You can see my recent post in the Old Cars thread for a "cult" lens with extreme "out of focus" areas (f/2.5, plus tilts for less DOF). Like it or hate it, it exists, and one can choose to use these tools or not. No hokum here.
You can see my recent post in the Old Cars thread for a "cult" lens with extreme "out of focus" areas (f/2.5, plus tilts for less DOF). Like it or hate it, it exists, and one can choose to use these tools or not. No hokum here.
This assumes that everybody has the same vision/taste/style (strike what is not appropriate). 90mm is far too narrow for me to serve as a wide. Even the 75mm I have is borderline. I don't really care for the 150-210mm range, just like I don't use the 50mm in 135 or the 80mm in 6x6/6x4.5. And 300-360 isn't anything tele enough to bother. A bit like the 135mm in 135, to long for close up and not usable to bring something far closer. So I use the 75-125(-250). Probably explore the 65mm this year if I can find one to my budget.
They don't need to be fancy
Expert in non-working solutions.
What works for me in the 4x5 format is a multiple of 1.5 (ish), which, for me, means 65,90,135,210, and 305.
For 5x7, its more a question of my being enamored of particular focal lengths: 210 and 120 being my favorites, followed by 305, 150, and 90.
I also do a little bit of 8x10 with the 305 (and occasionally 120SA and 210 Sironar-N, which covers!)
Very little 11x14 - and the 305 G-Claron works just fine for this, although if I were to do more with this format (and with 8x10, for that matter), I'd also want something a bit longer...like a 450 (Fuji-C or Nikkor-M).
But none of the above lenses are all that "fancy." There are times, particularly as I'm now doing very big enlargements (to 40x60, mostly from 5x7), when I think I should go with a Sironar-S for at least my favorite, 210mm focal length, and then perhaps add a Schneider 110XL-asph, then a 150mm Sironar-W to this lineup (thus replacing my current 210 Sironar-N, 120 Super Angulon, and 150 G-Claron). Not sure if this would make a huge difference though...especially as I'm often working in environments (foggy surf, cloudy peaks, etc.), and often at aperture values courting diffraction...leading me to suspect that "the fancy lenses" would offer little to no visible improvement - and I'd rather put the investment into film, paper, and "travel to locations" expenses.
Are you going to be shooting 4x5? Do you plan to do mostly landscapes, architecture, and the like, or still lifes, portraits, ...?
All the other folks chiming in know much more about the latter, where you are interested in bokeh, or soft focus, or other interesting looks. But I can tell you this. If (like I was) you are coming from 35mm or DSLR and you are going to shoot 4x5 landscape, I think you'll find you can get great results from any decent lens. I started with a Caltar 90, which is sort of budget/rebranded (Rodenstock, I believe), a Rodenstock Sironar N 150 (the Sironar S is the fancy one there), Fuji 240A (kind of a popular one, maybe considered slightly fancy but not cultish). All of those make great images if the user is competent. In my case, even when the user is incompetent they can make good images by accident on occasion!
Good deals can be found both here and on ebay, if you keep your eyes open. I have a wonderful Fujinon W 125 that I got for... about $125 on ebay.
If you do prefer landscapish subjects, another thing to consider is your taste in focal lengths. When I started I was into the David Meunch near-far thing, and kept looking at lenses wider than my 90mm, but now I prefer longer lenses and rarely use my 90 any more.
Last, but not least, there is merit to the idea of spending the bucks initially to get something right away that you will use forever, but ask yourself whether you have been satisfied with your initial purchase of a car, skis, boat, golf clubs, whatever. Chances are you wanted to upgrade after getting a bit of experience. LF will likely be no different.
Exactly.
There is the problem. So, just get after it.
I've got my plan now!!
Anything in life worth having is worth sharing.
I have a 150mm now.
Next 90mm
Then 300mm or 360mm (somewhere in there)
Then 75mm if I think/want it
Then 240mm or 210mm if I think/want it
The only curve ball is the 115mm I might throw in there. It's a good deal and might monkey up the plan, but maybe not too much.
Anything in life worth having is worth sharing.
For the longest time. a plain Jane 14" Commercial Ektar kept my 8x10 quite happy.
After about 20 years a few more lenses sneaked aboard, but it still sees a lot of use.
None are of 'em are fancy, but they all think they are
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
Bookmarks