thoughts on a "super angulon 75/8"?

[Havoc]

I can get a "super angulon 75/8" for a reasonable price. But I can't find much about them as the 65 and 90 seem to be more popular. Would be to be used on 4x5 with minimal or no movements. The old Schneider page said they are meant for 9x12 but that they have about 20/17mm shift when used with 4x5. Would be fine for my use. Can they be used without a center filter? No idea what shutter it is in.

[Dan Fromm]

Havoc, the list has a link to my article on center filters. Read it. It also has links to Schneider catalogs. Hint: unless the price is very, very right I'd rather have a lens in a #0 than in a #00 shutter.

The CF rule of thumb for 4x5 is that lenses shorter than 90mm need one. But and however, tastes and subjects differ. A 75 mm lens centered on 4x5 will give corners 2 stops down from the center. With the right subject you might be able to live with this. Get the lens, use it and then you'll know whether you should get a CF.

A 50 mm lens on 2x3 is parallel to a 75 on 4x5. I have a 47 SA, shoot 2x3. Sometimes I like the results I get without a CF, some times I don't. I've broken down and bought one.

[Havoc]

I don't know about the shutter, that's a bit a guess. Looking at the price I'd say it will be a #00. Not ideal but if it is in good condition it isn't an issue either. But is that lens a reasonable performer? I read that the older SA's can be a bit all over the place. And as the 75 doesn't look to be popular I'm curious if that might be the problem.

As for filters, the SWD75 I use on the Wista gives me visible vignetting when I rack it up all the way. So more mechanical vignette than fall-off I'd say. But I haven't quantified it and it was on b&w so maybe I don't see it but it is there. Or I can live with it.

[Dan Fromm]

Not to be a complete idiot or anything, but if you a have perfectly fine 75/5.6 SWD why would you want a 75/8 SA? Weight savings?

So you'll know, I still qualify as a complete idiot. I've had a perfectly fine 65/8 SW for a while, also a perfectly fine 65/8 Ilex for much longer. I can justify getting and keeping the SW 'cos its in a #0, not in a #00, and came as part of a bundle. I sold the rest of the bundle, the SW is a free lens. But, I recently recently went crazy and bought a 65/5.6 SA. Heavier, a stop faster, more coverage than I can use but the price was very right.

I don't believe that a modern 75/5.6 SA clone will suffer from mechanical vignetting even wide open when centered on 4x5. Cos^4 is a killer.

[Steve Goldstein]

Mind what others have said about the #00 shutter. Its repair possibilities are very, very limited.

The 75/8 SA takes 49mm filters so will more easily fit into a lightweight system based on smallish filters (I use 52mm). Schneider's CF II was intended for this lens (also the old 47/5.6 SA), and Heliopan made a similar CF that'll require a 49-52 step-up. Both are only 1.5 stops, so really not quite enough, but much better than nothing. Remember that the front thread of CFs can be much larger than the mount, this Heliopan is 77mm in front, the Schneider is 67mm.

I once compared my 75/8 SA with a more modern f/4.5 75 (a couple of them, actually, from different manufacturers). Yes, coverage was more limited and the image wasn't as sharp, but I'll accept that for the portability as I rarely print bigger than 11x14 anyway. And I do have an f/4.5 if I want to carry it along with some bigger filters.

[linhofbiker]

My copy of this lens was very sharp. I used it with my Linhof Technika V 6x9 which allowed quite extensive rise. It was in a modern (at the time) compur 0 shutter. Sold them both a long time ago. Now concentrating on 5x7 and 4x10 B/W. Schneider lenses varied in quality during the 1960's and on. Best to find a "Linhof selected" version if possible. Though some say this is no indication of quality, but I have always been satisfied by my "Technika" marked Schneider's, Super Angulon's and Symmar's.

[LabRat]

When I did interiors, even if a WA lens had a big IC, the fall-off and distortion started to look screwy if even moderate movements were applied, so try to shoot on-axis... Maybe a little front rise, but go real easy on it...

I had a 75mm SA at one time, but a problem came up when trying to use it on a press or technical camera, when in use, the FS would need to be between the front bed rails, and the rear body rail, so no place for the FS mount to sit... A 65mm would ride inside the camera rails, and a 90mm would ride the front... Using recessed or extended boards almost worked, but not for me... I ended up finding a new home for it because I had other lenses that were not too different in FOV on my monorail and folding cameras...

Steve K

[Daniel Unkefer]

Small Super Angulon Collection by Nokton48, on Flickr

I have a 75mm F8 chrome Super Angulon and I like it. Mine is in a special Sinar Norma barrel mount. I also have the correct center filter, mine is engraved "Center Filter for 75mm F8 Super Angulon".

Shown above with my other small Super Angulons (the 47mm F8, two 65mm F8's, and my 75mm F8).

These are good highly usuable lenses. Test first of course, if you can, before buying.

[diversey]

I had one. It is hard for me to use this lens on 4x5 Camera. You have to use small aperture f16-22 to cover 4x5. Center of image is sharp, but peripheral is fuzzy. Definitely this lens is not for 4x5. The image above is the best one I got from this lens.

[Bernice Loui]

Not wise to generalize the overall performance of the entire Super Angulon offering based on testing a single lens sample.

Cannot tell squat about lens performance and images in general from images posted via the web. They are some what representative of what the real image is at best.

Had used-tested-owned many Schneider Super Angulons over the decades, some were awful, some were absolutely excellent. SAs from that era varied a LOT which is why in-depth testing of the target lens to be owned is so very important.

BTW, this applies not only to Schneider lenses, in-depth testing of all prospective lenses should be a given prior to consideration to ownership.


Bernice

I had one. It is hard for me to use this lens on 4x5 Camera. You have to use small aperture f16-22 to cover 4x5. Center of image is sharp, but peripheral is fuzzy. Definitely this lens is not for 4x5. The image above is the best one I got from this lens.