Rodenstock or Schneider 90?

[Maretzo]

Dear LF shooters/colleagues,

I am going to order a new lens for my 4x5 view camera.
I presently use a Nikon 8/90 which is a bit disappointing, and will be replaced soon.

What is your advise or experience between:

Rodenstock 4.5/90

or

Schneider Super-Angulon XL 5.6/90?

Normal or recessed board, on my just-has-been-delayed Chamonix?

Landscape only, small movements: mostly rear tilt and front rise.

Thanks, Serge

[Ron Marshall]

They are both about twice the weight of the Nikon. The XL takes 95mm filters, versus 82mm on the Rodenstock.

[Maretzo]

Hi Ron,

well, interesting remarks, because I did not think about the size of the filter, but it turns out that I have several adapter rings, but unfortunately neither the 82 nor the 95. But 95 seems quite close to the size of the Lee filters system. Any problems you are aware of?

[vann webb]

One vote for the Rodenstock. Extra light to focus by on wide angle lenses can be crucial, IMO. I had the f6.8 version and wound up with the 4.5 due to the difficulty seeing all the way out to the edges on the ground glass. Both manufacturers make excellent quality glass. 82mm filter thread works with Lee and you can still put a 105mm circular polarizer out front of the holder with their attachment ring. Not sure if you could get away with that on the Schneider or not. Something to verify.

[Sheldon N]

What is disappointing about the Nikkor? Is there a particular problem you are trying to solve?

I've owned two different copies of the lens, and both have been razor sharp. It's the best balance of light weight/smaller size/larger coverage in a 90mm lens out there. If the problem is the f/8 maximum aperture and difficulty focusing at the edges/corners, that could be helped by using a tilting loupe such as the Silvestri 6x.

[Ron Marshall]

Hi Ron,

well, interesting remarks, because I did not think about the size of the filter, but it turns out that I have several adapter rings, but unfortunately neither the 82 nor the 95. But 95 seems quite close to the size of the Lee filters system. Any problems you are aware of?

Lee makes a 95mm ring.

[Daniel_Buck]

chamonix 4x5 gives pretty decent moves at 90mm with a flat board. Rear tilt back is no problem at all, neither is a bit of swing on either standard, or tilt on either standard. and I get almost 1 inch of rise or so, before bellows limit me from going any higher.

[Maretzo]

What is disappointing about the Nikkor? Is there a particular problem you are trying to solve?

I've owned two different copies of the lens, and both have been razor sharp. It's the best balance of light weight/smaller size/larger coverage in a 90mm lens out there. If the problem is the f/8 maximum aperture and difficulty focusing at the edges/corners, that could be helped by using a tilting loupe such as the Silvestri 6x.

Hi Sheldon,

That's correct, I (wearing glasses) find difficult to focus and get regularly out-of-focus or un-sharp pictures. I do not have this problems with other Rodenstock 75 and 150.

serge

[Darryl Baird]

Another option is a Fuji SWD 90/5.6. Less expensive that either the Rodie or Schneider, plus you might as well look at the Nikkor 90/4.5. That was the sharpest lens I ever owned, but then I never owned a 90 Rodenstock.

The one benefit you have now it that the 90/8 Nikkor sells at a hefty premium due to the demand for the lens by LF folks who backpack with their gear.

Look at KEH, they have a good selection of used lenses. Badger Graphics for new prices.

[Maretzo]

Thanks for your comments.
Since I already own the Rodenstock 75mm, I will go for the Rodenstock 90/6.8, so that I can use the same Lee adapter ring and same centre filter.

You pointed out rightly the huge size and weight of the 90/4.5.