Hello and W/A advice sought

[Nick De Marco]

Hi I am Nick, from London. A photographer and barrister. I have mainly worked with 35mm and medium format as well as digital (currently Leica M8)

I purchased my first 5x4 camera last year, picked up a lens a little later and have slowly been trying to learn.

I bought a Toyo 45IIA as my camera, as it is more portable than others, seems well made, and I got a good deal used.

I bought a Schnieder 150mm 5.6 used lens as my standard lens, which seems OK. But I love wide angle and saw a used 47mm f5.6 lens for sale and bought it, having read that you can use the 47mm on a Toyo filed camera.

A friend had previously given me a Toyo recessed board in case I ever bought a wide lens, and I mounted it to this and then used the lens, with camera, for the first time last weekend.

Having developed my own b/w film I saw some strong vignetting and part of the camera board in the frame. I took some more colour the next day and just picked those up, and see the same problem. I wonder if anyone can advise me what, if anything, I can do to stop this or whether the 47 is just too wide for the Toyo.

I used it wait a 6x12 back and there it worked almost fine, as the vignetting is on the corners, so if I can't use the 47 properly I guess I can always use it with a 612 back.

Here is a link to a photo with 5x4 slide and lens showing full extent of vignetting:

http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/image/131805629

And here to one with the 612 back:

http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/image/131805636

Any advice very gratefully received. I am a novice here.

Anyway, hi, and I shall be coming back

Nick:)

[Leigh]

Hi Nick,

There are two specifications you must check when selecting a wide-angle lens:

1) Flange focal length (FFL) - the distance from the lensboard to the film when focused at infinity. This number can vary all over the place, but is typically greater than the focal length of the lens for wide-angle types. For example, on the Super Angulon 65mm, the FFL is 72.5mm even though the focal length is only 65mm.

If the FFL is less than the distance from the film to the front of the lensboard with the bellows racked all the way back, you need a recessed lensboard.

2) The diameter of the image circle (usually given at f/22). As a minimum this must be greater than the diagonal dimension of the film (163mm for 4"x5"). Significantly larger diameters are required if you want to use rises or shifts. If the image circle is too small you'll get vignetting (corners will be dark as shown in your first photo).

Both of these factors will determine whether or not a particular lens is suitable for use on the camera. Many WA lenses are not usable with the 4x5 format.

The only 47mm lenses I can find are both Super Angulons, with image circles of 123mm, much too small for 4x5 work.

What 47mm did you use? That's an awfully short FL for 4x5.

- Leigh

[jb7]

Hello-

This isn't a 47mm XL, is it?

It doesn't look like it covers sufficiently-
as Leigh suggested, it might be the non-XL version-

The 47mm XL will cover, though if you shoot transparency, you'll probably need a centre filter- and it will allow only very limited movements.

Given the picture of St.Clems you posted, perhaps the 72mm XL might suit you better-
it has a similar angle of view, but a larger image circle, allowing much greater use of movements.

I don't know if your camera position was restricted, but a little more distance between you and the building might not have been a bad thing...

[Nick De Marco]

Thank you for the replies so far.

It is a Super-Angulon but not an "XL", I guess it is "pre-XL". Toyo claim this camera can take lenses down to 47mm, but I am not convinced, and have read some stuff on the net suggesting they can't, at least not without the XL.

I am already using a recessed lens board with it, but I cannot be sure it is the right one - it was one given to me. Maybe I need more "recess".

The building in shot is actually the one my flat is inside, so I have photographed it a few times. You can't actually step any further back away from the building. I think the best I have done with the building before is with a 15mm voigtlander lens on 35mm film and a 47mm Mamiya lens on the Mamiya 7. However, I get a lot of distortion because I am near the building and it is high. I hoped to do better with LF. In one sense I love the 37mm lens as it gives me such a wide view I can get distance and a view of the building I have never got before. But I cannot really get any movement at all with that lens on, so still get distortion and have to crop the neg.

It sounds to me like the answer is a 72mm + lens for 4x5 and, sadly, keeping this extreme 47 just for 6x12.

Thanks again for the welcome and advice

Nick

[jb7]

I think the claim is correct, from what I can see-
the vignetting is caused by the lens, not the camera-
The Data for this lens can be found on this page- http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/archiv.htm
and I'd be surprised if the FFL was very different to the XL version-
which is here- https://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=168&IID=1841

Using the 72mm, I think the building would fill the frame, without the need for tilt-
though if that's as far back as you can go, the sides will be very close to the edges of the frame-

The 47mm xl would work too- the image of the church would be the same size as here, but with no cutoff- and a few mm of rise to play with.

[Nick De Marco]

Thank you for that explanation Joseph

Forgive me, I don't quite understand. Do you mean that the lens will cause such vignetting anyway - but it is fine to use on my camera? Or that the 47 lens I have cannot be used on a toyo field, only a 47xl can?

[jb7]

Yes, it makes an image-
Often, the shortest lens will be determined by the FFL mentioned earlier-
if you can't get the lens close enough to the film to focus at infinity, then it won't work-
but it would appear that your church is in focus at this distance.

The XL lenses have a wider angle of view-
as you can see from the Schneider link, your 47mm is described as a 6x9 lens, and will allow some movements on that format.

You could choose to use it like that, and crop from 4x5- or 6x12,
but if you want to shoot 4x5, that's a little less than ideal.

It's the lens that's causing the vignetting, not the camera-

[Scotty230358]

Personally, the widest lens I have for 5x4 is a 75mm which I use with a flat lens board and bag bellows. It is so wide that I have to compose very carefully to ensure that there are no unwanted elements in my picture. As a landscape photographer I have never had the need for anything wider. I am, by no means, saying that a 47mm lens has no place in 5x4 photography, its just that I have yet to find a situation where I need one.

[Nick De Marco]

Thank you for the very helpful advice
I should have come here before buying - nevertheless, you have to jump in the pool to swim

I shall keep th 47 and use it for only 6x9 and 6x12 (where as I say I juist about get away with it)

It sounds like the best thing for me is a 75mm. I am on the look out for one. In the meantime I have seen a used 58 XL and a 90 both with toyo boards, and wondered if anyone could tell me whether the 58XL would have the same problems as the 47 and whether the 90 is just not wide enough for most things (not necessarility including my dificult church)?

Nick

[John NYC]

If you compare a 75mm on 4x5 to what lens focal length it would be on 35mm film, you have this...

The long side of the 4x5 comparison works out to be 22.5mm lens equivalent. The short side ends up being 18.9mm equivalent.

So, since the formats are not the same, you could consider this lens somewhere in that range... say 20mm for argument's sake.

If you do the same comparison for 58 and 47mm on 4x5, you get these equivlents (long side then short side):

47mm: 14.1mm, 11.9mm
58mm: 17.4, 14.7

Again, just roughly you could call the 47mm about a 13mm equivalent and the 58mm about a 16mm equivalent.

I don't know about you, but I never shoot anything below 16mm equivalent on any format. And that is really, really wide to me.

I have a 150mm that I use on 8x10. This is almost a direct comparison to the 75mm on 4x5. I find it to be about as wide as I would ever want to go on large format and looks very wide (but great!).

[Nick De Marco]

Thanks John
That sounds right. I would not usually use beyond a 21mm on 35mm, so a 75 sounds ideal.
Would a 90 be closer to a 28 or a 35?

[Scotty230358]

I believe a 90 around 28. A 120 is the approximate 35mm equivalent. With the 58 you mentioned I think you will still see the camera bed. Also, at that focal length centre filters are more of a necessity. 90mm lenses are wide enough for many applications and (as you have a 6x12 roll film back) make very nice gentle wide angles. However, if the majority of your subjects are tall buildings shot in confined spaces the 75mm may be a better choice.

[Noah A]

My widest lens for 4x5 is an 80mm, and it's quite wide but still offers enough coverage for movements and I still wouldn't say it has an 'ultra-wide' look. I use it with a flat board and regular bellows on my Wista VX, but to get the most out of the lens I plan to switch to a recessed board and bag bellows.

Can't you drop the bed on your camera? Some field cameras (most, I thought) allow you to drop the bed down then use front rise and tilt to get the lens in line with the back. This may get the bed out of the frame of your wideangle lens.

Something like a 75mm, 80mm or 90mm probably won't require such a trick however.

If you need a wider angle of view for one particular shot (and if you're scanning your work) you could use a moderately wide lens with lots of coverage and stitch two frames together, shifting the lens in between to get your wider view.

[Vick Vickery]

Welcome to group therapy! :) Though I have a 65mm, I only use it with one of my roll film holders (6x7 or 6x9) since mine doesn't cover 4x5. I have found my most used wide angle is 90mm which is also probably my most used lens since I do mostly architectural work. You've gotten a lot of good feedback above. Hope you enjoy your trip into the LF world!

[Nick De Marco]

Thanks Vick
I have indeed got saome great feedback here, and been made to feel very welcome. Thanks everyone.
As it happens I just went out and got a 90 - a shop nearby had a mint used Fujinon SWD 90mm f/5.6 on a Toyo lens board for the field camera at a good price. I could not resist it as I want to use the LF again tomorrow (my last weekend I can for about a month)
It's muche newer the the two old LF lenses I bought, and is in very nice condition. Apart from the fact it is very big, it's not too heavy and I'm really looking forward to using it.

Nick

[Leigh]

It is a Super-Angulon but not an "XL", I guess it is "pre-XL".
Hi Nick,

Your lens is the one I mentioned above, with the 123mm image circle. It will not work with a 4x5 camera.


Toyo claim this camera can take lenses down to 47mm, but I am not convinced...
In looking at your first photo, it appears the front of the camera bed is visible at the bottom of the image.
This would argue for the camera not being able to use that particular lens at all.


I am already using a recessed lens board with it, but I cannot be sure it is the right one - it was one given to me. Maybe I need more "recess".
If your camera focuses properly at infinity, then your recessed lensboard is OK.

A different lensboard will not increase the image circle diameter. The two parameters are unrelated.

Sounds like your 47 is relegated to 6x12 duty.

The 72mm will probably not cover the full building from your vantage point. Its field of view is much narrower than the 47.

To get rid of the distortion (building smaller at the top) you need to employ "front rise", which is one of the standard features on a view camera. This moves the image circle relative to the film. But to do so, the image circle must be larger than the film.

A full treatise on view camera operation is way beyond the scope of a forum thread. I suggest you consult any of the online resources or printed guides on the subject.

Best of luck.

- Leigh

[Leigh]

a shop nearby had a mint used Fujinon SWD 90mm f/5.6
That's a very good choice. I recently purchased the same lens, but haven't received it yet.

The image circle is 236mm, which permits movements on the narrow film axis of ~49mm either direction, and on the wide axis of ~43mm. That's quite a lot of movement, probably more than the Toyo can do.

Great choice.

- Leigh

[tgtaylor]

FWIW my widest lens is a 75mm Grandagon f4.5 and I rarely find that I need to use it as the 90mm f4.5 Grandagon is usually the better match. Toyo 45AX.

[John NYC]

Thanks John
That sounds right. I would not usually use beyond a 21mm on 35mm, so a 75 sounds ideal.
Would a 90 be closer to a 28 or a 35?

I would actually call a 90mm on 4x5 closer to a 24mm on 35mm film.

Here is a comparison, again with focal length then long side equivalent and short side equivalent. I find that looking at both the sides separately is infinitely more useful than doing the diagonal approach. But at the end of the day, it "feels" somewhere in the middle of these two equivalents.


Focal Length Long Side Eq. Short Side Eq.
75mm 22.5 18.95
90mm 27 22.74
110mm 33 27.79
120mm 36 30.32
135mm 40.5 34.11

[Nick De Marco]

I wanted to thank (once again) all those who gave me such a friendly welcome and useful advice here.

I used the Fujinon 90mm f5.6 SW-D lens that I bought on Friday, yesterday - on a trip to 'Canvey Island' a windy, and rather sad, outpost on the Thames estuary.

The 90mm turned out to be exactly what I wanted/needed. Wide enough for the kind of photography I was planning to do there, and rarely too wide. I didn't once feel I needed to go winder (although took one 16x12 with the 47 I had with me, but the type of shot would have only worked in panoramic format anyway). Once or twice I thought I needed a longer lens (and longer than the 150 I had in my bag).

When I got home I developed the film in my combi-plan tank - something else I'm getting used to. This was just the second time, but unlike the first, did not turn out to be a complete disaster. I developed all 8 5x4 sheets (using the tank 3 times to stop sticking, doing 3, 2 then 3 sheets each time) with little or know problems. The negatives look good, although not as contrasty as I usually like - but I am guessing that is simply a product of producing larger negatives with more detail (as I'm used to 35mm or 120). I don't think I shall really know until I have time to go to the darkroom and make prints - but I think the 90 was a great choice.

That leaves me with 2 final questions (for now). What would you recommend I get as a long lens? I don't want super long, maybe something between the equivalent of 60-90mm in 35mm. I already have the 150 symmar, but it is an old lens and rather soft. I think I would prefer something a little more modern, I'm guessing 210 or up. If possible not to huge or heavy, of expensive, but with 5.6 so I can focus more easily. But I don't know where to start.

Second, colour v black and white. I use both in other formats, although I learnt when young on black and white film, and I feel I still have a lot more to learn about colour in particular. The advantages of black and white to me are obvious. It is about 6 times cheaper. I can buy Fomopan 100 for about 50p per sheet, and develop at home for the same price, or colour film for £3 per sheet (can't find it cheaper) and my prolab will charge me the same to develop. The second advantage of b&w is that I think it is easier, as I'm getting used to large format, as I can think more about shapes and composition and not have the additional difficulty of colour.

On the other hand, when I see the type of contemporary photos I think work best in large format, and the type that best equate to the type of thing I'm planning to do with large format (as opposed to other formats), for example in journals like the British Journal of Photography, the images are all colour and it is obvious they will work better in colour. And even yesterday in Canvey Island I wish I had more than 2 sheets colour film left (yet to be processed) and the shots I made I could have made on colour (most of them anyway). I want to experiment, with whatever I have and can afford, but I am also developing work for a particular project and it would be a real pain to have to revisit all my weekend trips and re-photograph because I had only done so in black and white.

I realise it is rather a bizarre question, and one maybe difficult to answer. I'm settling for a compromise of taking about 5 sheets of both in future. But I just wondered if any of you guys more experienced in large format had any useful advice or experience in this regard.

Anyway - here are two of the shots from yesterday (rather badly scanned I fear)

http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/image/131854890

http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/image/131854891

Nick

[John NYC]

That leaves me with 2 final questions (for now). What would you recommend I get as a long lens? I don't want super long, maybe something between the equivalent of 60-90mm in 35mm. I already have the 150 symmar, but it is an old lens and rather soft. I think I would prefer something a little more modern, I'm guessing 210 or up. If possible not to huge or heavy, of expensive, but with 5.6 so I can focus more easily. But I don't know where to start.

Nick

Focal Length Long Side Eq. Short Side Eq.
180 54 45.47
210 63 53.05
240 72 60.63
270 81 68.21
300 90 75.79
360 108 90.95

Not sure what your camera is capable of, but be sure you have enough bellows to accommodate anything 300 and up.

Regarding focusing... once you get to longer lenses, it is not that hard to focus lenses with an f/9 aperture. I actually use a normal and medium wide on 8x10 that are both f/9 (and I shoot at night!) and don't have problems, but I do use a loupe.

[John NYC]

Anyway - here are two of the shots from yesterday (rather badly scanned I fear)

http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/image/131854890

http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/image/131854891

Nick

Those are nice! I like the Robert Adams-equse use of midtones.

[tgtaylor]

I'd recommend the 210mm and 300mm Nikkor-M.

I frequently reach for my 210mm Schneider Symmar-S as it provides a prospective (approx 70mm on a 35mm film camera) that is between my normal (150mm apo Sironar S) and 300mm Nikkor-M (approx 100mm). The Toyo will take a 360T lens but the 300 Nikkor-M is so sharp and light and fairly inexpensive: i bought mine new from Midwest Photo Exchange for $600 US.

A 90mm, 150mm, and 300 are the only lens that I carry when doing significant back country travel and all of the above lens are tack sharp.

[Leigh]

My suggestion would be 90mm, 150mm, and 210mm. This is kind of a "standard" kit, although you'll find many variations. I have a 90mm Fujinon SWD, and Sironar-N lenses in 150mm and 210mm.

The Nikkor-M is an outstanding apochromatic lens, but at f/9 it may produce an image on the ground glass that's a bit dark for accurate focusing.

Just one man's opinion, worth every cent you paid for it. :cool:

- Leigh