Schneider 80mm Symmar or 90mm Angulon XL

[Sizam]

I'm super super new to LF and am trying to decide on a WA lens, I'm looking at the Schneider ~80mm area and am confused on these two lenses. The 80mm Super-Symmar XL and the 90mm Super-Angulon XL. I realize the 90mm has a larger image circle which is something I'd like for extreme movements but is there some aspect of the 80mm that outshines the 90mm? I'm wondering why anybody would opt for the 80mm when you could get the 90mm for barely any more money and have a larger image circle, I mean 10mm isn't much. What am I missing?

Thanks!

[Bruce Watson]

... is there some aspect of the 80mm that outshines the 90mm?

Oh yes. Physical size, weight (!), and filter size at least.

The 80mm SS-XL is an excellent backpacking and landscape lens. Small and light, as sharp as you could want, and nice and contrasty. It has a big enough image circle that you can use it for a fair amount of architectural exteriors. For interiors it's probably not going to be enough for some situations.

YMMV, it depends on what you want obviously.

[Michael Mutmansky]

10mm is a lot, actually. A closer comparison would be a 75mm lens and the 80mm. The 72mm SA XL is probably about as far away from the 80mm on that end as the 90mm is on the other end, and in both cases, they are much larger, heavier, and require much larger filters.

I consider the 80mm to be an ideal field lens for landscapes due to it's good speed and quite small size.

However, if you are intending to do more critical work (architectural, or ary copywork, for example), the 80mm have more falloff than the comparable super angulon lenses, so that can be a concern. If you intend to shoot landscape, I think this issue is irrelevant.

FYI, I have one listed on Ebay right now that ends tonight.


---Michael

[Rakesh Malik]

I picked the 80mm SS XL for the same reasons, really; it was smaller and lighter, and also a bit faster than the 90, which leads to a slightly brighter image when composing and focussing. I can't compare the two, but I love my 80mm.

[Dave_B]

I have the 72XL and the 90XL. Both lenses are superb optics. Bright, good colors, sharp to the edge of the image, everything you could ask for in a lens. However, they are also heavy, expensive and use large, expensive filters. If you need what they offer, go for it. If something smaller, lighter and cheaper will work, go with that. Use the unspent $$$ on film. Unless you are really pushing things, I would not suggest these lenses for general use. For a lot less money you can finds lenses in these lengths that will likely work for a very long time in most general photography. In addition, when you drop one glass side down in a gravel parking lot, you will cry a little less.
Cheers,
Dave B.

[Jack Flesher]

My personal preference shining through, I really didn't like the 80SSXL. And I tried to like it twice. Disclaimer is I shoot color, so this may be more of an issue for me than for someone shooting only B&W, but the falloff was extreme enough that the center filter was required at all times -- so add the cost, size and weight of it into your calculation. By comparison, I found the 90 Super Angulon f8 version to be sharper and have no offensive falloff for most applications and the f8 lens is not that much larger or heavier than the 80SSXL with the center filter. And the 90 has a bit more IC and is about half the cost of the 80 used -- IMO this makes it a relative bargain. The f5.6 90SA is enough larger and heavier it might be a concern, though it is a stellar lens in its own right with significant coverage.

[Sizam]

FYI, I have one listed on Ebay right now that ends tonight.


---Michael

DAMN, I got to the auction with 1min 20sec left and in the process of logging in it ended Thanks for the suggestions, I think the 80mm is the one to go for since f8 seems too dark and it sounds like the size/weight of the 90 SS XL is a real turnoff.

[turtle]

Dont forget that there are a lot of super value 90mm lenses available at a fraction that a 80XL will set you back with similar image circle and only another 100g in weight. 90 F8 Nikkor SW, Schneider Super Angulon f8...F8 aint so bad, although some hate it. I find it absolutely fine personally.

If you are short of cash for other lenses this is worth consideirng as the 80XL is expensive.

[Former Member 8144]

How would people see a 75mm schneider SA f5.6 fitting into the equation.
Image circle is 198mm..so fine for landscape work (but not so good as the 80/90mm's for architectural with large shifts) and the weight is just 100gm more than the 80xl..but less than any comparative 90mm F5.6.

Not sure how much they go for though.

Marc

[Jack Flesher]

How would people see a 75mm schneider SA f5.6 fitting into the equation.
Image circle is 198mm..so fine for landscape work (but not so good as the 80/90mm's for architectural with large shifts) and the weight is just 100gm more than the 80xl..but less than any comparative 90mm F5.6.

Not sure how much they go for though.

Marc

Hi Marc:

I owned one of the latest MC versions for a short while but sold it to fund the second 80SSXL purchase I referenced above. You know, since everybody was raving about it so enthusiastically I figured I must have had a bad copy on round one... In the end, it was a mistake and I wish I had never let the 75 go as the latest MC versions can be tough to find. It was an excellent lens and there is a reason they bring a premium on eBay when they show up. I think I got about $700 for mine and would gladly pay that to get it back.

However, that said, I really do like the combo of my 90 f8 SA and slightly wider 65 f5.6 SA when needed -- both are newer MC versions and I bought BOTH for what the 80SSXL sold for. So in the end, maybe I'm ahead

Also, I agree with Turtle -- I do not find f8 on my 90 a problematic limitation at all, even using it in dark interiors.

Cheers,