Your favourite 75mm lenses or ones to avoid

[612tom]

Hi, I'm in the market for a 75 or 72mm lens, what are your favourites, and are are there any ones you dislike and should be avoided?

I'm looking at:

Fuji SWD 75mm 5.6 (196mm coverage)
Nikkor SW 75mm 4.5 (200mm coverage)
Rodenstock Grandagon-N 75mm 4.5 (195mm coverage)
Schnieder Super Angulon 75mm 5.6 (198mm coverage)

and if budget would allow, the Schnieder 72XL with 226mm coverage, possibly overkill for 4x5 landscapes and architecture...

The Fuji and the Nikkor seem to be available used from $500-700 from ebay and KEH etc in fairly good condition, the Rodenstock is nearer to $1000, and the 72XL over $1400. Do these prices sound about right?


Thanks in advance for any comments and recommendations.

[Steve Goldstein]

Don't forget the 75mm f/6.8 Grandagon from Rodenstock. Just on a lark, I shot one sheet of 5x7 FP4+ with my 6.8/75 while testing a few 90mm lenses for coverage, and was stunned to find a sharp image right out to the corners at f/22. This wasn't at infinity focus, but about 10 feet, but for sure it'll more than cover 4x5!

[Blumine]

I have both the Fuji 75mm and the Schneider 72mm XL. They are both great lenses, but I tend to grab the Schneider first. At least with my copy, the Schneider seems a little warmer and the Fuji a tad sharper, but its hard to tell. The biggest disadvantage to Schneider is the 95mm Filter size, the Fuji takes 67mm.

I tried a Nikon 75mm once and prefered the Fuji.

Blumine

[Gem Singer]

The Caltar Ii-N 75 is actually a Rodenstock Grandagon N, re-badged by Calumet Photo.

Previously owned ones can be purchased at lower prices than the Rodenstock version.

Excellent lens.

[Mark Sampson]

I have a 75/4 Nikkor-SW. It's very sharp and contrasty (like my other Nikkors). I use it mostly to photograph kitchens and bathrooms, for which it's well suited. Clients seem to love its 'reach' in a small room, and exclaim about the quality of an 11x14 print from a negative made with that lens. I've rarely used it for landscapes, although it performs well for that too.

[Archphoto]

I have the 75 SA and love it.
I bought the 72XL because I needed more coverage.
The 72XL is more contrasty than my old 75SA, both are keepers for as long as I am involved with LF, a very long time I hope.

I have a 115 Grandagon: great too, with the Nikon and Fuji I have no experence.

Peter

[Bob Salomon]

re-badged by Calumet Photo.

Not really. It is a private label lens and Rodenstock puts the Calumet name on the lenses like they put the Sinar name on the ones that Sinar sells.

Calumet just buys them from Rodenstock.

[Walter Calahan]

I've only owned a Nikkor 75 mm. Never let me down.

[rdenney]

Were it me in your shoes, I'd buy the one that turned up in the shutter I thought would be most reliable and that had the best price. I worked around this focal length in my collection, going for a 65 and a 90, and used Schneider lenses in both cases. But that was as much because of the condition and price of what was offered at the time as anything.

A buddy of mine has a 75/8 Fujinon, and it does work beautifully. The price was also very good--that extra stop is expensive. It's not like the difference between the Super Angulon 65/8 and 65/5.6, where the latter has sufficient coverage for 4x5 and the former is marginal--the Fuji seemed to have plenty of coverage for him.

Rick "thinking one of the joys of LF is not having to obsess over marginal lens differences" Denney

[Gem Singer]

Bob,

In other words, Calumet purchases Rodenstock Grandagon-N lenses from the manufacturer, has their name placed on them, and sells them under the name Caltar II-N. Is that not correct?

Seems that when I see a reference to that procedure on this forum, it's called rebadging. In your industry, it's called private labeling.

Is there a difference in quality between the Rodenstock branded lenses and the Caltar branded lenses (aside from the warranty service)?

Is that the reason why Caltar lenses are less expensive?