I have an opprtunity to purchase a Nikkor F4.5 90 mm lens, on a Copal 0 shutter. Right now I use a Rodenstock Grandagon N 90mm F4.5, on a Compur shutter. It is a large lens, and I like the idea of a smaller lens. But the lens tables on the Ebony web site indicate that the Nikkor has an image circle of 235 mm at F16. The Rodenstock has an image circle of 236 mm, but I don't know at what arpeture.
Can anyone recommend the Nikkor as a suitable replacement, or should I stick with the Grandagon? I do like this lens, but I am only considering the Nikkor because it is much smaller in size.
I was under the impression that these lenses are close to the same size. Each takes 82mm filters. The 90mm f/8 Nikkor SW is smaller - It takes 67mm filters, and has the same image circle as the f/4.5 version.
The Grandagon is a great lens. Memory tells me that the specs for it are at given at f/22. I can't see any reason to switch to another lens the same size.
I think by going with the Nikkor 90mm f/4.5 you'd save 100g of weight and get a Copal 0 shutter instead of a Copal 1. If you really are looking for weight savings, look to the Nikkor 90mm f/8 as recommended by David, which is half the weight of your Grandagon.
Sheldon is right, you do get the smaller shutter. I feel that the weight difference, about 3.5 ounces, is pretty meaningless. I don't think that you would find the f/4.5 Nikkor SW a small lens. The difference between the f/8 Nikkor SW and the Grandagon N is about 3/4 of a pound.
If i were fortunate enough to have a 90 4.5 i would never consider going to a 90 8 no matter what the weight difference is. Focusing a 90 8 is so much a hassle if not in clear daylight. Enjoy having a 4.5 no matter which one you deside to keep.
I have owned the f4.5 Nikkor and the f8 Nikkor -- and currently own the f8 Schneider. FWIW, I can assure you that focussing is *not* much different between these 90's -- though weight certainly is. For field, get an f8 lens; for studio, keep the Grandagon.
The 90mm 6.8 Grandagon N in Copal 0 weighs 16.2 oz and uses a 67mm filter and is faster and brighter then a Nikon 90mm f8. Why compare a 4.5 to an 8.0? Why not compare the 8.0 to the 6.8?
And why would you switch from an old Grandagon to a similar Nikon? You would get better performance by switching to the MC version of the Grandagon-N.
The reason I think that many photographers like the 90mm f/8 Nikkor W is that it has the same size image circle as the f/4.5 lenses, in a smaller, lighter package, that takes smaller filters. If you need/want the larger image circle in a smaller lens, that lens is the one people look to.
Other than the Nikkor W's image circle, the f/6.8 max opening (and the larger image circle compared to those of the f/8.0 Fujinon SW, or f/8 or f/6.8 Super Angulons) make the smaller Grandagon-N is very attractive. I really like my 90 and 75mm f/4.5 Grandagon-Ns. I am sure that the 90mm f/6.8 is in the same class.
Jack,
Its funny how different people see things differently. I have an f/4.5 Grandagon-N, and an f/8 Fujinon SW. I think that there is a noticeable difference between the brightness of the image on the groundglass between them, especially indoors or in dim light. I find it much easier to focus the f/4.5 lens in lower light conditions.
I was in too much of a hurry this morning and worded my response above poorly. I can see where it might appear as argumentative to your post and that was not my intent -- my appologies! I understand the focusing situation may be different for some folks and certainly respect your POV
FWIW, my more complete answer: I had heard that argument years ago and bought my first 90, the f4.5 Nikkor over the f8 version for that reason. Then a year later, after seeing how much smaller it was, I tried a friend's f8 Nikkor and saw virtually no difference on my GG in real world shooting -- and the weight difference was very noticeable... The next week I had the f8 version, sold the f4.5 version and never looked back.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks