PDA

View Full Version : Additional lenses for 5x7



1750Shooter
2-Mar-2012, 21:24
I just bought a beautiful Seneca 5x7. It came with a 210mm lens as "normal" & I'm thinking about a wide & a longer lens. Maybe a 90 & a 300 or so. Anyone have any other recommendations? I'm kind of constrained by having limited cash, so I can't afford the $2K super stuff, but there has to be some others out there. BTW, the camera will be used primarily for landscapes. Thanks for any help.

Ken Lee
3-Mar-2012, 03:54
Unless you're making rather large prints, almost any decent lens shot at its best aperture should give terrific results.

With longer lenses, size can become an issue. Since you're shooting outdoors, an f/9 design like an APO Ronar, Artar etc. shouldn't be a problem to focus, but can save you considerably in weight and price - and allow you to use smaller filters - and will be ridiculously sharp. The 300mm Fujinon A is similar, and has huge coverage, but is more rare and pricey. If size isn't a problem, then you can probably find a Rodenstock N or Caltar or Schneider at a very good price. Another excellent choice would be a 300mm Nikkor M or 300mm Fujinon C, and they are in the second tier of pricing. They don't provide extreme coverage, but are wicked sharp, small, and light. They both take 52mm filters.

At 360mm there are the big f/5.6 plasmats, and then there are the f/9 APO designs: smaller, lighter, and wonderfully sharp. Less coverage, but for landscapes that's less often a requirement.

A 450mm, the Nikkor M or Fujinon C will be hard to beat. The Nikkor may be a slightly better performer than the Fujinon, but it's also larger and heavier. The Fujinon takes only 52mm filters and sits in a Copal 1 shutter.

If you play your cards right (as they say) you can find longer lenses which all take the same filter size, and save more money, time, and weight. For example, the 300mm Nikkor M, the 300mm Fujinon C, and the 450 Fujinon C both take 52mm filters, as do the 200mm Nikkor M and 240mm Fujinon A. If it were me, I'd even consider trading the 210 so that I can use a kit comprised of any 3 of those lenses.

Once you get past 450mm, lenses tend to get rather large, and depth of field becomes an issue even at "infinity".

jackpie
5-Mar-2012, 00:14
90mm lenses are very wide on 5x7. If that's what you want, then fine go ahead, otherwise think about getting a 120mm. I have used the Nikkor 120SW and the older Schneider SA 121 with great rusults on 5x7. They are moderate wides and available used at reasonable prices. They also have coverages that allow lots of movement on 5x7, and even just cover 8x10.

I believe the Schneider 110XL to be the "state of the art" wide angle for 5x7 but find the price prohibitive for me.

cdholden
5-Mar-2012, 05:11
90mm lenses are very wide on 5x7. If that's what you want, then fine go ahead, otherwise think about getting a 120mm. I have used the Nikkor 120SW and the older Schneider SA 121 with great rusults on 5x7. They are moderate wides and available used at reasonable prices. They also have coverages that allow lots of movement on 5x7, and even just cover 8x10.

I believe the Schneider 110XL to be the "state of the art" wide angle for 5x7 but find the price prohibitive for me.

I agree. If you're enlarging, probably not as big of a deal, but I contact print, so there's not much sense in cropping when I can frame it how I want during exposure. I've got the older 121mm Super Angulon (also covers 8x10) and a 90/4.5 Grandagon. While 31mm in focal length doesn't sound like much difference, it can sometimes mean getting the shot you would otherwise miss. I have also looked at the 110 XL and also found it cost prohibitive. Up to now, I've just been lucky and have been in places where I can use the 90mm and let my feet "zoom in" to compensate for the difference in focal length when the 121 isn't wide enough.

cdholden
5-Mar-2012, 05:16
A 450mm, the Nikkor M or Fujinon C will be hard to beat. The Nikkor may be a slightly better performer than the Fujinon, but it's also larger and heavier. The Fujinon takes only 52mm filters and sits in a Copal 1 shutter.

Many people forget about the 450 Nikkor-Q, or don't know about it. Because of this, it's usually cheaper when they're available. Supposedly single coated where the M is multicoated. I've never had an "M" so I can't put them side by side, but the "Q" covers my 12x20 and comes in the older Copal 3 shutter (more iris leaves for a rounder aperture). 62mm filters can be used on the front lens.

turtle
5-Mar-2012, 06:47
The reccs for the 300s are what I would say, but another lens that rarely appears, but is worth mentioning is the rodenstock 300 F9 geronar.

It is small, very light, has great contrast and is as sharp as anything else at landscape apertures. It comes in a Copal 1, takes 58mm filters I think and costs considerably less than the Nikkor 300 M and Fuji 300 C when they do appear. With a 340mm circle, it can be used for 10x8 (with limited movement) and is sharp right into the corners. Its an absolute gem as long as you don't expect to use it at wider apertures, where it performs poorly due to its triplet design. Well worth considering if you see one (half the price of a Fuji C or Nikkor M).

The other lens to grab with both hands, is a 150 APO Sironar-W (or as it used to be called before the yellow racing stripe, the 'APO Sironar') At under 400g, copal 1, 72mm thread and and 252mm circle, it offers enough movement for landscapes (double the 150 Sironar-s) and can be found for $500-800+ depending on how lucky you are (and condition etc). It is half the weight of the 150 Super Symmar HM from Schneider with the same image circle. There is one in the classifieds now.... PS I would not even consider a 150 Sironar-S (or Symmar-L) as they are not really any cheaper than a non-racing stripe APO Sironar W and cover less.

The 150 f9 G claron also covers with some movement at F32, but is dingy due to f9. Tiny and cheap tho.

A 165 Angulon is worth considering. Covers 5x7 with tonnes of room and there is also one in the classifieds.... Cheaper than the 150 Sironar-W and brighter than the 150 G claron with lots more coverage.

If you only have a standard lens right now, I would definitely get something in the more modest wide category than a 90mm (very wide indeed on 5x7), besides, few 90mm lenses have much coverage for 5x7. The 90mm Nikkor SW F8 just covers at 235mm and the 90 XL has another 20mm of IC, but has huge filters and a gigantic rear cell diameter that can cause camera mounting issues on Linhof panels.

Jim Becia
5-Mar-2012, 08:03
No one has mentioned the Fuji 300 5.6 which can be found at very reasonable prices, I got mine for $300 and it is a tack sharp lens that has more than enough coverage for 5x7. I use mine on an 8x10. Yes, it is in a Copal 3 and is large (77mm filters) but the results and the price are nice. It's probably 50% less than the cost of a Nikkor 300M or Fuji 300C. However, if weight is an issue, the aforementioned Fuji and Nikkor can't be beat. (I own the Nikkor 300M also.) Jim

John Kasaian
5-Mar-2012, 08:05
I've got a 14" APO Artar and a Wolly 159mm WA for my 5x7 which handles the long and short ends nicely. :)

Thom Bennett
5-Mar-2012, 08:13
Interesting. I'm on the lookout for a shuttered lens for my 11x14 and wasn't familiar with the "Q" specs. Thanks!


Many people forget about the 450 Nikkor-Q, or don't know about it. Because of this, it's usually cheaper when they're available. Supposedly single coated where the M is multicoated. I've never had an "M" so I can't put them side by side, but the "Q" covers my 12x20 and comes in the older Copal 3 shutter (more iris leaves for a rounder aperture). 62mm filters can be used on the front lens.