
Originally Posted by
David Karp
He said this: "I plan to shoot predominantly architecture and portraiture" which should give us an idea of what he wants to do with the lenses. He also said "Could anyone please give any recommendation as to which one may be a better choice? (and which focal length is closer to 35mm on a 35mm camera). I appreciate both are heavy lenses but I would like the flexibility of a large image circle."
A 120mm would be great for shooting architecture. My understanding is that many architectural photographers preferred to use a 115mm to 120mm if they could get all of the subject into the frame. If not, then hopefully the 90mm would work, and if not that, then go to the 75mm or 65mm. It might be helpful if Kirk Gittings pitched in here. If I remember from prior posts, I think he often used his 120mm Nikkor for architecture and still uses it for landscapes with his 4x5 Phillips, which is similar to the OP's Chamonix.
In my experience, a 125mm Fujinon NW (one of my very favorite lenses) does not have enough image circle to use effectively for architecture. A 120mm Super Symmar, a 125mm Fujinon W (older, single coated), or 120mm Angulon would have the same problem.
ADDITION: I purchased a 120mm f/8 Fujinon SW, which is single coated, because I wanted a lens in the 120-125mm range with more image circle. It was probably less than half the cost of the 120mm Nikkor, which would have been my #1 choice due to reputation and the fact that it uses 77mm filters instead of the larger 82mm filters used by the 115mm Grandagon-N. I shoot black and white only and have no problem shooting single coated lenses.
Bookmarks