View Full Version : Hassle-free wide angle lenses

14-Feb-2004, 20:08
What's a good wide angle lens if I want to use it outdoors or for reasonably spacious interiors rather than tight interiors, I make regular use (for my 35mm camera) of a 24mm lens and don't like the distortion of anything wider and I don't want to buy, or have to carry, a center filter? I'm thinking 90mm over 75mm. Have I got that right, or not?

tim atherton
14-Feb-2004, 20:12
Pretty much - and because of the ability to correct all sorts of perspectives with the view camera, you don't necessarily get the same sort of distorion (unless you want it...)

Ralph Barker
14-Feb-2004, 21:02
A 90mm on 4x5 isn't bad, but you may find f8 versions a bit dim (on the groundglass) for interiors. The f5.6 Super Angulon XL is much brighter, but the elements are quite large (95mm front filter), resulting in a different type of hassle. A slightly longer, but far more compact alternative would be the 110mm Super Symmar. After getting the 110mm, I seldom use my 90/5.6 anymore.

14-Feb-2004, 21:38
To convert the "size" of a 4x5 lens to the equivilant 35mm (based on how much it will show on the horizontal side of the film), just multiply by 0.3. So a 90mm lens will take in the same view as a 27mm lens (90x0.3=27). Because the 4x5 is more nearly square, it will take in more vertical view than the long narrow 35mm negative.

Henry Ambrose
15-Feb-2004, 06:53
Not taking into account any math or formulas, I get the -feeling- that my 80mm Schneider is pretty close to a 24mm on a 35mm camera. The 24 is one of my favorites as are a 50 on 6X7 and an 80 on 4X5. I don't think you'd go wrong anywhere from 75mm to 90mm on 4X5. If a center filter is definitely out then go for the 90.

Frank Petronio
15-Feb-2004, 10:06
A 90/6.8 Grandagon-N from Rodenstock is an all-around convenient size (67mm filter, Copal 0); fairly bright and even; has enough image circle to use a reasonable amount of movements; is not overly wierdly fisheyed or distortion prone; and one of the sharper, most flare-free, widely available, and least expensive modern multi-coated lenses.

This is from a guy who has bought several exotic lenses and now realizes that simple is best. In fact, I would swap my mint 75/6.8 for a mint 90/6.8 if anyone is interested.

Juergen Sattler
15-Feb-2004, 10:11
If you will be settling for the 90mm and do not want to use a center filter, stay away from the Schneider Super Angulon 1:8/90mm. I have noticed considerable loss of light at the edges. I sold mine and now use a Rodenstock Grandagon N 1:6.8/90mm which I think is far superiour to the Schneider lens. The light is much more even throughout the entire negative.


15-Feb-2004, 14:26

I think I can get my hands on a Grandagon 90mm f6.8 at a reasonable price. It sounds like it will do what I want, and I gather that there is little if any difference between the earlier non-N and the N.

Frank Petronio
15-Feb-2004, 17:23
coatings are improved with the N, which means less flare and more consistent color. Probably worth at least $100+ more for the N.