Schneider Super Angulon 72mm

[Bob Salomon]

Back focus is important when using tilt. I focus on the subject/compose etc, then set my tilt angle and refocus using the rear. This has the effect of keeping my focus center point where I want it. I use the rear focus quite a bit. my composition/perspective, etc is not affected either. So it is initial focus front, set tilt to where I want, then refocus to point I want to be in focus, check everything, then retilt if necessary, and back focus again. This is also based on my f/stop of choice to suit my need and hyper-focal distance.

And you are using a base tilt camera. Not the same with a center tilt camera or an asymmetric tilt camera.

[xkaes]

The Toko 4x5 cameras were available with fixed or adjustable rear standards. But those with adjustable rear standards can be adjusted forward or backward. This feature adds 3 ounces to the fixed model -- not what I would call a big deal -- but it also adds 25mm of bellows extension.

From what I can tell, the adjustable rear models far outsold the fixed rear models.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

Center tilt. Chamonix 45H1. No base tilt.

[chassis]

I use a Schneider 58mm SAXL on a Toyo 45AII and like it alot. Most of the architecture images on my website use this setup. The bellows does end up almost completely compressed, and drop bed+front rise is common for me. I use a recessed lensboard, which is required on my camera to achieve infinity focus. A shutter release 45 degree attachment is needed to attach a normal cable release, and it is fiddly to cock the shutter and close the aperture.

My philosophy is, if you're going to go wide, go wide. On 4x5 the widest is 47mm, but I didn't like having a zero-movement (bellows limited) camera, and the 47mm was more money at the time than I wanted to spend. So I went with the 58mm and haven't regretted it.

Everything I have read about, and images I have seen from, the Schneider 72/5.6 SAXL is(are) excellent. This lens is on my list. Here is a proposed wide to normal lineup for 4x5:

58
72
120
150

If the Schneider 72SAXL doesn't materialize for whatever reason, for 4x5 I would not hesitate to go with a Nikkor-SW 75/4.5. I have not used the Nikkor 75, but have 3 other Nikkors, all of which are outstanding lenses.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I use a Schneider 58mm SAXL on a Toyo 45AII and like it alot. Most of the architecture images on my website use this setup. The bellows does end up almost completely compressed, and drop bed+front rise is common for me. I use a recessed lensboard, which is required on my camera to achieve infinity focus. A shutter release 45 degree attachment is needed to attach a normal cable release, and it is fiddly to cock the shutter and close the aperture.

My philosophy is, if you're going to go wide, go wide. On 4x5 the widest is 47mm, but I didn't like having a zero-movement (bellows limited) camera, and the 47mm was more money at the time than I wanted to spend. So I went with the 58mm and haven't regretted it.

Everything I have read about, and images I have seen from, the Schneider 72/5.6 SAXL is(are) excellent. This lens is on my list. Here is a proposed wide to normal lineup for 4x5:

58
72
120
150

If the Schneider 72SAXL doesn't materialize for whatever reason, for 4x5 I would not hesitate to go with a Nikkor-SW 75/4.5. I have not used the Nikkor 75, but have 3 other Nikkors, all of which are outstanding lenses.

Yep, go wide, my widest on 35mm is 15mm and looking at 11mm. waffling between 72 and 75, but 58 is interesting too now that you mention it. Choices, now to win the lottery

[Corran]

While the aspect ratio isn't quite the same, I find the 58mm XL to closely match the 15mm on my small-format cameras. I love that focal length. I have the 47mm XL too and it is just too wide, usually. It has to be a really tight shot for that lens to work, but the 58mm seems just right for me usually. The 58mm also works out as a wonderful 6x9 lens if using a medium-format back / camera for "wide" but not too wide...like a 25mm on small format.

But the 72mm XL is probably the limit before images start to look obviously ultrawide-angly, if that makes sense.

I was looking back through my scans and I remembered that I've noticed the 72mm XL and 90mm XL images that I've shot on color have an especially lush look to them. Might just be my imagination. Here's an image from the 72mm XL on 4x5 Portra:



Nice late evening lighting helps. Maybe I've just been lucky with the light every time I use them .

[Steven Ruttenberg]

Well,15m on 35 mm format has a 98 degree field of view and a 58 mm has a 95 degree field of on 5x4. My IRIX 15mm has almost no distortion so if optics good on 58 mm it should be similar on distortion if not better.

[Corran]

Never noticed a hint of distortion on the 58mm, as one would expect from a non-retrofocus design.

[Bernice Loui]

Modern LF wide angle lenses based on the "Biogon-Aviogon" variations have better overall performance compared to Retrofocus wide angle designs except in the area of light fall off and large apertures. Generally, they have lower distortion, better resolution and such compared to small format Retrofocus designs. Keep in mind the often coveted small format wide angles are of the Biogon-Aviogon variety, examples: 21mm Super Angulon, 21mm Biogon, 15mm & 12mm Heliar and etc.. These are usually found on rangefinder small format film cameras and can be used on mirror less digital cameras.


Bernice