Schneider Super Angulon 90mm v. Super Angulon 90mm XL

[Corran]

I've used the old f/6.8 Angulon, Super Angulon f/8 (several of them, from various time periods), Nikkor f/8, and the 90 XL (90mm is my favorite focal length on 4x5...).

On extreme examination of hi-rez scans, I just maybe saw a bit of a difference between the XL and the more common lenses. Mostly, it was because I shot it a few times at f/16 instead of f/32, looking for the difference. At f/22 or smaller I imagine that would evaporate. The Angulon of course isn't nearly as good as all of the others but I shoot it at f/32 more or less always, which makes it about as good as anything else at that aperture.

So, I hike with the Nikkor usually or the Angulon when I want ultra-light. The XL is a pain to use with filters so I don't use it except for handheld stuff on my Linhof, since it has the widest aperture and because I have a cam that works for it (not technically made for it but so close as to work just fine).

Unless you need it for architecture or shooting as an extreme WA on 4x10, the XL is probably not a worthwhile investment, or maybe if you want that extra bit of sharpness at a more middling aperture and don't need the DOF.

[Milonian]

To put another wrench in the works... what about a 90mm f/8 Nikkor-SW? It's reputation for image quality is stellar and it's very small and lightweight.

I'll check that one out too!

[Milonian]

I've used the old f/6.8 Angulon, Super Angulon f/8 (several of them, from various time periods), Nikkor f/8, and the 90 XL (90mm is my favorite focal length on 4x5...).

On extreme examination of hi-rez scans, I just maybe saw a bit of a difference between the XL and the more common lenses. Mostly, it was because I shot it a few times at f/16 instead of f/32, looking for the difference. At f/22 or smaller I imagine that would evaporate. The Angulon of course isn't nearly as good as all of the others but I shoot it at f/32 more or less always, which makes it about as good as anything else at that aperture.

So, I hike with the Nikkor usually or the Angulon when I want ultra-light. The XL is a pain to use with filters so I don't use it except for handheld stuff on my Linhof, since it has the widest aperture and because I have a cam that works for it (not technically made for it but so close as to work just fine).

Interesting - thanks Bryan.

Unless you need it for architecture or shooting as an extreme WA on 4x10, the XL is probably not a worthwhile investment, or maybe if you want that extra bit of sharpness at a more middling aperture and don't need the DOF.

[Drew Wiley]

I prefer the Nikkor 90/4.5. Seems a cut above the SA, or at least did back in the day. Since wides have more falloff than normal lenses, and I hate fresnels, the
bigger aperture helps, esp if a center filter or contrast filter is in place. Big image circle. Don't use this focal length enough to warrant multiple options, but if I
did choose and f/8, it would probably be the Nikkor likewise.

[Old-N-Feeble]

Another nice thing about the 90mm f/8 Nikkor-SW is it can use a 67mm Schneider center filter designed for the 58 SAXL, 80 SSXL and 110 SSXL. It's not the full two stops correction but it's enough.

[Corran]

Perhaps one day I should try that (I have the 3B for my 58XL). I've never noticed any significant fall-off from the Nikkor.

[Milonian]

Thanks to all for replies.

[kleinbatavia]

I've used a few 90mm lenses, including the schneider SA. It's a good lens, but somehow I never got along with it. I've since switched to a nikkor 90 SW (8) and am very pleased with the results. Both for B/W and color work. It's a little more difficult to focus in bright light, but nothing a good dark cloth won't fix... (I do use a gg/fresnel combo on my camera).

[plaubel]

Maybe one short technical question concerning the non S Angulon is allowed , please:
In the Schneider data sheet https://www.schneideroptics.com/info.../6,8-90mm.html , they describe two different focal lengths - the effective focal length and the back focal length, and i am not sure with the correct translation.

Thanks for your help,
Ritchie

[Dan Fromm]

Effective focal length is to a thick lens as focal length is to a thin lens. Distance from rear node to film plane with the lens focused to infinity.

Back focal length is the distance from the rear vertex of the rear element to the film plane with the lens focused at infinity.