large format lens in range of 70-120mm

[Professional]

Hey again,

Long time i didn't post here due to getting busy with family and work and taking a rest from Photography for a while, soon will be back to photography i hope, and i have a question regarding large format.

I am thinking/planning to get a lens for LF by the end of this year i hope, and i look gazillion times on some lenses and still can't decide which one to go with, i don't ask about sharpness or IQ because i know all of them will produce decent results i can ask, i just narrowed my choices on few lenses, i know you people are the best to tell me about impressions and reviews, sure you use/tested all of those lenses, so i hope to get your opinions/recommendations to help me for better decision.

The lenses i look at to choose one from are:

- Schneider 72mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon XL

- Schneider Super-Angulon XL 90mm/5.6

- Schneider 110mm f/5.6 Super-Symmar XL

- Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90mm/4.5

- Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90mm/6.8

There are also Nikkor 90mm and 105mm, but i took them out of the list, even old SA 90mm i took it out, so from the 5 above lenses, which one would you go with for 4x5? I would use it mainly for landscapes and outdoor shots such as cityscape and architecture for examples.

I welcome any other recommendations but then it will be long searching and discussing to add another options, i may able to buy 2 lenses of above if so, but for now i am able to buy only one lens, next year i can afford another one but i will be thinking about longer lens for something else, but if you tell me to get 2 of above then i will go with one this year and second next year, don't take me wrong, but i only looking to get new item not used.

[Steve Barber]

I, mostly, use the large format camera the same as you intend. Unless you think you particularly need the extra rise available with the 90mm f5.6 Schneider Super-Angulon XL, I would suggest the 90mm f4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon-N, instead. It is not so bulky and heavy and has almost as much rise as the Schneider. Whichever you choose, be sure that your camera will be able to accommodate it and will allow full movements without interference.

I should, also, say that, while the 90mm is my second most used lens, the lens used most is the 210mm and, if I were only to get one, that would be the focal length I would start with for what you are wanting to do. You can get a 210mm f5.6 Nikkon Nikkor-W with a late model, black, Copal shutter for not much money, used but in like new condition and I would suggest one of those or something similar, even if you decide you have to have the 90mm now.

[Professional]

I, mostly, use the large format camera the same as you intend. Unless you think you particularly need the extra rise available with the 90mm f5.6 Schneider Super-Angulon XL, I would suggest the 90mm f4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon-N, instead. It is not so bulky and heavy and has almost as much rise as the Schneider. Whichever you choose, be sure that your camera will be able to accommodate it and will allow full movements without interference.

I should, also, say that, while the 90mm is my second most used lens, the lens used most is the 210mm and, if I were only to get one, that would be the focal length I would start with for what you are wanting to do. You can get a 210mm f5.6 Nikkon Nikkor-W with a late model, black, Copal shutter for not much money, used but in like new condition and I would suggest one of those or something similar, even if you decide you have to have the 90mm now.

I will get 210 later it is the second in the list after one of those wider lens, i don't know why many go with 210mm but i use more of wide angle lenses on my 35mm and MF, so i look for the same on 4x5, what is the equivalent FL of 210 on 4x5 to MF[6x4.5/6x6/6x7] and 35mm?

So that SK 90 SA XL has a bit more rise? Well, i always like to have additional performances or features because i always updating my gear, so i don't want to buy one 90mm now and later i change it to another one to accommodate newer or another body that is more more with movements, i am really planning to get another body with more movements sooner or later so better to be ready with the lens, also i want to buy once, that 90mm will be great with limited body or more advanced one, money is not an issue, i know the prices of all those lenses, if i will go with used one then i will not post here and go buying 5 lenses instead, but i have this bad habit that i want to buy things new unless they are discontinued and no longer available, and i will not buy hundreds of lenses as we do with DSLRs, i have 150mm for LF now and it is not wide enough for me, so that i mentioned those above one, and you said 210, it was my fault i didn't mention that i have 150mm.

[Professional]

In addition, as i want to go with new only lens, i also saw 4 lenses of 210mm FL, that will be another issue later to which one to get regardless of the price, but i will ask about this later when i finish with the lenses mentioned on my OP, i am not in rush, the lenses are still available i hope, will be one once forever maybe, one of those 210 versions i saw is a bit cheap as new, but it may not be the best choice to go if i ask between the 4, but who knows?!!!

[hiend61]

You'll be very well served by a Grandagon 90/4,5. The extra coverage of a SK 90 SA XL will be of great help only if you make extreme movements or you plan to upgrade to a 5x7 set, in this case, a 90 will be a superwide with some reserve for movements. You do not mention the superb Grandagon 115/6,8 which is my preferred landscape lens for 4x5. I love this lens so much that when it was discontinued I purchased a second spare lens!. I never tried the SK 110 XL, which is said to be superb, but I´m sure the Grandagon 115 is as good.

[Steve Barber]

Well, you can go all over the map with this, because of the different aspect ratios, but, if you use the commonly accepted standard of the diagonal measurement of the negative, then a normal lens for the 35mm camera would be a focal length of about 45mm, the 6x7 normal lens about 90mm and the normal lens for the 4x5 would be a lens with a focal length of 150mm. A 35mm lens for the 35mm format would be about 75 per cent of normal. That applied to the 6x7 would give a lens with a focal length of about 65mm and for the 4x5, you would look for a focal length of about 110mm.

In practice, as I am sure you know, the lens focal length usually considered as “normal” for the 35mm camera is a 50 or, perhaps, a 55mm focal length. The 6x7 and the 4x5, however, would remain the same as calculated. Similarly, 90mm is the more common wide angle for the 4x5, being the first lens in the series 90-150-210 that is commonly preferred for the three basic lens focal lengths for that format.

To answer your question, the 210, in 4x5, would compare with the 35mm format’s 65mm or 70mm lens and a lens of about 120mm in 6x7. In fact, while Hasselblad has a very nice 120mm for the 6x6, my Mamiya 7 has, 43-50-65-80-150-210mm with 80mm as the normal focal length. For me, I like the 43mm with the 80 and the 210mm lenses for the 6x7 and do not bother with the others. As I said, you can have a lot of variation with the different aspect ratios. In 4x5, for example, I like the 135mm lens more than the 150mm as the “normal” lens.

[BrianShaw]

In 4x5, for example, I like the 135mm lens more than the 150mm as the “normal” lens.

Ditto... and then next used is 210, followed by 300, followed by 90. I get very bored very fast with the wide-angle look. With the exception of architecture the 90 is useless to me.

[BrianShaw]

p.s. I understand your attraction to a brand-new lens (I was that way for a long time too) but your images will likely be just as good with careful buying of used lenses... and that would allow you to get a little variety right away ratehr than buying one, waiting to save money, buy another, etc.

[Professional]

Steve, with your "math" or calculation about equivalent FL then you make me even more to go with 90mm or wider, because in 35mm the wide angle i use mostly is 24mm and wider down to 16mm, and in MF, the lens i use with 6x6 hassy is 60mm and the lens for RZ 67 is 50mm, both are wide enough that i like, i said i shoot landscapes at wide and also architecture, i do also interiors and here i really need something wide even wider than 90mm, i tried my 150mm and it was long, i will have time to get 210mm later, but now i really like to use ultra wide lenses, i can show you most of my 35mm and MF shots where i use wide lenses more, i know some places i need something longer such as 35mm on 35format and equiv on another larger format, but many times i am in situation where i want something wider than 24mm on 35mm format, you all answers giving me a sign that all or most of you don't shoot landscapes at wider angel lenses, and i don't do much of stitching or panos if you mean i don't need super wide angel lens, that lens 150mm did give me which FL i want to use, i want one wider and one longer, and now which wider i want to go this will be a big question, i will be worry if i go with 110 or 120 then i will think about more wider lens.

[Jeff Keller]

For landscapes with a 6x7 Mamiya 7ii, I really like the 43mm. That would correspond to about 72mm on a 4x5. On the other hand when using a 35mm SLR a 24mm would be my favorite, which corresponds to about 90mm on 4x5. I think a big part of the preference for me is how large the print is going to be. The larger the print the more I lean towards wider angles.

For the interiors of houses and condominiums, I use extreme wide angle lenses on a digital SLR. The equivalent of 14mm on a 35mm SLR. The equivalent for a 4x5 would be either a 58mm or 47mm. Fortunately movements are not normally needed. Using focal lengths this short can be challenging with many 4x5 cameras. If you aren't planning on taking many very wide angle interior pictures, consider stitching together a panorama ... interiors don't move so stitching will work well. Your camera and lenses can be optimized for outdoor work.

Jeff Keller

[Professional]

For landscapes with a 6x7 Mamiya 7ii, I really like the 43mm. That would correspond to about 72mm on a 4x5. On the other hand when using a 35mm SLR a 24mm would be my favorite, which corresponds to about 90mm on 4x5. I think a big part of the preference for me is how large the print is going to be. The larger the print the more I lean towards wider angles.

For the interiors of houses and condominiums, I use extreme wide angle lenses on a digital SLR. The equivalent of 14mm on a 35mm SLR. The equivalent for a 4x5 would be either a 58mm or 47mm. Fortunately movements are not normally needed. Using focal lengths this short can be challenging with many 4x5 cameras. If you aren't planning on taking many very wide angle interior pictures, consider stitching together a panorama ... interiors don't move so stitching will work well. Your camera and lenses can be optimized for outdoor work.

Jeff Keller

Strange your post showing me about wide angle lenses and you didn't say go with 210mm for wide angle, i have wide angle lenses for MF and 35mm DSLRs, so i was looking for the same on 4x5, i did say i shoot landscapes, mostly wide for sure, and architectures or cityscape, i forgot to add that i will shoot indoors, so i will be on wide side more than longer, and i said i will go with 210 after the wider range lens, i don't know why many here prefer to shoot landscapes and indoors with 210mm, i thought this lens is more to use for portraits.

Anyway, it seems still i am not sure which one of the 5 lenses i mentioned i can go with, but seems to make it easier for me and taking out 110 and maybe 72 and keep confusing on the three 90mm, oh wait, i better ignore that 6.8 version and stay with 4.5/5.6 versions, so 2 of 90mm, but again, i always thinking about 72mm but worry about its IC and coverage ability on 4x5.

[Martin Aislabie]

From personal experience I know that the Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90mm/6.8 is very good at flare suppression.

The question you need to decide is - what are you mainly going to shoot ?

For buildings a large image circle is essential - but the lenses tend to be both large (diameter) and quite heavy.

However, if you are carrying your camera gear very far then lightness and compactness may be more of a factor.

You might also want to consider the cost and flexibility of filters.

A 67mm filter will fit both the Rodenstock 90/f6.8 and Schneider XL 110/f5.6 - they both take the same centre filter too.

Martin

[Professional]

From personal experience I know that the Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90mm/6.8 is very good at flare suppression.

The question you need to decide is - what are you mainly going to shoot ?

For buildings a large image circle is essential - but the lenses tend to be both large (diameter) and quite heavy.

However, if you are carrying your camera gear very far then lightness and compactness may be more of a factor.

You might also want to consider the cost and flexibility of filters.

A 67mm filter will fit both the Rodenstock 90/f6.8 and Schneider XL 110/f5.6 - they both take the same centre filter too.

Martin

I like your post because it goes deeper or more details, and i should answer with more details if i can.

- I said i will shoot landscapes, and architectures that including buildings, but not necessary i will shoot only buildings, so i should be suited for most applications anyway.

- Weight is not a big factor for me, i know if i will use LF then i will not have that long run or walk, also i will drive car and stop very near to locations i want to shoot, i do carry heavy DSLRs and MF anyway, so i got used to heavy gear, and i see those lenses are lightweight, i shoot with Canon and Hasselblad heavy lenses, those are heavier than most LF lenses, so i tell you know that weight factor is not a big deal, i have LF body that is lightweight as well [about 2KG or closer].

- Cost is not a big deal, if i decide on one lens then i should save for it, and the price of each lens of above are almost high, so i made my plan to the highest one, so if i go with less i may save few bucks for filters, and i already have filters for MF and 35mm, and i can use adapter rings and steps up/down rings if needed, i don't think i will buy any more filters over what i have already.

- I have 67mm filter and adapter ring for 67mm and step down ring for 77mm to 67mm, so i am fine there, but even if i buy another lens with another diameter for example 72mm it will not be a big problem, filter issue is the least for me here.

Thanks Martin, waiting for your answers again.

[Heroique]

Professional, looks like your profile says you now have three cameras & two lenses:


Speed Graphic Pacemaker 4x5
Crown Graphic 4x5
Shen Hao HZX45 IIA

Wollensak Graflex 162m f3.5
Rodenstock APO Sironar-N 150mm f4.5

Just thought I’d list them since most of us ignore the profiles that most of us don’t fill out! ;)

Me, if I were going to add one lens (for now) to address the shooting preferences you’ve described, within the cost guidelines you’ve stated, any lens you’ve listed – wider or longer than the two you have – would be a fine choice. My one caveat, personal and very subjective, would be that a jump from 72/90 to 150 is fairly considerable. Other than that, get any. Get out there. Get shooting. Get back to us. And welcome back!

[Professional]

Professional, looks like your profile says you now have three cameras & two lenses:


Speed Graphic Pacemaker 4x5
Crown Graphic 4x5
Shen Hao HZX45 IIA

Wollensak Graflex 162m f3.5
Rodenstock APO Sironar-N 150mm f4.5

Just thought I’d list them since most of us ignore the profiles that most of us don’t fill out! ;)

Me, if I were going to add one lens (for now) to address the shooting preferences you’ve described, within the cost guidelines you’ve stated, any lens you’ve listed – wider or longer than the two you have – would be a fine choice. My one caveat, personal and very subjective, would be that a jump from 72/90 to 150 is fairly considerable. Other than that, get any. Get out there. Get shooting. Get back to us. And welcome back!

Thank you very much!

[Armin Seeholzer]

For interiors you should also put the Schneider XL 47 mm on your list, not good as a starter lens but good for a wide guy like you and me;--)))
I worked as architecture mag photog in the past and my most used lens for interiors was my 75mm Nikkor and short behind the 47mm the 90mm is most of the time to long, but it is also a must for archit. pics!

Cheers Armin

[Professional]

For interiors you should also put the Schneider XL 47 mm on your list, not good as a starter lens but good for a wide guy like you and me;--)))
I worked as architecture mag photog in the past and my most used lens for interiors was my 75mm Nikkor and short behind the 47mm the 90mm is most of the time to long, but it is also a must for archit. pics!

Cheers Armin

Now you add more lens to the list, i would like to go with so wide lens such as 75 or even 58, but 47, i know that is too much wide and in architecture i may need it a lot in many composition, i live in a house with nice interiors and most of the time i know i want to go so wide equivalent to 10mm on 35mm format, but another time 24-40 is good enough, but for landscapes i was used to use 16-20mm but later i more prefer 24-35mm focal length, so in LF i think i should be in range of 40-70mm, in fact i was putting that 72 XL as my first priority but i thought i may go with mid range more than ultra wide, and maybe i misunderstand the focal lengths in LF, i have 150mm which is nice but many times i am in situations i want much wider lens than this.

Thanks