PDA

View Full Version : Looking for advice on first lens or lenses



photoncapture
28-Aug-2010, 09:01
I am very new to LF format and looking into buying either an Ebony RW45 or the Chamonix 45N-2. I plan on using the camera mostly for landscape and secondly for architecture.

I am trying to be sensible and therefore looking to put more money towards getting the best glass at a reasonable price and settling for a decent starter camera. Total budget is about $3500.

I have read threads on this forum and searched online for reviews concluding that I would like to concentrate on Rodenstock and Schneider lenses. The question now is which lens to start with considering my favored focal length range, in both 35mm and medium format, lies between 24 and 70mm (in 35m equivalents)?

Ron Marshall
28-Aug-2010, 09:12
Any multicoated lens from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, Rodenstock will be fine.

Don't buy new. Good deals used on this forum or KEH Camera Brokers or Midwest Photo.

My kit is Nikon 90mm f8, Rodenstock 135mm f5.6 and Nikon 200mm f8.

That 90 has a large image circle, permitting ample movements, but being only f8 is a lighter design. There is an f4.5 model, with the same IC but much heavier.

A49
28-Aug-2010, 11:35
Any multicoated lens from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, Rodenstock will be fine.

If you would take buying used lenses into consideration, I think also the single coated lenses from these manufacturers do the job, especially, if you want to process the negatives yourself or if you want to scan the negatives (hybrid working). If there should be a minimal loss in contrast due to the only single coating then you can raise it in the processing thereafter.

I have outstanding results with Schneiderīs Symmar and Symmar-S, which are very sharp and highly resolving normal lenses. A 135 mm or 150 mm of them is a good choice as standard lens (50 mm equivalent). A 210 mm or 240 mm lens could do what your 70 mm in the 35 mm format does. You donīt have to care about image circle with these longer lenses. Every lens that does not start with "Tele" delivers a big enough ic. As a wide angle the 90 mm Schneider Angulon is a cheap and good lens but it has only little movements in 4x5 inch. If you can afford, then the 90 mm Super-Angulon would be the better choice. It is sharper in the corners and has enough movements.

Technical data about vintage Schneider lenses you can find here:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/index.htm

The other manufacturerīs lenses are as good as Schneiderīs but I donīt know them that well.

Donīt think too much about lens quality, there are many parameters that influence the image results. The resolution and sharpness you can achieve depends much more on the aperture you shoot at. If you need depth of field then you have to take often f/22 or even smaller iris openings (f/32, f/45,...). You will see that the aperture values in large format that you work with are very different from the apertures you can take in 35 mm or MF. In the f22-and-smaller-aperture-openings-area all the modern lenses produce very similar image quality because then they are all limited by refraction effects and not by their design or quality. The better (and more expensive) lenses show their advantages only at apertures about f/11 or f/16 at which are often at their absolute optimum in terms of resolution and sharpnes. With a 150 mm or longer lens at f/11 or f/16 you have a very narrow depth of field which is adequate only in some photographic subjects.

And at last the lens question is dependend from the size of the print format that you aim at. The larger it is the more critical you should choose the lens. If you donīt want to enlarge more than 5 times linear, what would be to 20x25 inch, then nearly every modern lens will be good enough.

I hope I didnīt confuse you too much...;)

Best regards,
Andreas

photoncapture
28-Aug-2010, 12:19
Thanks, Ron and Andreas, for your replies to my post. Your feedback is much appreciated.

I will start searching for used lenses in the range that I think would be suitable for my kind of photography and keep all of your info in mind. Probably, start with 110/135 or a 210 and eventually add a wide angle 90 or 75.

Its not like when I go hunting online for a new Leica lens where there is only one choice, the focal length I'm looking for. LF lens buying is a little like solving a problem using Matrix Algebra or Quantitative methods with the combinations and permutations! Which focal length + which manufacturer + which series + which aperture + weight factor... Oh Yeah, I forgot the IC factor for 4 x 5!

Cheers,

Nick

GPS
28-Aug-2010, 12:37
...
The question now is which lens to start with considering my favored focal length range, in both 35mm and medium format, lies between 24 and 70mm (in 35m equivalents)?

If you want to know the answer for this question there is a direct way how to get the answer by yourself. Make you a simple viewing frame with several desired focal length markings on it, walk with it where you take pictures and measure for yourself the "best" working focal lengths...

photoncapture
28-Aug-2010, 13:08
Hi GPS,

That is a great suggestion! I'm usually good at figuring this stuff out but forgive my ignorance in saying that I am not sure how to replicate the focal length on a cardboard cutout, i.e., I'm thinking angle of view, like in my rangefinder's viewfinder, but how do you go about figuring that out for a 4 x 5 format?

Like I said it might be obvious but I must be brain dead today!

Thanks, Nick

John NYC
28-Aug-2010, 13:40
I spent a lot of time calculating focal length comparisons to 35mm using every angle of view. I finally realized that it is enough for me to look at it this way (on 4x5) and not try to make comparisons between the formats because they really don't match up...

- 90mm and below is the border where things start to look very wide angle
- 120mm and below is the border where things start to look wide-angle
- 180mm and above is where things start looking just slightly telephoto-ish
- 210 is the border where things definitely look telephoto-ish

If you think of it that way, it will be easier to know where you want your first lens.

That said, since you probably will feel differently about focal lengths in LF than you did in 35mm, it probably makes sense to start with either a 135 or a 150. The 135 is a little more generous in its field of view, but unless you get something like the Apo Sironar-S, you won't have much room for movements on many of them. Almost all 150s will give you plenty of room to learn movements.

I just sold a beautiful 150mm Apo Symmar on this forum for a song. They are available left and right these days. KEH had a ton of them last time I checked.

GPS
28-Aug-2010, 13:52
Hi GPS,

That is a great suggestion! I'm usually good at figuring this stuff out but forgive my ignorance in saying that I am not sure how to replicate the focal length on a cardboard cutout, i.e., I'm thinking angle of view, like in my rangefinder's viewfinder, but how do you go about figuring that out for a 4 x 5 format?

Like I said it might be obvious but I must be brain dead today!

Thanks, Nick

There isn't anything to figure out...:) Take a piece of cardboard, make in it an opening the size of your film format. Attach a string in the middle of the lower horizontal cardboard bar, mark the focal length on the string and put that mark under your observing eye. Looking through the viewing frame with the string stretched will tell you what your film will see with the given focal length. Enjoy fully! :)

photoncapture
28-Aug-2010, 18:11
I am new to this...I just realized how simple it is! Thanks again, I will try this neat little trick. Nick

Peter De Smidt
28-Aug-2010, 21:47
A 120mm F8 wide angle, each of the major manufacturers make one, is a very useful optic, with loads of coverage. It's wide, but it doesn't get the extreme wide angle look. It's my most used lens. You might get one and use it for awhile. For a second lens, you will find that you occasionally wish that the 120mm were longer or shorter. If on most of those occasions you wish for a longer lens, investigate a 210mm; if shorter, try a 90mm. These lens are also very plentiful, and thus you can find them for a reasonable amount.

Lachlan 717
28-Aug-2010, 23:18
I'd forget the Ebony (and probably the Chamonix) and go for a cheaper, second hand camera for $600-$650. Or even a new Shen Hao for this price.

With the leftover $3k, I'd buy a second hand Schneider 72mm SAXL and a Schneider 110mm SSXL.

I'd also keep an eye out for a Fujinon 210mm W f5.6 (for under $200).

And I think I'd be very, very happy...

GPS
29-Aug-2010, 01:43
I am new to this...I just realized how simple it is! Thanks again, I will try this neat little trick. Nick

Once you see how precise it is (more than the majority of camera viewfinders!) you will love them so that you will make then not from humble cardboard but from nice lightweight PVC sheets, with the corresponding focal length written on them (and marked on the string). Then you will make them for roll film formats, then you will make "universal" frames that will be able to show several roll film formats on one and the same frame...
After that, when you see the world in different film formats and focal lengths, you will want to have cameras with all these formats - you will start to make them by yourself, then make them even better and even more of them...:) Been there, done that. Don't know the end of it yet, though...:)

Thalmees
29-Aug-2010, 04:38
looking into buying either an Ebony RW45 or the Chamonix 45N-2. I plan on using the camera mostly for landscape and secondly for architecture.

just settle on one of the 90mm. It can cover both landscape and architecture.
This focal length is very versatile.
You may add later more lenses toward longer or shorter focal lengths.
I do not know exactly how capable are Ebony and Chamonix regarding direct desplacement of standards. But, the more the IC the better the lens for architecture photography. Here are few examples:
Schneider Super-Angulon 6.8/90mm: IC around 216mm,
Schneider Super-Angulon 5.6/90mm XL: IC around 259mm.
Rodenstock Sironar-N 6.8/90mm: IC around 221mm,
Rodenstock Sironar-S 5.6/90mm: IC around 236mm,
Nikkor has also very reputable quality.
Good Luck.

photoncapture
29-Aug-2010, 05:23
I just made my cut out of a 4 x 5 and it is a brilliant little tool! I have measured off focal lengths that I thought would be appealing to me but I also did a quick exercise with the reverse, where I simply found a few lengths that I felt comfortable with and then measured it and that's cool as well. What's even more interesting is how when trying the reverse I find that the measurement corresponds exactly to the focal length, and this is to within a mm! Thanks, I now have yet a new hobby -:)

GPS
29-Aug-2010, 05:33
:) Boy, you're caught... R.I.P.

ComicDom1
29-Aug-2010, 21:25
What no one has seemed to mention in this thread is the fact as you get into the wider focal lengths, you might require the use of a center filter. I have not noticed the need for it on my Nikon SW 90mm 4.5 but I have a 75mm 4.5 on the way to me that might just need it. I will know when it gets here. I would figure out what you intend to shoot the most and go from there. In Fred Pickers book, his suggestion for starting out with LF was 210mm and a Super Angulon 121.

Jason