing anything new but it's not 'wrong' to want to spend your money (whether it's magic bullet chasing or GAS) - if you choose to spend your money it's always nice to know what other people have learned through making similar mistakes :-)

Advantages of buying new lenses

Increased range of focal lengths
Learn about the difference (or not) between lenses
Save weight?
Keep the second hand market running
Convince yourself that "no it's not the lens that is the problem"

All of these are positive aspects...

Disadvantages of buying new lenses


Loss of money as you trade which could be spent on film/holiday/filters?
You get a worse lens?
You don't go out as much ("I'll wait until the new lens arrives")
You convince yourself it's better even though it's not (Magic Bulllet Syndrome)


I'd personally extend the focal range if you need it and find someone who has a range of different lenses to go out with a swap to see what the results are like..

Tim

[Asher Kelman]

Please evaluate my lenses and tell me the quality of the glass (1-5 scale, 5 being best), additional comments are encouraged. I shoot B&W Tri-x 320 (70%) and Readyload Kodak VC Slide 100 (30%).

1. Schneider Super-Angulon, 90mm F8
2. Fujinon W 150mm F5.6
3. Nikkor W 210mm F5.6 (keep)
4. Fujinon T 400mm F8

I have the funds for "better" glass, just not sure if I get "better" results with the following. i.e would you make the transition from what I have to the following...

1. Schneider SA-XL 72mm 5.6 (replace SA 90)
2. Rodenstock APO Sironar-N 150mm F5.6 (replace Fuji W 150)
3. Nikkor T 360/500/720 (replace Fuji Telephoto)

I read a lot about the "XL" from Schneider and Sironar-N from Rodenstock as being "must have". Any advice?

Hi Dave,

So much on lens choice depends on what you are getting with what you have now and in what way the current lenses are hindering or satisfying you. Is there a particular feature that you are missing? Are you finding limits to how large you can print or the tonalities? Are the lenses to heavy, not fast enough or there's just a feeling you'd like "the best".

If you can answer these questions, then the guys here will have very specific favorite lenses for you.

Asher