90/135mm or 115mm on Chamonix 45 type camera?

[thafred]

Hi all!

I´m reading LFF and photographing with 4x5 for over a year now (doing well thanks to all the knowledge on this forum!) and want to finaly change from my Speed Graphics to a real Field Camera. I´ve started photographing city-szenes and landscapes with my Graflex and begin to feel limited with the movements (they are a joy for portraits and street photography thou)

Last week I had the chance to play with the Shen Hao PTB 45 from Arthur Fleischmann (also a member here) and was very pleased with the camera (lots of movements, surprisingly light and stable!) so I think the Chamonix or her Chinese clone will be on my shopping list soon.
I don´t have a wideangle lens with huge IC (I have a old Angulon 90 6.8) so I´m thinking of adding that (a 90mm Grandagon or Nikkor) to my lenses.
A friend of mine is visiting from the US and could bring a lens or two from KEH which would be very neat since the prices are almost half of what the lenses cost here in Austria (or germany).

My plan is to use the 90 in combination with my 135 Symmar-S or even get an APO Sironar-N 135 (Caltar) together with the 90 Grandagon to have a match for Slide film and also that I can leave the Symmar on the SG (RF calibrated for the 135)

I saw a Grandagon 115 for sale too and the lens really got me interested. When shooting with other formats I enjoy having only one FL since it helps me to focus, so I like the idea of doing that with LF too. I couldn´t find much about the lens on the web other than it is heavy and that it has a huge image circle (I suppose all the movements the Chamonix can do the lens could).
I´m thinking that the wider angle of view compared to my 135mm would be a nice thing to have and that the large IC would be thrilling (the 190mm of the symmar are enough on the SG but on the field camara..). Downside is the weight and the size but I guess the other two lenses would take up the same space in the bag and weight roughly the same too. My only doubt is if the Chamonix 45 even supports a 740g lens like the 115 grandagon.

Would you swap a 135/90 combination for a single 115mm lens or do you think the IC of the grandagon is completely wasted on the Chamonix anyway and I should hang onto the 135/90 set? Would the Grandagon crush the Cham´s front standard?

I am contemplating for a week now but should make a fast decision so I would be very grateful for your opinions on this.

Thanks for your help!
Fred

[Jeff Bannow]

I personally find 90mm / 135mm way too close. I would look at 90mm / 180mm or so, if you are only going to have 2 lenses.

I have no experience with the 115mm, but I don't find 135mm to be wide at all.

[thafred]

thanks jbannow.

I also think of my 135 as a standard FL. compared to my 35mm on 135-film which I´m shooting most i´d even say it feels slightly longer (at least I often find myself stepping back after I build up the tripod). The 90 doesn´t feel too close for me and I really like my 40/28 combination with the leica M but most of the time prefer the 35 instead...that´s what started me thinking about the 115 :)

[gevalia]

I use a 90mm Grandagon on my Chamonix 4x5 and have no issue with the weight. I think your questions on focal length are up to you. Personally, I settled on a 90 and 150 for wide and normal. I have a 135 and 125 and used them for quite a while but the 150 was more in my comfort zone - it just felt right. I never used normal lenses in other formats since I am a wide-angle landscape guy but I have to say that I seem to use the 150 more then any of my others (which are 90, 240, and 360) on my LF. If the Chamonix will have no issue with a Goerz 14" with the bellows extended to the max, it also has no issue with the 90 Grandagon.

[Ron Marshall]

If you have the 90 and the 135, you probably don't need the 115. Not only is it heavy, it takes 82mm filters. Your field camera will not have enough movement to take advantage of the large image circle of this lens; which is the main reason to tolerate such weight.

Good luck!

[Frank Petronio]

A Rodenstock Grandagon 90/6.8 with a Rodenstock Sironar 210/5.6 is a nice combination of popular, inexpensive yet quality lenses with large coverage that also share the same 67mm filter size. Why not keep the 135 on the Speed Graphic and go with that?

[thafred]

thank you all for your sugestions!

Thank you Ron, thats exactly what I was worrying about..too heavy and too much movements...filters and expense drove me finaly away from the grandagon 115!

Gevalias and Franks comments got me thinking and so this weekend trying to get a better feel for the lenses I took my 90 angulon, 135 Symmar-S and 150 Symmar convertible with me. I think that I like the 90/150 combination better than the 90/135 set (quite surprising for me since I only shot with the 135 till now but the 150 was very nice in use...doesn´t seem so narrow as I was thinking).

Since there was a 90 Super angulon MC in EX+ condition for the same price as a Grandagon MC in BGN I chose the Schneider SA now in combination with a APO Symmar 150 in BGN condition. I hope I didn´t make a bad choice but I hope that the lenses are equaly as capable as their rodenstock equivalents. As a plus I will have the MC Symmar-S 135mm in my bag too in case I need it, should renders equaly to the 90 SA MC or APO 150 right?

the Symmar Convertible I have is a nice lens with high resolution but I hope to improve contrast in color photography with the APO Symmar.

thanks again for your kind help!
best
fred