Starting out, no lenses, never shot 4 x 5 before: what FL?

[NancyP]

I am an amateur and newbie at LF, and would like some opinions on how to get started.
So, I figured that my first lens (4 x 5) ought to be some approximation of "normal", which to me in 35mm terms is 35mm to 60mm, which should be 135mm to 220mm or thereabouts. I see lots of choices in 135, 150, 180, and 210mm. I have an opportunity to buy a 210mm f/5.6 Symmar-S locally. I thought this could be a good starter because I like the 55 to 60mm focal length on 35mm, and because the lens specs indicate a ~290mm image circle - theoretically giving me 65mm worth of movements with 4 x 5. I'd like to learn movements, this should be way more than I need, shouldn't it? I intend to shoot landscape and some outdoors architecture. Does it make sense to get the larger longer 210mm with ginormous I.C. , rather than a 150mm equivalent with still-generous I.C. of ~210mm, for a "learner" lens?

[Oren Grad]

My "normal" for 4x5 is 135 - a 210 feels very long to me. And 150 is, strictly speaking, the true normal as conventionally defined by the format diagonal. But if you like longish normals on smaller formats, a 210 could well be your own version of the proverbial comfortable old shoe. And really excellent modern 210's are widely available now at very attractive prices.

The image circle of any modern 210 plasmat will be way more than ample for 4x5 - more than ample for 5x7, actually.

In general outdoor snapshooting, a little bit of movement goes a long way. With architectural subjects in particular, extreme parallel movements call attention to themselves through their extreme effects on subject geometry. That's fine if it's what you want, not so much if you'd rather that your viewers' attention focus on your content rather than your oh-so-clever technique. Ditto with crazy tilts of the focus plane, which can leave OOF stuff leaking out in awkward places and end up looking contrived.

Regardless, if you tend to "see long", a 210 is a perfectly reasonable choice to get started.

[MMELVIS]

Get the 210 you can purchase locally and get shooting. Sounds like you have a very good idea on your needs and the 210mm f/5.6 Symmar-S you mention should serve your needs well.

[Tim Meisburger]

I like a 210 for portraits, but for general shooting generally reach for my 135. If I only had one I would go for 135 or 150 and crop when needed. 2nd would be 210, third a wide (90mm).

My 2c (FWIW)

[David Lobato]

If you like 55mm to 60mm in 35mm format, then the 210 would suit you quite well. I certainly love mine on a Toyo field camera. The major brands of 210mm lenses are excellent, Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, Fuji. Symmar S lenses are excellent, just be sure to visually inspect it before payment.

I also like 135mm lenses as do many others on the forum. For me, 135mm is a great compliment to a 210mm lens and their prices are very reasonable. Those two focal lengths are the most commonly used for my landscapes.

[richardman]

135mm or 150mm is a good starter lens, IMHO. The wides on LF don't have the exaggerated look as much as the small format lens. I am sure there are physics explanation somewhere. Anyway, if you concentrate on portrait, especially half body or headshots, then yes, longer lens would be good. Otherwise I'd recommend 135mm/150mm.

Any modern lens from the big 4 should be fine. A $200 lens could serve well for many many years.

[David Swinnard]

My starting lens for 4x5 was a 120 Super Angulon - a bit wider than the 35mm I liked on 35mm and a bit narrower than the 28mm I often had on.

It worked well for me as it matched my vision (no portraiture). Later I had access (borrowed) to a 90mm SA so my second personal lens was a 210mm which I liked very much too. When I lost access to 90, the 120 and 210 worked well.

Personally, a 135 or 150mm did not work for me. After using a 4x5 now since the late '70s I finally got a 150mm - a hand-me-down from a closing business - the price was right. What remains to be seen now, is whether I reach for it or not.

[Leigh]

Of course, everyone's preferences are different.

I think the 210mm lens would be too long for either architecture or landscape work that you mentioned.

Its angle of view (wide) is 33.6 degrees, compared with 45.9 degrees for a 150mm lens.
That's a huge difference.

On the other hand, if it's available and inexpensive, shooting and learning trumps reading and writing any day. Look for a good price.
If you decide you want/need a shorter lens you can probably sell the 210mm for your original cost.

- Leigh

[Jim Graves]

Buy it ... shoot it ... sort it out later. If the image looks too narrow, move back ... it it looks too wide, move forward. Have fun!

[AtlantaTerry]

I intend to shoot ... some outdoors architecture.

You may find that a 210mm is a bit long for outdoor architecture. A lot depends on how far you are away from the buildings and your final goal for the photos.

IMHO the most popular focal length for architecture is 90mm. But as always, YMMV.

Once you start actually photographing architecture with your 4x5 and 210mm lens, you will immediately know if that focal length is too long.

So get out there and start burning some film.