Selecting a 90mm lens

[senderoaburrido]

I might go for the Nikkor, as it is slightly less expensive than the Super-Angulon MC. If things don't work out, I guess I'll resell it. I can also fund it with the jammed-shutter hasselblad 80mm and a few crumby 35mm lenses I could sell. Thanks for the advice you guys!

[Bob Salomon]

I might go for the Nikkor, as it is slightly less expensive than the Super-Angulon MC. If things don't work out, I guess I'll resell it. I can also fund it with the jammed-shutter hasselblad 80mm and a few crumby 35mm lenses I could sell. Thanks for the advice you guys!

As was pointed out earlier these types of lenses all have fall off which can mostly be corrected with a center filter, if required and desired. However Nikon never offered one for their wide angles so you might want to spend just a bit more for one of the ones whose factories did address this problem and offered center filters to their users. Nikon did not face up to this issue.

[Jim Jones]

What will you be photographing? If you don't need a lot of movements get a late-model plain 90mm Angulon (not Super) which will be within your budget, and go make photos. You can always get another lens later on if you need to and if you can afford it.

I agree. Certainly the somewhat similar Optar and probably the 90mm Angulon should be well stopped down for optimum image quality. If the small working aperture and limited coverage aren't too much of a handicap, one of these lenses lets you be photographing while perhaps waiting for a bargain in a better lens. Pursuit of the perfect lens gets in the way of photography.

[neil poulsen]

I had a single coated 90mm f/8 Fujinon. It was a nice lens. Only reason I sold it was because I picked up a 90mm f/8 Nikkor for the larger image circle.

As the largest aperture of a lens increases, the image circle also typically increases. This makes the 90mm Nikon f8 SW interesting, because at 235mm, it has an image circle that's about as large as f5.6 or f4.5 90mm super wides.

[David Karp]

Yes. That is exactly why I switched to the 90mm f/8 Nikkor. I kept running out of room with my older Fujinon. However, the Fujinon was a great budget friendly option when finances were tighter.

Thinking of finances, if I was starting out in LF and had to buy lenses on a budget, but knowing what I know now, I think I would buy Fujinon lenses on from Japan on EBay, as suggested by Oren. In the last year or so, I picked up a single coated 135mm Fujinon W and a 250mm f/6.7 Fujinon W at extremely reasonable prices.

[Kodachrome25]

This "test" leaves out so many lenses That it will not lead one to what are the "best" lenses. Nor does it use MTF or graph distortion or color curves. Lastly it isn't objective as it was done under uncontrolled conditions.

Be that as it may, I replaced a good 90mm 6.8 Grandagon with the Nikkow SW 90/8 and the Nikkor just blew the Grandagon away in terms of micro-contrast and resolving of fine details, one of my sharpest LF lenses by far.

I have no issues with fall off either.

[ottluuk]

I think the camera is an important factor here. If your camera is a modern wide angle friendly design with supple bellows and bright screen, it'll be easier to tame a slow 90. If you have an older camera with a simple ground glass, things are not so simple. Do you invest in a brighter screen (that may or may not have other problems) or a faster (larger, heavier) lens?

Another point is that the flange to film distances of various 90s can be quite different. For example, according to http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenseslist.html it's 103 mm for the f/5.6 Super-Angulon MC and 94 mm for the 6.8 Grandagon. I'd guess it's pretty close to 90mm on the old Angulons. Depending on the construction of your camera's focussing system and bellows, these extra millimeters may be very helpful – or not necessary.

One thing is for sure, though. The f/5.6 models are BIG. On the left – multicoated SA 90/5.6 in Compur 1, on the right – a folding 6x6 camera with a coupled rangefinder and 75/2.8 Xenar lens.

[Bob Salomon]

The problem with your comparison is that one lens covers 5x7" + while the other only has to cover 6x6cm. That makes one much larger then the other.

[pdmoylan]

Having used the Nikkor 90 f8 most of my career and having compared to the 90 f8 single coated Fuji which I owned for a while, if you are shooting color I would choose the Nikkor. Otherwise it is a tossup except for coverage, the Nikkor having more as has already been said.

I don't usually have a reason to disagree with Bob S, but I concur with Ed Sawyer and K25, you do not need a center filter with the Nikkor 90 f8.

Best choice for the money IMHO. Money being no object I would probably go with the Schneider 90 f5.6XL which gives a bit more pin sharp appearance to images or the Nikkor 90 F4.5, both of which are heavy, but both excellent. You will need a center filter with the Schneider.

PDM

[Drew Wiley]

Similar vintage late lenses from Fuji, Rodenstock, Schneider, and Nikon are going to be quite similar. I happen to own a Nikkor 90/4.5 because I wanted something
relatively bright for interior architecture. It had a very good reputation at the time, with lots of movement room on 4x5. I generally use a center filter with it. Those of us who routinely shot chromes found center filters essential. With black and white work, it all depends how you feel about illumination falloff toward the corners. And that would apply to any brand of wide angles. Many of these lenses are such a bargain at the moment that I'd be more concerned with condition than brand per se.