Poll: Shortest Focal Length You Own

[Ron Marshall]

I'm curious what the shortest focal length lens is in your kit.

Mine is a 55mm.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

My shortest is a 45 mm apo-grandagon.
But it does not cover 4x5" ; I use it for 6x9 or 6x12.
So I cannot vote.. snifff. :(

[Daniel Grenier]

You forgot a common one in 8x10, Ron. The 165mm (which is my widest).

[Ole Tjugen]

Assuming you are only asking about lenses that cover 4x5", mine is a 65mm. I have even shorter lenses for smaller formats like 6.5x9cm.

A more useful question would be "what is your widest lens, in terms of image angle along the long side of the film?"
But that would have to be accompanied by tables for those who can't do mental trigonometry...

[Capocheny]

Hi Ron,

You also left out MY widest lens... the 72XL for 4x5. :)

110XL for 5x7
150SW Nikkor for 8x10

Cheers

[jb7]

47mm-
though this looks very much like a 4x5 poll-

j

[Walter Calahan]

120 for 8x10

Can't remember what the shortest is on my 5x7 Graflex, but it ain't short due to the mirror.

58 for 4x5

43 for 6x7

50 for 6x6

12 for 35 mm

Sorry don't own any 11x14 or larger. Grin.

[BrianShaw]

My answer only applies to the LF that I use: 4x5. Ohter answers would apply if the quesiton were directed to MF or SF.

[Ron Marshall]

I meant it to apply to 4x5; I can't believe I forgot 72mm!

If I missed your shortest, pick the nearest to it in the list.

[Vaughn]

150mm is the shortest for 4x5.

My over-all widest lens is a 159mm for 8x10.

Vaughn

[Gordon Moat]

I have a few 105mm lenses, but none of them cover 4x5. Does (did) any company ever make a 105mm that covered 4x5, with movements?

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Nick_3536]

Fuji 105mm SW does

My shortest lens is 75mm

[Peter K]

My shortes LF-lens is a SA 1:8/47mm.

Peter K

Sorry, I've forgotten my short macro-lenses: Carl Zeiss Planar 1:4.5/20mm and Schneider M-Componon 1:4/28mm.

[Daniel_Buck]

I got at 12mm flat and 8mm fish for my SLR :-D 90mm for my 4x5

[Jiri Vasina]

At the moment it's a 135mm one. But only because I haven't acquired the 120mm one I want for 13x18cm/5x8" that I shoot now. (4x5" is a backup).

[Merg Ross]

Assuming 4x5,the shortest focal length that I own is a 90mm. I last used it in 2002.

The shortest lens that I use on a regular basis is a 125mm Fujinon.

[lungovw]

Mine, for 8x10, is a 6 1/4 Wollensak Extra Wide f9.

[David A. Goldfarb]

55mm Apo-Rodagon is the widest I use on 4x5", but if I'm carrying my 6x17cm back, then 75mm is slightly wider on the long dimension.

[Mark Sawyer]

Here's a switch: for 4x5, 90mm, for 8x10, 75mm!

[Ron Marshall]

Here's a switch: for 4x5, 90mm, for 8x10, 75mm!

Mark, is that 75mm a Hyperagon?

[Scott Davis]

I used to have a 75 for 4x5. I found I wasn't using it much at all, so I offloaded it. I still have a 90, which I on rare occasion also use with 5x7. For 8x10/5x12, I have a 159.

[Dan Fromm]

This looks like a 4x5 poll. I shoot 2x3. So much the worse for me.

My shortest lens, which doesn't cover 2x3, is a 38. The shortest I own that covers is a 47.

[Jan Pedersen]

90mm for 4x5 and 5x7
120mm for 8x10
No need for anything wider :)

[Mark Sawyer]

Mark, is that 75mm a Hypergon?

Yup, with the fan. I need to get out with it more, but I've been going in other directions lately...

[jnantz]

i had a 58 brassie in a barrel,
but sold it years ago ... and i miss it

[Andrew O'Neill]

Hey Capocheny, won't your 110XL also cover 8x10?

[Ron Marshall]

Yup, with the fan. I need to get out with it more, but I've been going in other directions lately...

Would you mind posting something taken with that on 8x10? I'm very curious to see the perspective.

[Mark Sawyer]

Would you mind posting something taken with that on 8x10? I'm very curious to see the perspective.

With apologies for hogging the thread (and the usual crappy scans), four uncropped 8x10 images of the same little spot in the woods with different focal lengths. I moved around some for each, otherwise it would have just been an exercise in camera cropping. I wanted to see how each caught the same space, and situated the camera accordingly...

480mm Apo Ronar:
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/480mmRonar500hi-1.jpg


215mm Acuton:
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/215mmAcuton500hi.jpg


121mm Super Angulon:
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/121mmSA500hi.jpg


75mm Hypergon:
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/Owen21k/75mmHypergon500hi-1.jpg

[Steve Barber]

"With apologies for hogging the thread (and the usual crappy scans)"

Don't apologize, it is an interesting comparison.

[Ron Marshall]

Thanks Mark, that is amazingly wide. A bit of light fall-off in the corners but not objectionable.

[Mark Sawyer]

Most welcome, Ron. I could have spun the fan longer and evened out the exposure, but I still haven't used it enough to figure it all out. To use it, the main exposure needs to be at least a second or more, so you have to figure reciprosity into the fan exposure, which still doesn't seem to be enough. But the time will come, I hope...

[David A. Goldfarb]

Very interesting. The distortion in the corners produces a real sense of dynamism with the 75mm on 8x10". My widest for that format is the 120mm Perigraphe.

[Daniel Unkefer]

Hmmm...

I have a Sinar Barrel 121 f8 Super Angulon (has Norma rabbit ears) which I occasionally use for W/A 8x10 with my 8x10 Sinar Norma. The lens covers the whole plate, when I crank the focus forward to whatever hyperfocal distance is appropriate for what I am doing.

With my 4x5 Norma, I have a 58mm Rodenstock Grandagon I removed from a Graflex-XL and, if focused hyperfocally, will cover the entire 4x5 plate. A machinist friend made a custom aluminum deeply-recessed board from an old flat Norma one. It is a good trick to weld aluminum properly, needs just the right touch.

[panchro-press]

I have a B&L ProtarV. It covers 8X10 and is a wide sucker...and sharp as a tack!

[Toyon]

Mark, the camera was/wasn't leveled for each shot?

[QUOTE=Mark Sawyer;333936]With apologies for hogging the thread (and the usual crappy scans), four uncropped 8x10 images of the same little spot in the woods with different focal lengths. I moved around some for each, otherwise it would have just been an exercise in camera cropping. I wanted to see how each caught the same space, and situated the camera accordingly...

[Mark Sawyer]

[QUOTE=Toyon;334375]Mark, the camera was/wasn't leveled for each shot?

Not very well, apparently! This was the very first day I had the Hypergon out, and I was leveling it by just looking at the camera back. It was overcast and spitting a light rain at the end of the day. and I took a short cut...

I've found since then that one has to be <i>excedingly</i> careful about leveling the camera with such a wide lens, and with a focusing aperture of f/22 and a big light loss outside the center (where the congerging lines show up), it's easy to blow it. I'm not proud of the little bit of work I've done with it thus far, but the image does show the look and potential (and problems!), at least for educational purposes...

[Ole Tjugen]

My vote and reply just changed - I've bought a 47mm Super Angulon XL.

Sometimes even 65mm isn't wide enough, and it's no problem using even shorter lenses on my camera.

This is a dangerous trend - I'm beginning to by modern lenses! :eek:

[tgtaylor]

For 4x5, a 75mm f4.5 Grandagon is my shortest focal length. Its a great lens and very compact but I have found the 90mm f4.5 Grandagon to be adequately wide for most of my images. For example, yesterday I was shooting the interior of a historical structure in San Juan Batista (not the mission but the Plaza Hotel directly across from it) and I initially thought that the 75mm would be required. Nope, the 90mm would do it.

Similarly, a 45mm is the shortest focal length for my Pentax 67II but there too I find that the 55mm is usually adequate. Both the 55mm and 90mm are larger and weigh significantly more than the 45mm and 90mm.

I had been toying with the notion of acquiring a 65mm Nikkor and almost bought one this morning at a camera show (they wanted $675 and I offered $500). I'm really glad now that they didn't drop down or bargain with me because I can see now that the 65mm would see very little use.

Thomas

[Rodney Polden]

65mm Nikkor-SW on 4x5
90mm Super-Angulon on 5x7
120mm Nikkor-SW on 8x10

.......and a new pair of aspheric lens implants, so my eyes are back to seeing their accustomed 185 degree wide-angle view, after years of struggling behind spectacles! Great new vision. Thank you, Doc

[Alan Davenport]

I suppose the poll result is skewed toward the 4x5 format, since (I think) more of us use 4x5 than the larger large formats.

I'm not surprised to see 90mm in the lead; 90 is a surprisingly wide lens, compared to its supposed 35mm analogue. Anyway, 90 still seems plenty wide to me (and is my widest.)

The other spikes in the distribution, 65/75 (taken together) and 47mm all represent focal lengths that are sufficiently different from one another, to be very different in use. Overall, the numbers represent a (to me) logical progression in focal lengths for photographers wanting a good lens selection.

[Capocheny]

Hey Capocheny, won't your 110XL also cover 8x10?

Hi Andrew,

Indeed, it does! :)

Cheers

[John Kasaian]

159mm for the 8x10, 170 for the 5x7 and 127mm for the 4x5.

Someday maybe a 120mm SW for the 8x10, a 120 for the 5x7 and either a 90 or 100 for the 4x5.