First and second lenses for new 4x5 shooter

[Two23]

I've found dark cloth to be more of a pain than a help. They get in the way, the wind blows them around. I was out photo'ing country churches yesterday and simply used a black jacket. I have a couple of them I got as a package deal but just never found them helpful with 4x5. Will have to recheck when my 8x10 comes as that's a much bigger chunk of equipment. I started out with lenses: 90mm f5.6 Super Angulon, 180mm Fuji f5.6, 300mm Rodenstock Geronar f9. I went to 90mm f4.5 Nikon and 300mm Nikon M f9. I found the 90mm wasn't wide enough shooting the interiors of abandoned houses and some landscapes so I bought a Nikon 75mm f4.5. Might eventually upgrade that to Super Angulon XL 72mm to get a bigger image circle. Also discovered I was constantly wishing for something between 90mm and 180mm, so I bought a Rodenstock 135mm. I use that quite a bit now. My point is I started with a set that roughly doubled focal length and then fine tuned my lens selection to match what I photo'd. Would I be happy with a 150mm instead of a 180mm? Most likely. There isn't that much difference. Think of them in terms of a Nikon DSLR, it's like the difference between a 50mm and a 60mm, roughly. I sometimes use these modern Copal mounted lenses, but I also have a set of uncoated lenses from 1910-1930 for when I shoot dry plates, and a set from 1844 to 1880 for when I shoot wet plate. And that's the thing about large format--they are extremely versatile. I can shoot virtually any lens (that covers) made in any period of history, and I can use any medium from the very beginnings of photography to current times. All with the same camera! It gives me a lot of options. It's not like owning a Hassleblad and only being able to shoot film using Hassleblad lenses.


Kent in SD

[Alan Klein]

Alan, you and AdamD seem to be on the same search at the same time! Merg's advice is (as you would expect) spot on. But you don't need a Rodenstock App 150, any 150 from the "big 4" (Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, Fuji) will be an excellent first lens. (The problem with the 135, as I posted to AdamD, is the smaller image circle which will severely limit your use of view camera movements.) Then, again as Merg writes, your second lens depends entirely on your vision and most common uses. If you often find that you want to pull your subject closer to you (but can't simply walk forwards), or you like to isolate elements in the scene, your next lens would be longer, the 210. If you find that you usually want more "territory" in the image and can't simply move backwards, or you are working a lot in restricted spaces, such as indoors, your second lens would be wider, the 90 (my own is an 80mm). But really use the 150 for a while so that you have a basis for picking a second lens. (Ultimately you may well end up as many of us have, with a bunch of lenses from wide to long; my own collection goes 80, 120, 150, 180, 210, 300 and each has a "best use" either in terms of focal length or compactness of the lens for backpacking.)

Thanks Peter for you info. I was looking at the Rodenstock 150 APO f/5.6 Sironar S MC. But they're around $1300 and up for the better ones. Pretty expensive. So now I'm looking at Schneider 150 APO F/5.6 Symmar MC. They're in the range of around $350 to $800.

[Merg Ross]

Thanks Peter for you info. I was looking at the Rodenstock 150 APO f/5.6 Sironar S MC. But they're around $1300 and up for the better ones. Pretty expensive. So now I'm looking at Schneider 150 APO F/5.6 Symmar MC. They're in the range of around $350 to $800.

Alan, now you're in the ballpark for price, and a Schneider 150 APO f.5.6 Symmar MC would be a good choice, in my opinion. I have the 210mm version and it is excellent. Remember, this is your first large format lens, and there really is no "best" lens. But the 150mm is where you should be looking.

[Corran]

150mm APO Symmar was my first lens and I still have/use it. Paid $300, probably available less now.

[Alan Klein]

Schneider Kreuznach Apo Symmar 150mm F/5.6 MC Lens from Japan 100% seller $520. Near mint. Good price? I couldn't get him down. I'l pulled the trigger and bought it.

[Corran]

Plenty available for less...
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro...Desc=0&_sop=15

Put out a WTB ad here.

[Merg Ross]

Schneider Kreuznach Apo Symmar 150mm F/5.6 MC Lens from Japan 100% seller $520. Near mint. Good price? I couldn't get him down. I'l pulled the trigger and bought it.

Good choice. It will serve you well.

Do you have film holders?

[Alan Klein]

Good choice. It will serve you well.

Do you have film holders?

Yes. 6. New from Chamonix to go with the new 4x5 Chamonix camera I bought. And my wife is still smiling. So far so good. Heck it is my 75th birthday next month. Starting this creative project I feel a little like Grandma Moses.

[Alan Klein]

Alan, thank you for mentioning my note and book. You sound inspired, and I'm sure the pleasure will follow (likely after some frustration). Take your time, ask a lot of questions, and you will be rewarded!

As to the film I used for the two photographs referenced in my book, both were on Ilford FP4+. It would be my choice, and has been for several decades. By the way, the Mono Lake photograph was made with the longest lens I own for 4x5, namely a Schneider G-Claron f.9/270mm. I would give serious thought to making your first lens a 150mm. From there, you can decide if you want to go longer or wider; the 150mm will be useful much of the time. You likely will end up with three lenses. Enjoy!

I like wide angle. Here's 50mm medium format with an 35mm camera equivalent 24mm lens. https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=...N05&view_all=1

Someone mentioned that you use a factor of 3.6x from 35mm equivalent lenses to figure out the 4x5 lens. Is that your understanding too?
So I suppose, a 90mm in 4x5 would be the selection to get the same 24mm equivalent.

I don;t like wide angel greater than that because they distort too much. On the other hand, now with LF and movements, can I remove those distortions and think along the lines of a 75mm which would be a 21mm equivalent?

[Bob Salomon]

I like wide angle. Here's 50mm medium format with an 35mm camera equivalent 24mm lens. https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=...N05&view_all=1

Someone mentioned that you use a factor of 3.6x from 35mm equivalent lenses to figure out the 4x5 lens. Is that your understanding too?
So I suppose, a 90mm in 4x5 would be the selection to get the same 24mm equivalent.

I don;t like wide angel greater than that because they distort too much. On the other hand, now with LF and movements, can I remove those distortions and think along the lines of a 75mm which would be a 21mm equivalent?

35mm is a long, narrow format. 45 is short and squat.

Use the horizontal angle of coverage to compare equivalent focal lengths.

Lenses wider then 75mm from major manufacturers do not distort.
The angle of the camera back to the subject is used to correct keystoning which is more apparent with wider lenses.