your favorite 90mm lens? [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

rdenney

9-Sep-2009, 21:47

For what format and how much movement needed for that format? :)

He did say 4x5.

But he didn't describe his application. I regularly use a Super Angulon 90/5.6 and I never swear at it. I doubt I would have any complaint with the offerings from Fuji, Nikon, or Rodenstock, either. That's just the lens that came to me at the time I was looking for it.

If I was wanting a lens to fold up in a Speed Graphic, however, none of those would work. Then, the 90mm Wolly that is in a box somewhere would be the proper choice. And the 90/5.6 SA is not exactly small and light.

Rick "it depends on the requirements" Denney

Ron Marshall

9-Sep-2009, 21:51

I have a 90mm f8 Nikon that I am very happy with. I don't find f8 too dark, and it is fairly light weight.

Roger Thoms

9-Sep-2009, 22:01

I have a F8 Super Angulon that I really like for 4x5 and they are plentiful on the used market.

Roger

bqw

9-Sep-2009, 23:41

I have a F8 Super Angulon that I really like for 4x5 and they are plentiful on the used market.

Roger
I just got an elderly Angulon 90/6.8 for ~US$100, but haven't used it yet.

jnantz

10-Sep-2009, 03:45

i have a SA90mm f5.6 or f8 ( i think ) chrome barrel.
i got it from keh a long time ago, and ... its ok.
it is pretty big compared to the 2 tiny 90mm lenses i used before ...
one was a wollensak air corps raptar with a funky colored dot on the lens
and the other was a 12.5 wollensak exwa gotten when the raptar was
in the shop being filled with beard clippings ... both offereed a ton of movements
( i ran out of camera before i ran out of circle ) and were used on a rail camera
...i bought the SA because the shutter seemed more reliable not really
for any other reason.

Aender Brepsom

10-Sep-2009, 04:13

I have tried a Super Angulon 5.6/90mm, a Grandagon-N 6.8/90mm and a Grandagon-N 4.5/90mm (and had a SA 8/90mm on a 6x17 Gaoersi). All of them performed extraordinarily well in terms of image quality, but the Grandagon-N 4.5/90mm was the one I liked best. If weight, bulk and money are important, I'd take the Grandagon-N 6.8/90mm, as it is the best compromise.

The answers here won't be very helpful I suppose, as everybody has different opinions. Fact is that all modern lenses from any of the 4 major manufacturers (Schneider Kreuznach, Rodenstock, Nikon, Fujinon) will be excellent. Things like weight, filter size and price will probably be more important the performance differences. Don't forget the Caltars; they are rebranded Grandagons and usually less expensive, although every bit as good as their cousins.

ki6mf

10-Sep-2009, 04:23

I second Aender on the Grandagon N 4.5/90. I use it for landscapes and it works extremely well.

IanG

10-Sep-2009, 04:27

Like Aender I have a SA f5.6 90mm (chrome) and a newer f6.8 90mm Grandagon both are superb lenes, I prefer the Grandagon, it's Multicoated but I had it first and I guess taht's why :D The 90mm SA was for a 6x17 camera, now it stays in the UK.

I also use a 90mm Angulon for hand-held work with a Crown Graphic, it's not bad as long as there's enough light to use it well stopped down.

Ian

Gem Singer

10-Sep-2009, 07:49

Jamie,

Check your private messages.

Upper right hand corner of this page.

Steve Hamley

10-Sep-2009, 11:34

The 80mm Schneider Super Symmar XL! :D

Cheers, Steve

jamie c

11-Sep-2009, 10:06

sorry everyone, my internet was down. and i couldn't access the site to respond.
i appreciate all the help.

i ask because i am pretty sold on the chamonix 4x5, and i was looking for a nice 90mm lens to compliment it. ideally an f-5.6 or so.

David Karp

11-Sep-2009, 11:38

If you are set on one of the larger 90s, then I would really consider the f/4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon-N. You get a bit more light to work with. I like mine very much.

That being said, I own or have owned 3 90mm lenses. A single coated f/8 Fujinon (very nice-smaller image circle), the Grandagon-N (very nice), Nikkor SW f/8 (very nice with image circle comparable to the bigger Rodenstock. Personally, I think that the Nikkor is the best fit for a field camera that offers the movements to take advantage of the image circle.

The Schneider 90 XL is also a nice lens (by reputation - I never tried it), but it is even larger than the Grandagon-N. Not the best choice for a field camera in my opinion.

speedtrials

11-Sep-2009, 11:58

I had at the same time both of the Nikon 90mm's: the f/8 verison and the f/4.5 version. I got rid of the f/8 version as I found the brighter one much easier and nicer to use. For me, the gain in brightness was worth the extra weight.

Andre Noble

11-Sep-2009, 13:15

Nikon 90 F8

jamie c

11-Sep-2009, 14:31

Eric Brody

11-Sep-2009, 14:40

The Nikon f/8 is an impressive lens, sharp, with a large image circle, and quite easy to focus. Since it is usually used at f/22 or so, paying for and carrying the f/4.5 never appealed to me but I'm usually working outdoors in decent light. Were I doing indoor architecture type work, the wider aperture might appeal. It was the second lens I bought, after my Fuji 210. I still have both and still use both, and still love both.

Eric

SAShruby

11-Sep-2009, 14:42

None. I don't have anything smaller than 120. Interesting is that the most famous fotographs are not taken with wide lens.

Let the hell begin :D

Eric Brody

11-Sep-2009, 14:44

While the Chamonix is a fine camera for field use, why are you not looking at a monorail with more flexibility if you're doing "mostly composed or staged scenarios with people and location" and "a little extra weight can't hurt, right!" It sounds like weight is not an issue. Consider the Arca 141, it's gorgeous and lovely to use.

Eric

David Karp

11-Sep-2009, 14:46

None. I don't have anything smaller than 120. Interesting is that the most famous fotographs are not taken with wide lens.

Wasn't this made with a 90 on 4x5?

http://www.anseladams.com/ProductImages/posters/15440144.jpg

SAShruby

11-Sep-2009, 14:48

Wasn't this made with a 90 on 4x5?

http://www.anseladams.com/ProductImages/posters/15440144.jpg

I said most... and.. I was planning to insert, non-landscape but anyway, statistically I'm right.

jamie c

11-Sep-2009, 15:22

eric -

yes, the majority of my 'art practice' is staged or composed location shots - i still want a camera i can carry around (if need be) just for the love of photography. i've been using a cambo for a little while and it has all the movements i could ask for, but i really don't need most of them, and it is a serious camera to bring around, and it demands a serious tripod, and setup.

the chamonix allows the freedom of the movement i need, without the bulk and weight of the cambo. and it can fold down to fit in the same bag i carry a hasselblad.

the wise crack about the extra weight was more about adding extra weight to the chamonix, and since it is as light as it is, even a heavy lens couldn't weigh it down.

it is a contradiction, yes i can see that.
but after seeing a chamonix in the flesh, i totally fell in love.
a small toyo would be good as well, but the craftsmanship of the chamonix is really amazing.

Mike1234

11-Sep-2009, 16:04

None. I don't have anything smaller than 120. Interesting is that the most famous fotographs are not taken with wide lens.

Let the hell begin :D

Really decent super-wides have only been around for a few decades unlike photography which has been around for 150 years or so. The so-called "renaisance" of photography began long before very high quality super-wides were available. Images shot with them are catching up. There are literally thousands of outstanding images floating around on the internet shot with them.

pocketfulladoubles

11-Sep-2009, 16:18

thanks again -

the 4.5 or 5.6 is important to me, as i shoot mostly composed or staged scenarios with people and location. i need the wide angle for smaller spaces, and the brightest screen possible to view the composition at its best. the large, or heavy lens doesn't really bother me because i have to lug around a strobe as well. a little extra weight can't hurt, right!

j.

I've had both the Nikkor f4.5 and f8, and kept the f8. I carry 5 lenses and wanted to keep the weight down a little, and the f4.5 is a beast and needs much larger and more expensive filters. If brightness is really your concern, ditch the stock screen and get a Maxwell. If you're trying to focus wide open, you're really not going to want the stock fresnel on there anyway (see other posts here about that).

SAShruby

11-Sep-2009, 16:41

In my opinion, wide shots are dull. There is no pleasure of enjoying fine lines in transition rendering of the detail. That's the secret of the great photographs.

I just feel bitchy today, so I'm stirring the pot here.

eric black

11-Sep-2009, 17:37

my favorite 90mm is the 80mm super symmar- guess its not quite a 90, but as close as Im going to get.

jamie c

11-Sep-2009, 22:22

jamie c

11-Sep-2009, 22:27

ps. in all honesty i am not even trying to be rude.

i'd just like to see visually where you are coming from.
and it is annoying that you have these great claims and a website that won't load.

IanG

12-Sep-2009, 02:50

Images made with a "Wide angle lens" vary very markedly depending on the photographer.

I shoot regularly with a wide-angle, 90mm through to a 65mm and in many cases you'd not realise just how wide and it would be difficult to make a good image with a 150mm or longer. So those are starnge comments by SAShruby :D

Ian

Ole Tjugen

12-Sep-2009, 08:41

Really decent super-wides have only been around for a few decades unlike photography which has been around for 150 years or so. ...

That's completely wrong. The widest rectilinear lens ever made is STILL the Goerz Hypergon - and that was made over a century ago.

Ole Tjugen

12-Sep-2009, 08:46

... and by the way - I prefer a 90mm f:6.8 Angulon for weight, and a 90mm f:8 Super Angulon for evenness of illumination. The differences in sharpness and max aperture are minimal, so I tend to use the old Angulon on 4x5" and the 90/8 on 5x7".

eddie

12-Sep-2009, 10:15

hey jamie, i have only used a 90 f8 and now a 5.6. i loved the f8. i used it on my chamonix for a long long time. it quickly became one of my favorite lenses. i was able to "upgrade" to the 5.6 version recently and did it because i could. i have not been shooting it too long so i can not say much yet, but so far all is well. the f8 is smaller for sure. both work well on the chamonix. i posted a couple of shot son the "trains" thread. the lathe was shot at f8 just for fun.

have fun with your 90 and the chamonix.

eddie

Mike1234

12-Sep-2009, 11:21

That's completely wrong. The widest rectilinear lens ever made is STILL the Goerz Hypergon - and that was made over a century ago.

Ole... Call me wrong if you like but Hypergons were/are difficult to use. Also, by "really decent" I mean lenses of low distortion, sharp from center to corners, and relatively even illumination... and availability of CF's to correct the latter. I don't consider the Hypergons, although an awesome achievement for their time, to fit any of these critera.

IanG

12-Sep-2009, 11:36

Hypergon's might be rare but Wide Angle Protar's aren't.

My f16 151mm Ross version covers 10x8 with room for movements. There are plenty of other good early wide angle lenses with designs going back to the 1880's & 90's and many are quite capable lenses particularly for contact printing or modest enlargement.

Ian

Ole Tjugen

12-Sep-2009, 14:00

Mike, all superwides can be said to be difficult to use.

The Hypergon in fully distortionless, far better than e.g. the 80mm SSXL, and sharp center to corner at an image angle of 135 degrees. It was sold with a specially designed "rotating fan" center filter which effectively removed every trace of uneven illumination.

The Hypergon fills every single one of those criteria. What it doesn't fulfill is what you didn't state: They don't fit in modern shutters (they actually don't fit in any shutter at all), and the maximum aperture is an abysmally dark f:32.

Look up the curves if you need to, or read a book on optic design.

-----------

To get back on topic: All superwides are difficult to focus. This is not only because of relatively poor maximum aperture, but even more due to the large difference in angle of incidence between the centre and teh corners of the ground glass.

Of my wide lenses the most difficult to focus is not the 120mm f:16 WW-Aplanat, but the much faster 47mm f:5.6 Super Angulon XL. A larger aperture helps, but not that much...

rdenney

12-Sep-2009, 20:43

Based on some of the posts, I have the feeling some think a 90 is a super-wide on 4x5.

Huh?

47 is superwide. 65 is a strong wide. 90 is a moderate wide. 120-135 are wide normals, routinely provided on 4x5 press cameras as the standard lens.

Rick "whose least used lens is a 150" Denney

Frank Petronio

12-Sep-2009, 21:58

I like 90s on 4x5 because they are wide without being stupid wide like all the 72s, 58, 47s, etc. 90mm still presents some semblance of reality....

Favorites have been the late high serial number Schneider 90 Angulons in a late Compur for size/weight, sharpness and value -- best for field cameras. And the 90/4.5 Grandagon because you can use movements the way they were intended, like 2 inches of rise. The intermediate 90s, like the 90/6.8 Grandagons I have owned (several times over), are compromises that offer limited rise in a smaller size (67mm filter) but are fine for most landscapes (for architecture you'll want a lot of rise).

rdenney

13-Sep-2009, 04:02

And the 90/4.5 Grandagon because you can use movements the way they were intended, like 2 inches of rise.

The Super Angulon 90/5.6 has the same image circle as the 90/4.5 Grandagon (okay, it's only 235mm instead of 236mm). I sure seem more of them on the used market, too. If I wanted a lens with that big an image circle (and I did), I'd buy whichever one came my way with a better price/condition ratio.

Rick "who likes those stupid-wides" Denney

SAShruby

14-Sep-2009, 11:05

hey SAShruby-

why not instead of feeling bitchy and stirring the pot, you spend that extra effort on making sure your website works. at least if your images warrant your claims your opinion can be respected.

if not, well that's another thread.

so far, with exception to yourself, this thread has been quite helpful.
i'd actually really like to see your work.

let me know when it is up and running.
and maybe start another post about how useless 90mm are, and announce more inciting and useful statistics. i am sure you'll have quite the backing.

Well, as usual here, you misunderstood my comments. Anyway, my website is not working because I don't have time to build one. I have more than "one" hobby, hence I don't spend my time behind computer building website.

If you observe enough pictures and read over 100 books, you come to same conclusion. So, as may look that my comments are obscure and rude, they're based on facts, however I'm not going to "prove it" to you just because you want me to.

Sooner or later, maybe with more experience while thinking about many compositions you come to same conclusion.

p.s. If you not recognize sarcastic humor, and it wasn't meant to be sarcastic towards you, but towards myself, it's not my fault.

timberline12k

14-Sep-2009, 12:44

90mm F/4.5 CALTAR-II N MC

rdenney

14-Sep-2009, 19:44

If you observe enough pictures and read over 100 books, you come to same conclusion.

Pshaw. I've observed thousands of pictures, and read probably more books than 100, and I don't in any way come to the conclusion you expressed.

I'd be embarrassed to impose my visualization (or taste) on others, especially if it's not really mine from experience but more from spectating.

Also, I can't think of any reason why I would think my opinion worth anything if I'm not prepared to defend it.

Rick "opinions can't be proved (else they'd be facts), but they can and should be justified" Denney