shutter choice for a newbie

[danielha]

Thanks for the reminder Dan ! I sometimes forget to check french forums :-)

Daniel

[Tin Can]

OP

We insist you make a couple images without a 'normal' shutter

Think about it and make some

All paths lead back home

[danielha]

Tin Can,

Does this count for a "normal" shutter ? The pinhole does works. The 4x5 "holder" is made from 2mm thick carbox. I can choose between a .3mm or a .4mm pinhole for the shooting. And I have 3 focal length (90mm, 70mm and 50mm). However, I did not take the wide angle into account. So I can only use 90mm if I want to use the full 4x5 film :-)

I call it "The dude"

Lesson learned :-)

This indeed was fun to "build" :-)



Daniel

[Tin Can]

Excellent!

You know what you are doing! ...i was a little worried...

Buy the newest looking all black Copal as originally mounted with a modern lens, I shop Japan

One day soon all the good stuff will be gone

I screw around a lot, but when I want a good neg, the above always works

Tin Can,

Does this count for a "normal" shutter ? The pinhole does works. The 4x5 "holder" is made from 2mm thick carbox. I can choose between a .3mm or a .4mm pinhole for the shooting. And I have 3 focal length (90mm, 70mm and 50mm). However, I did not take the wide angle into account. So I can only use 90mm if I want to use the full 4x5 film :-)

I call it "The dude"

Lesson learned :-)

This indeed was fun to "build" :-)



Daniel

[danielha]

Hello again :-)

It took me quite some time to find a couple of lenses I'd want to buy. So I now have to make the final choice.

On one side, I do have a Fujinon SW 90mm f8 with a Copal 0 model C (thick silver speed ring). Both lens and shutter seem splendid. I have no clue on a manufacturing date.

On the other side, I do have a Schneider Super Angulon 90mm f8 with a Copal 0 model B (all black). Serial Number brings the lens back to 1986 / 1987. Logically I'd go with the Super Angulon with its younger shutter. However the lens is not as clean as the fujinon's. Do I have to fear this :



I understand that the paint missing is not too much of a concern but there's still something I don't understand in the center of the lens. If anyone has an opinion, I'd be happy to discuss it.

Regards,
Daniel

[BrianShaw]

Have no fear. Don’t fear that.

BTW, some of the best performing shutters can be the older ones. Age, alone, is not a very good criteria.

[Bernice Loui]

Those are areas circled in red can happen to any lens (Zeiss, Fujinon, Schneider, Nikon, Rodenstock and others). It is edge painting chipped off. Can often be made to look better by applying a black Sharpie marker to the affected area. Has essentially near zero effect on the film image produced by a lens with this.

IMO, this is not a proper criterial for optical performance of any lens. What IS important, image produced on film by any given lens. Visual beauty of a lens does not mean or define it's optical performance in many ways.

Lens choice should be made based on the image produced on film and not it's visual appeal alone.


Bernice

Hello again :-)

It took me quite some time to find a couple of lenses I'd want to buy. So I now have to make the final choice.

On one side, I do have a Fujinon SW 90mm f8 with a Copal 0 model C (thick silver speed ring). Both lens and shutter seem splendid. I have no clue on a manufacturing date.

On the other side, I do have a Schneider Super Angulon 90mm f8 with a Copal 0 model B (all black). Serial Number brings the lens back to 1986 / 1987. Logically I'd go with the Super Angulon with its younger shutter. However the lens is not as clean as the fujinon's. Do I have to fear this :



I understand that the paint missing is not too much of a concern but there's still something I don't understand in the center of the lens. If anyone has an opinion, I'd be happy to discuss it.

Regards,
Daniel

[danielha]

Thank you for your comment Bernice !

I did ask because I was not able to tell if this was important or not. I know that paint chipping off may not be a problem. But I had never seen some "paint correction" inside a lens and I didn't understand what I was seing on the picture !

I understand that the visual aspect may not mean everything about a lens. But I have to trust some guy halfway accross the globe based on criterias which are not the "image produced on film" as you say.

So far, I understand that both lenses, if working as expected, should be able to produce very nice images. Do I know if any of them have misaligned glass or any other kind of problem ? I know that they have no haze or fungus. I know that they have no extreme scratch and maybe one or two more details. That's all for now. I'll ask the seller. But chances are that the answer will be "The lens is good. No problem with it. Look at the picture, it's nice.".

So, for me, having clean lens & shutter tells me that both may have been treated with care. It's a start. It's not enough, especially when talking about 40 years old lenses. I understand that.

Daniel

[Bernice Loui]

Test any potential lens for ownership extensively before making a commitment to own, this is often a long term relationship. This is why right to return is SO important. If the lens in question radiates with stunning beauty, but optical performance a total dud.. consider what might justify a long term relationship with that lens?

Age of any lens is often insignificant, many of the lenses used to this day were made in the 1950 or earlier. One Cooke Aviar was made about 1919, optically GOOD. Most recent lenses would be the two Schneider 110mm & 150mm Super Symmar XL and 72mm Super Angulon XL made in the late 1990's. What should be the prime criteria for developing any relationship with any individual lens.. Does that lens meet your image goal needs, does not need to win a beauty contest, it needs to meet your image goal requirements, expectations, demands.

In this specific case of a modern 90mm wide angle, makes about zero difference between the Schneider or Fujinon or Rodenstock or Nikkor, they can both easily exceed your image goal needs_if there is a good understanding of what the limitations are inherent in any view camera wide angle lens based on the current understanding of the way Nature is. The more common problem area for view camera lenses, shutters, due to their mechanical nature. Lens cells and glass can be subjected to weird stuff that can cause them to not perform as designed, as produced. Be aware of lens cells that have been re-shuttered. Some of these lens cells were once in a dead shutter, then moved to a different shutter. Common and usually ok if proper attention is paid to lens cell spacers and cell spacing with accuracy and precision required (tolerances are in the 0.001" or 0.04mm or less range) for proper optical performance. Another common lens cell source would be Sinar DB mounted lenses, same requirements apply. Absolute give-away lens has been hanker_ed with, incorrect aperture scale, incorrect shutter for the age of the lens cells, and similar. One example appeared on LFF recently:
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...enar-360mm-5-5

Basically, do LOTs of testing before accepting or making a try for a long term relationship with said lens.


Bernice

Thank you for your comment Bernice !

I did ask because I was not able to tell if this was important or not. I know that paint chipping off may not be a problem. But I had never seen some "paint correction" inside a lens and I didn't understand what I was seing on the picture !

I understand that the visual aspect may not mean everything about a lens. But I have to trust some guy halfway accross the globe based on criterias which are not the "image produced on film" as you say.

So far, I understand that both lenses, if working as expected, should be able to produce very nice images. Do I know if any of them have misaligned glass or any other kind of problem ? I know that they have no haze or fungus. I know that they have no extreme scratch and maybe one or two more details. That's all for now. I'll ask the seller. But chances are that the answer will be "The lens is good. No problem with it. Look at the picture, it's nice.".

So, for me, having clean lens & shutter tells me that both may have been treated with care. It's a start. It's not enough, especially when talking about 40 years old lenses. I understand that.

Daniel

[abruzzi]

While I can certainly understand Bernice's desire to test lenses prior to ownership, in many cases its just not practical. In my case, since beginning playing with 4x5, two years ago, I have never seen another person shooting a LF camera and the only camera shop in my city of 200k is Best Buy. I'm sure there are some other LF shooter here, but I've never met them.

So to test I'd need to do a mail order rental or something like that--or a private person loaning me their by mail. If I was buying a $2000 lens, hell yeah, I'd want to do that. But I bought a 90mm ƒ8 SA sight unseen from KEH recently for $100.* It was listed as "Ugly" but I'd call it immaculate. You can find the SA 90/8 for $1000 on ebay, but the vast majority of them are well under $300.

The point is that beginners (which I'd still definitely consider myself) are mostly shopping at the bottom end of the market and much of that thourough detailed approach is better done after purchase, and for that reason getting other's feedback optical qualities, and using proxies such as cosmetic condition are a tried and true approaches.

* I think it was this cheap because it was listed as "24MT", i.e. a 24mm mount, or Copal 00. But the one then sent me was in a copal 0 shutter. Even so, these are mostly inexpensive lenses.