Opinion: Would a 90mm f8 or f6.8 lens be too dark for dawn and dusk landscape?

[Drew Wiley]

It not just chromes. As I've noted numerous times before, it's easy to get off the separated part of the respective dye curves with color neg film and into crossover territory with significant falloff. Mere "overall latitude" talk won't spare you from that. Unlike b&w film, you don't just get a density shift, but risk a hue shift, and even more, a cleanness of hue loss. Whether one considers that a minus or a creative opportunity all depends; but it's there. And it's not going to be easy to post-correct, if doable at all by routine means. Ektar can be a bear in that respect; but Portra certainly isn't exempt, though it might be a little less noticeable due to the lower contrast.

[Dan Fromm]

I heard this from time to time: lenses with larger apertures could have more falloff. I don't know if this is true. But I would like to consider and discuss this.

Daniel, aperture has nothing to do with cos^4, which center filters more-or-less correct. That said, shooting a wide lens at a large aperture risks mechanical vignetting, which a center filter can't correct. This is why CF manufacturers recommend shooting at f/11 or smaller with a CF.

By the way, I didn't include the two photos in your post that I quoted, but the first one is darker in the upper corners. Can't see anything in its lower corners.

In post #14 above you wrote:

In my opinion, with this focal length, the question of whether you need a center filter is also crucial. Because the center filter often costs more than the lens. I would take the lens for which you do not need a center filter. Maybe that is the lens with the smaller image circle. But at 90 mm you don't need a very large image circle, 216 mm is enough

Cos^4 affects all lenses of the same focal length approximately equally, coverage has nothing to do with it. Biogons -- the only f/4.5 Biogon suitable for LF is the 75/4.5 -- are the big exception, with them falloff is closer to cos^3.

FWIW, there's a general consensus that a CF isn't really needed with a 90 mm lens shot straight ahead on 4x5. Shooting a 90 decentered is another matter and so are shorter focal lengths.

And if you want a light and inexpensive 90 mm lens that covers 4x5 with ample movements, get a 90/14 Perigraphe Ser. VIa #2. In barrel and no CF was offered for it. My #1, #1bis and #2 f/14 Perigraphes are all in the same barrel and can be stuffed into the front of an Ilex #3 shutter.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

Daniel, aperture has nothing to do with cos^4, which center filters more-or-less correct. That said, shooting a wide lens at a large aperture risks mechanical vignetting, which a center filter can't correct. This is why CF manufacturers recommend shooting at f/11 or smaller with a CF.

By the way, I didn't include the two photos in your post that I quoted, but the first one is darker in the upper corners. Can't see anything in its lower corners.

Thanks to all. Even if I sometimes embarrass myself: I always keep learning.

r.e., Bob, Dan, I have mixed everything up.

Obviously the lens barrel can cut off-axis light at large apertures ("mechanical vignetting", as Dan said). But that has nothing to do with "natural vignetting, which is a product of the angle the light strikes the film" (I found this here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/thread.../#post-1156357)

Also, it seems that in the past they didn't use a center filter at all. At least in my older literature I didn't find anything about it ... - When did the wish for center filters come up?

Thanks!

[Alan Klein]

Daniel, aperture has nothing to do with cos^4, which center filters more-or-less correct. That said, shooting a wide lens at a large aperture risks mechanical vignetting, which a center filter can't correct. This is why CF manufacturers recommend shooting at f/11 or smaller with a CF.

By the way, I didn't include the two photos in your post that I quoted, but the first one is darker in the upper corners. Can't see anything in its lower corners.

In post #14 above you wrote:


Cos^4 affects all lenses of the same focal length approximately equally, coverage has nothing to do with it. Biogons -- the only f/4.5 Biogon suitable for LF is the 75/4.5 -- are the big exception, with them falloff is closer to cos^3.

FWIW, there's a general consensus that a CF isn't really needed with a 90 mm lens shot straight ahead on 4x5. Shooting a 90 decentered is another matter and so are shorter focal lengths.

And if you want a light and inexpensive 90 mm lens that covers 4x5 with ample movements, get a 90/14 Perigraphe Ser. VIa #2. In barrel and no CF was offered for it. My #1, #1bis and #2 f/14 Perigraphes are all in the same barrel and can be stuffed into the front of an Ilex #3 shutter.

What about 75mm lenses?

[Bob Salomon]

What about 75mm lenses?

All wide angles. 35mm, 45mm, 55mm, 65mm, 75mm, 80mm, 110mm, 115mm! Etc. and some that I missed.

[Dan Fromm]

What about 75mm lenses?

Alan, what do you want to know about them?

[r.e.]

What about 75mm lenses?

Looks like you're talking about @Dan Fromm's sentence, which you highlighted in your post #34:

"FWIW, there's a general consensus that a CF isn't really needed with a 90 mm lens shot straight ahead on 4x5. Shooting a 90 decentered is another matter and so are shorter focal lengths."

I've read a lot of posts on this forum about centre filters. I don't see a "general consensus". What I see are some people who regard the falloff for a given lens as acceptable, in some cases desirable, and some people who don't. People may have a different view depending on whether one is talking about negative film or reversal film. Some people draw a distinction between colour negative film and black and white negative film. There are also a couple of experienced forum participants whose view is that the design of the lens can have a bearing on this question. This comes through in discussions about Schneider Super-Symmar XL lenses. Schneider's XL focal length in this range is 80mm, but there is at least one highly experienced Schneider XL owner here who regards a centre filter as necessary not just for that lens, but for Schneider's XL 110mm lens.

Whether someone finds falloff acceptable also depends on when they want to address it. Obviously, some people will prefer to address falloff in camera. However, a good number say that they are happy to deal with falloff post-capture. I guess that depends on how much time one wants to spend in Capture One/Photoshop (digital) or dodging and burning (analogue).

Re Dan's comment about shooting "straight ahead"... I don't understand why somebody would purchase a wide angle lens for use with a 4x5 view camera (as distinct from a 4x5 point and shoot), or decline to purchase a centre filter, on the basis that they will never use any movements. In fact, I don't see anybody saying pre-purchase that that is their plan, nor saying that that is what they are doing post-purchase. As a practical matter, I think that rise, at a minimum, is basic to composing with a wide angle lens.

I've set out my own general perspective on centre filters in post #30.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

By the way, I didn't include the two photos in your post that I quoted, but the first one is darker in the upper corners. Can't see anything in its lower corners.

This is exactly why I thought I am blind. I have used front rise. The upper right corner should be lighter and the lower right corner darker. I would also have thought at first that the falloff on the right was related to the small but bright light source in the image, the sun.

- But here's the problem: I don't see a uniform wall, but a backlit scene ...

The problems will come when I have uniform light and lighting. Not good!

r.e. is right: what's the point of a wide angle if I'm not willing to screw on the right center filter in the last consequence to avoid falloff I don't want?

But: which center filter do I need? https://galerie-photo.com/center_fil...mat_lenses.pdf if I understand Dan correctly, I would need an E67/86 with 1.5 EV correction, right? A 90/8 M67x0.75 IIIa (III?) Schneider, or a Rodenstock +1.5 E67/86 or a 67mm ND Center Filter 3X Heliopan?

It seems that they no longer exist ...

[r.e.]

But: which center filter do I need? ... A 90/8 M67x0.75 IIIa (III?) Schneider, or a Rodenstock +1.5 E67/86 or a 67mm ND Center Filter 3X Heliopan?

You could use any of those three. That gives you a broader search field and therefore more room to take into account price and condition. I have the Rodenstock E67/86 0.45ND myself. I use it with a Rodenstock Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm. I may purchase a Schneider Super-Symmar XL f/5.6 110mm, in which case I'll be able to use the same centre filter.* You might find it useful to read this Bob Salomon post from 2000:

I don't think you will find many people, if any, who have actually used all 3 [Heliopan, Rodenstock and Schneider centre filters] on the same lens with the same film at the same time who could answer your question.

We are in a unique position. We are the Heliopan and the Rodenstock importer and also the Linhof importer. As such we import the Heliopan and Rodenstock ceter filters as well as Schneider ones for the 58 through 90mm XL lenses we sell.

WE HAD THE SAME QUESTION.

The editor of Shutterbug prior to Bob Shell was an extremely knowlgeable photographer named Lief Erickson (tragically died too early) and he too had this question.

So he took the Linhof Technorama 617 and the old Fuji 617 with a Schneider, Rodenstock and heliopan center filter for a test.

He found no difference on film between them.

However that was before Rodenstock redesigned their center filters.

No center filter is totally neutral. They tend to shift torwards green under cetain conditions. The latest version of the Rodenstock ones are the most neutral of all center filters.

Rodenstock does publish an interesting 2 page sheet on center filters and there use which we would gladly MAIL to anyone in the U.S. who would like it. Simply send a request in info@hpmarketingcorp.com and request it. If you ask Rodenstock for it they will forward the request to the same address so your direct request would be the fastest.

Link to the thread containing Bob's post: https://www.largeformatphotography.i...all-off-110-XL


* Owners of the Schneider lens advise that I'll need a centre filter for it. The Schneider is more expensive than two other lenses that I've considered in about that focal length, but if I wanted a centre filter for those I'd have to purchase one. The fact that I can use a centre filter that I already have with the Schneider reduces the price difference significantly.

[Dan Fromm]

But: which center filter do I need? https://galerie-photo.com/center_fil...mat_lenses.pdf if I understand Dan correctly, I would need an E67/86 with 1.5 EV correction, right? A 90/8 M67x0.75 IIIa (III?) Schneider, or a Rodenstock +1.5 E67/86 or a 67mm ND Center Filter 3X Heliopan?

It seems that they no longer exist ...

The ones you listed are functionally equivalent. Same threading, same correction.

They still exist. I have 4 CFs in the drawer. I don't think CFs are still made, but I haven't checked which, if any, are available new from Rodenstock and Schneider. Used ones are available. I bought all of mine used. I just checked what's offered on ebay.ch, found 45 CFs.