Nikon Nikkor 90/4.5 vs 90/8

[darr]

I am trying to slim down the weight of my travel 4x5 kit. Curious if switching out the Nikon 90/4.5 with the 90/8 would be beneficial regarding weight and dimensions and have excellent image quality. Does anybody have experience with both? TIA

[Oren Grad]

While we're waiting for hands-on reports, here are the specifications including size/weight:

[darr]

Thanks, Oren!

[Joseph Kashi]

I am trying to slim down the weight of my travel 4x5 kit. Curious if switching out the Nikon 90/4.5 with the 90/8 would be beneficial regarding weight and dimensions and have excellent image quality. Does anybody have experience with both? TIA

Although I don't have experience with the 4.5 version, my 90/8 Nikkor is one of the sharper lenses among my few dozen LF lenses, covers 5x7 easily, and uses 67mm filters, implying a relatively compact size and weight for its class.

[Eric Woodbury]

Of the several 90s I've had, Nikkor 90/8 is the finest.

90/6.8 Angulon is the most compact for 4x5 and sharp enough, too. Later years they had modern shutters. Coatings are fine unless you are shooting into the lights.

Never had the 90/4.5. I'd never shoot that open. Might be handy for focussing on a dark subject, but I get by with f/8.

[Mark J]

Do you use a fresnel on the 4x5 screen ? If I was using the f/8 lens I'd want that to help composition, on a lot of subjects. I'm sure it's a just as sharp as the f/4.5 when stopped down though - it has 8 elements which is more than the Schneider and Rodenstock slower models.

[darr]

Do you use a fresnel on the 4x5 screen ? If I was using the f/8 lens I'd want that to help composition, on a lot of subjects. I'm sure it's a just as sharp as the f/4.5 when stopped down though - it has 8 elements which is more than the Schneider and Rodenstock slower models.

My travel 4x5 is an Ebony RSW with an original screen and fresnel.
The 90/4.5 has been an excellent lens, just a bit on the heavy side now that I am shooting more landscapes rather than building interiors.

[darr]

Although I don't have experience with the 4.5 version, my 90/8 Nikkor is one of the sharper lenses among my few dozen LF lenses, covers 5x7 easily, and uses 67mm filters, implying a relatively compact size and weight for its class.

Of the several 90s I've had, Nikkor 90/8 is the finest.

90/6.8 Angulon is the most compact for 4x5 and sharp enough, too. Later years they had modern shutters. Coatings are fine unless you are shooting into the lights.

Never had the 90/4.5. I'd never shoot that open. Might be handy for focussing on a dark subject, but I get by with f/8.

Thanks!!

[Michael R]

They are equivalent in performance, so really it's just a matter of size/weight vs losing almost 2 stops for wide open focusing/composing under low light conditions. That really depends on the person. I always preferred the faster models because I see a little better (not a huge difference but every little bit counts for me), and I don't have far to carry stuff so it made sense.

The f/8 takes smaller filters on the front so you might need a step up ring unless you already have some 67mm filters for other lenses.

My travel 4x5 is an Ebony RSW with an original screen and fresnel.
The 90/4.5 has been an excellent lens, just a bit on the heavy side now that I am shooting more landscapes rather than building interiors.

[neil poulsen]

I generally have Schneider lenses, except for my Nikon 90mm SW f8. As another responder pointed out, the f8 version has 8 elements. A nice advantage of a 90mm f5.6 90mm SW is their 235mm image circle, compared to a smaller image circle for their f8 versions. But indeed, the Nikon 90mm SW f8 also has that increased image circle.

My Fuji 105mm SW and my 121mm SW are both f8 lenses. So my 90mm SW might just as well be an f8.