Fuji 90mm f8 SW or Nikon 90mm f8 SW

[Dan Fromm]

B&W, Color, and Reversal - especially the latter in the beginning. I've read about the possibility of fall off but after close inspection of slides and prints never saw it. I project 6x7 chromes with a Pro Cabin 67Z projector onto a large Da-Lite projection screen and the illumination is even across the screen. My experience is apparently not unique as I have read the similar reports from others. Perhaps this is due to manufacturing sample variation, I don't know. For the record I have the MC Grandagon - not the later "N" version.

Thomas

Hmm. Did you shoot 6x7 without movements? I ask because 90 mm is the normal focal length for 6x7 so without movements a 90 that covers the format should have only minimal falloff.

[tgtaylor]

Hmm. Did you shoot 6x7 without movements? I ask because 90 mm is the normal focal length for 6x7 so without movements a 90 that covers the format should have only minimal falloff.

Movements when needed - especially rise, tilt, fall and shift in that order. The image I posted in the Architecture thread today was taken using maximum rise on the AX.

Thomas

[r.e.]

Movements when needed - especially rise, tilt, fall and shift in that order. The image I posted in the Architecture thread today was taken using maximum rise on the AX.

More helpful information. I asked about your Grandagon f/4.5 90mm and fall-off because I'm interested in the lens, and you have a lot of experience with it. Version noted. However, I'm not keen, for the reasons explained in post #29, to purchase the centre filter.

For anyone interested, the Rodenstock E82 centre filter for this lens, with a 112mm front thread, is being offered now in the appropriate subform of this site. It's also on eBay, but the price here is lower.

[Bernice Loui]

Rodenstock, Schneider were the LF view camera lens brands back in the days when sheet film color transparencies were THE high quality image production method. Nikkor was trying to gain_expand their photographic market share as Nikon-Nikkor had already held a good share of the 35mm film camera market, Nikon wanted more by expanding into the LF view camera market. What did happen, Rodenstock, Schneider remained the preferred lens brands as they worked excellent. Nikon was not much different optically, they did not have the marketing (much as they tried), brand recognition and long standing reputation among LF view camera users from that time (keep in mind, majority of 4x5 images from that time were made using monorail, in studio, high expectations images-work produced on color transparency film). Fujinon did not market in ways like Nikon or had the brand recognition as Schneider or Rodenstock.

~All four were essentially much the same, it came down to cost, lens availability and a long list of other factors_not image quality differences as if there were any significant image quality differences, there would be about zero possibility for any LF view camera lens brand to sell any significant numbers of lenses.

Fast forward to the here and now of what remains of the LF view camera world. Monorails have been over run by lightweight field folders, small light weight lenses and all related are in high demand commanding a market value premium, alternative image making processes have grown lots. Folks new to LF view camera today often have a history with 35mm film or digital as their points of reference and image making history. This history of Foto hardware is often carried over into their first steps into making-crafting LF view camera sheet film images. Reality, none of this should carried over into LF view camera image making without careful consideration due to the significant differences in hardware and often image making techniques.

It is quite true once Nikon-Nikkor stopped production of their LF view camera lenses, many excellent bargains could be easily found. Fujinon IMO never took the USA LF view camera market that seriously. While their LF view camera lenses were excellent in the same way as the other three, distribution and marketing was much less so compared to Schneider or Rodenstock... which continued to produce LF view camera lenses after Nikon-Nikkor stopped production due to lack of sales volume.

Fujinon LF view camera lenses came into popularity from a specific "lens test" that has been around on the web for years. Again, Fujinon makes excellent LF view camera lenses as does Rodenstock, Schneider, Nikon-Nikkor.



Bernice

Interesting what Bernice says about brands. Maybe it's just me, but my recollection is that discussions on this forum ten or more years ago tended to favour Schneider and Rodenstock, with Nikon down a step. When Nikon got out of making large format lenses, there were very attractive prices on remaining stock at B&H. What I notice about recent discussions is that all four of the major brands are seen as more or less equivalent. I think that this is good advice (four out of nine of my own lenses are Nikkors), but I think that it's something of a change from earlier days on this forum. I seem to recall that there were lengthy debates on brands, and within brands (especially Schneider), in hair-splitting territory. Again, maybe my memory on this is faulty. I've mentioned it only because for some people it might elicit a smile

[Drew Wiley]

Dan - The angle of view of a "normal" 90mm for 6X7 is entirely different from a wide-angle angle design 90mm suitable for 4x5 coverage plus ample movements. Drop down to an actual wide-angle design for the P67 itself, like a 55mm lens, and you have just as much falloff to contend with as the typical 90mm lens specified for 4x5 usage. The shift lenses for the P67 contain optics made for them by Schneider, based on the Super Angulon formula.

[r.e.]

Now this is a woman who knows her history. She gets additional points for confirming that my memory isn't yet due for relegation to the dustbin

Rodenstock, Schneider were the LF view camera lens brands back in the days when sheet film color transparencies were THE high quality image production method. Nikkor was trying to gain_expand their photographic market share as Nikon-Nikkor had already held a good share of the 35mm film camera market, Nikon wanted more by expanding into the LF view camera market. What did happen, Rodenstock, Schneider remained the preferred lens brands as they worked excellent. Nikon was not much different optically, they did not have the marketing (much as they tried), brand recognition and long standing reputation among LF view camera users from that time (keep in mind, majority of 4x5 images from that time were made using monorail, in studio, high expectations images-work produced on color transparency film). Fujinon did not market in ways like Nikon or had the brand recognition as Schneider or Rodenstock.

~All four were essentially much the same, it came down to cost, lens availability and a long list of other factors_not image quality differences as if there were any significant image quality differences, there would be about zero possibility for any LF view camera lens brand to sell any significant numbers of lenses.

Fast forward to the here and now of what remains of the LF view camera world. Monorails have been over run by lightweight field folders, small light weight lenses and all related are in high demand commanding a market value premium, alternative image making processes have grown lots. Folks new to LF view camera today often have a history with 35mm film or digital as their points of reference and image making history. This history of Foto hardware is often carried over into their first steps into making-crafting LF view camera sheet film images. Reality, none of this should carried over into LF view camera image making without careful consideration due to the significant differences in hardware and often image making techniques.

It is quite true once Nikon-Nikkor stopped production of their LF view camera lenses, many excellent bargains could be easily found. Fujinon IMO never took the USA LF view camera market that seriously. While their LF view camera lenses were excellent in the same way as the other three, distribution and marketing was much less so compared to Schneider or Rodenstock... which continued to produce LF view camera lenses after Nikon-Nikkor stopped production due to lack of sales volume.

Fujinon LF view camera lenses came into popularity from a specific "lens test" that has been around on the web for years. Again, Fujinon makes excellent LF view camera lenses as does Rodenstock, Schneider, Nikon-Nikkor.



Bernice

[Bernice Loui]

Been at this LF view camera stuff since the mid 1980's.. never really stopped since then.

After doing the cycle of modern LF lenses and many others, the most recent vintage LF wide angle lenses are THAT GOOD... from any of the big four.
Essentially pick any from the big four, difficult to go wrong unless the lens has a wonky shutter or whacked lens cells or these days alternative non-original shutter in set of "found" lens cells.. foisted to a unsuspecting buyer only to discover the optical performance is poor then blames the lens brand for this specific incident.


Bernice

Now this is a woman who knows her history. She gets additional points for confirming that my memory isn't yet due for relegation to the dustbin

[neil poulsen]

Drew, I take it you never heard the story of the man who was condemned to death and was offered a choice of deaths. One was to be torn apart by four wild horses, the other was to be burned at the stake. To which he said "They are both very bad."

I was being sarcastic too. I haven't used either, would be surprised if either wasn't more than good enough. So the OP's question, although asked with good intentions and genuine curiosity, was somewhat silly.

No question about it . . . I would definitely prefer to be pulled apart by four horses.

[ottluuk]

I'd just like to add that filter size for the lens, and for the front of a centre filter if desired, is a consideration that rarely gets discussed, but can have significant cost ramifications.

The Lenses, Filter Thread
Nikkor: 82mm
Fujinon: 82mm
Rodenstock: 82mm
Schneider: 95mm

The Centre Filters, Front Thread
Rodenstock 82mm: 112mm
Heliopan 82mm 0.45 ND: 105mm
Schneider 95mm IVa: 112mm
...

IIRC, it's only the Schneider Super-Angulon XL that has the larger 95mm filter size (and larger coverage). Older, non-XL 90/5.6 Super-Angulons have the more common 82mm filter thread. These should be comparable to Nikon, Fuji and Rodenstock f/5.6-4.5 lenses of similar vintage.

Focussing slow wide angles can be tricky and depends on your focussing screen, usual lighting conditions, eyesight, proper use of a focussing cloth, etc. So it's easier to say it's personal than to give exact guidelines. But for me, personally, a 65/8 Super-Angulon is a pain to focus, 121/8 SA is no problem except in very dim conditions and longer lenses (210/9, 300/9) are easy. For me, 90mm is about the tipping point where focussing at f/8 turns bothersome. If I were a heavy user of the focal length, I'd probably end up with two - a small slow one for hiking and a big fast one for everything else. But I'm not, so I 'll stick with my f/5.6 SA.

[r.e.]

IIRC, it's only the Schneider Super-Angulon XL that has the larger 95mm filter size (and larger coverage).

Yes, I've now amended post #29 to make it clear that I'm talking about the Super Angulon XL referred to in post #27 in the following sentence, and the centre filter for the XL: "Exception being the 90mm f5.6 Super Angulon XL which is the largest of this group, largest image circle of 259mm@ f22 with excellent optical performance."