explain like I'm 5......... 90mm lenses

[BrianShaw]

I just got an idea. I have an f/5.6 150mm. I'll turn the aperture down to f/8 while viewing and see how bright it is to help make a decision about my next lens.

I did that with my 90/5.6 and decided that if I used it once more I’d by a 90/8 first.

[Tin Can]

Right now my 90mm Optar in well working shutter is still on my plastic camera many here bought

I use it handheld at 5' using a prefocus distance and a wire finder............with flashbulbs

The Optar is just a lens option, but I will point out, my camera didn't break the weak point with a far heavier lens...

I experiment a lot, and am definetly not seeking AA magnificence, nor his tripod holes

I'm a good time guy! at least I used to be...

Dan, I am sure you could suggest far more exotic lenses that I will never find, buy or even want

I have four 90's....

[BennoLF]

I just got an idea. I have an f/5.6 150mm. I'll turn the aperture down to f/8 while viewing and see how bright it is to help make a decision about my next lens.

Wait but doesn't this not work? f/8 on a 90mm lens is a lesser transmittance than a a f/8 150mm, because the 150mm lens is a narrower FOV.
Both transmit the same total amount of light but with a smaller angle the 150mm is brighter per any given area. Or at least so the astro shooters tell me. Something about 'clear aperture size'
https://petapixel.com/2014/01/29/pic...y-photography/ look about 1/3 of the way down.

Am I talking crazy?

[Peter De Smidt]

Don't forget to factor in 1 -2 stops falloff at the edges.

[Bob Salomon]

Wait but doesn't this not work? f/8 on a 90mm lens is a lesser transmittance than a a f/8 150mm, because the 150mm lens is a narrower FOV.
Both transmit the same total amount of light but with a smaller angle the 150mm is brighter per any given area. Or at least so the astro shooters tell me. Something about 'clear aperture size'
https://petapixel.com/2014/01/29/pic...y-photography/ look about 1/3 of the way down.

Am I talking crazy?

You can always compromise between 5.6 and 8.0 with the 90mm 6.8 Grandagon N or the Grandagon.

[Dan Fromm]

Dan, I am sure you could suggest far more exotic lenses that I will never find, buy or even want.

Look for 90/14 Perigraphes and you will find. I just checked on ebay.com, 12 on offer. There should be others on ebay.fr.

[Joseph Kashi]

Why do 75mm and 90mm have the same 105 degree angle of coverage based on this sheet from references in this forum?
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...s/LF4x5in.html

Where can you get dimension spec (length width etc) for all lenses?

Hi, Alan

I checked the chart and it would appear that the series you compared are mismatched. The chart correctly shows the f/8 Fujinon SW wide angle lenses as 100 degrees coverage and the 90mm /5.6 SWD ( as in Deluxe) series correctly at 105 degrees. To my knowledge, the Nikkor 90/f8 is the only smaller f/8 modern ultra wide angle lens to have a 105 degree angle of coverage. Usually, the f/8 lenses have 100 degree coverage and the f/5.6 lenses have 105 degree coverage.

My suggestion is that you try to get an idea about relative sizes, weights, and ergonomics before spending a lot of money for am f/5.6 Ultra Wide Angle (UWA) lens that's too large and heavy to be usable on a field camera or that needs an expensive, hard-to-find center filter to be usable. I have both f/8 and f/5.6 UWA lenses. The relatively compact 75mm and 90mm f/8 lenses go along with most photo outings while the f/5.6 is admired and then put away in a dark drawer for yet another day.

[Bob Salomon]

Hi, Alan

I checked the chart and it would appear that the series you compared are mismatched. The chart correctly shows the f/8 Fujinon SW wide angle lenses as 100 degrees coverage and the 90mm /5.6 SWD ( as in Deluxe) series correctly at 105 degrees. To my knowledge, the Nikkor 90/f8 is the only smaller f/8 modern ultra wide angle lens to have a 105 degree angle of coverage. Usually, the f/8 lenses have 100 degree coverage and the f/5.6 lenses have 105 degree coverage.

My suggestion is that you try to get an idea about relative sizes, weights, and ergonomics before spending a lot of money for am f/5.6 Ultra Wide Angle (UWA) lens that's too large and heavy to be usable on a field camera or that needs an expensive, hard-to-find center filter to be usable. I have both f/8 and f/5.6 UWA lenses. The relatively compact 75mm and 90mm f/8 lenses go along with most photo outings while the f/5.6 is admired and then put away in a dark drawer for yet another day.

The 90mm 6.8 Grandagon and Grandagon N cover 102° more then most 8.0 lenses and 3° less then the 5.6 and 4.5 90s.

[Dan Fromm]

My suggestion is that you try to get an idea about relative sizes, weights, and ergonomics before spending a lot of money for am f/5.6 Ultra Wide Angle (UWA) lens that's too large and heavy to be usable on a field camera or that needs an expensive, hard-to-find center filter to be usable.

Joseph, optical vignetting (the dread cos^4) afflects all lenses equally. There've been many discussions about when a center filter is necessary. To the extent that there's a consensus, it is that 90 mm is the shortest focal length that can be used on 4x5 without a CF.

When a 90 mm lens is shot straight ahead, i.e., with no movements, the very corners of the 4x5 frame will be 1.5 stops down from the center. Most photographers find this tolerable.

Benno, if this drop of is more than you can tolerate -- it will be if you shoot reversal film -- you should be aware that there are no center filters for the small thin inexpensive 90s you asked about. There are CFs for the modern wasp-waisted ones. To learn more, especially about CFs for lenses whose manufacturers never offered CFs, read my article on the French LF forum. http://www.galerie-photo.com/center-...at-lenses.html

[Bernice Loui]

What were the "test" methods used to determine the SW Nikkor 90mm f8 was the "sharpest" of the lot?

*Camera used, film used, how was the film processed, subject & lighting conditions used, criteria used, how many representative sample(s) of SW Nikkor 90mm f8 lenses were tested......

It is more likely the 90mm f8 SW Nikkor had higher contrast not "sharper" than the others. This combined with a very long list of possibilities plus cognitive bias, image rendition bias and LOTs more all figure into that assertion of "sharper".

As for Fujinon LF lenses being "Superior" again, the is completely subjective and dependent on the needs of image maker and print goals.

Higher contrast is not "sharper"... In many real world sheet film to print image making realities, the sharpest lens is NOT the best lens for a given print. It is a LOT more complex than optical performance of any given lens.

As for which wide 90mm for 4x5 or 5x7_13x18cm, what is the print's goal? As previous mentioned and many times before, there are NO ideal lenses for ALL print goals. Go directly back to the intent and goal of the finished print, then figure out what lens-camera-lighting-film-post processing is required to achieve that print.


Bernice

Lots of good suggestions in this thread. I'll through in my own qualitative comments, FWIW, based upon my actual testing of the following 90mm UWA lenses that I have for different sets of 4x5 and 5x7 gear, along with 75mm and 105mm Fujinon UWA lenses.


90mm/5.6 Fujinon SWD - very sharp, multi-coated, but really big (82mm filter size), heavy and suitable only for fairly static photography. It's an 8 element UWA with 105 degree coverage that works well with 5x7. However, the 90mm/f8 Nikkor does just as well up to 5x7 and in a significantly smaller package.

90mm/8 Nikkor - sharpest lens of the lot by a small margin and with a 67mm filter size. The 235mm/105 degree image circle/coverage is large enough for some movement on 5x7, and it's sufficiently small/light for backpacking My personal preference.

90mm wide angle Dagor - very, very small yet does a very nice job on 4x5. Downside - it's currently as expensive or more expensive than the Nikkor 90/8 on the used market and the shutter will probably require a CLA. Still, as a tiny 4x5 backpack lens, it's great. You can sort of eke out usable 5x7 coverage at very small apertures, but that's marginal.

90mm/6.8 Angulon I apparently have a good factory-coated later copy and it's decent at small apertures, but still seems softer and less contrasty than the similar 90mm Wide Angle Dagor. My least favorite.


Additional comparisons in nearby focal lengths:

75mm/8 Fujinon This is the first version of the SW series, with the inside lettering and single-coated. It's surprisingly sharp and small (58mm filters, I seem to recall). Some movement on 4x5 is possible as the image circle is about 180mm. It's Fujinon's equivalent to the original Super Angulon in terms of 6/4 design. This might be a good alternative to a 90mm UWA - you can always crop a bit or move in closer if you want a tighter composition.

105mm/8 Fujinon NSW This is a later UWA design using 6 air-spaced elements in six groups, multicoating, and lettering on lens barrel outside. It's extremely sharp and my preferred 5x7 UWA, but is overkill on 4x5 as it is a 77mm filter size lens.

The good performance of the later 105mm NSW Fujinon 6/6 design and the earlier 75mm/f8 6/4 design suggests that later NSW models of the Fujinon 90/8 would have similarly good 4x5 performance in a smaller, less expensive package. I did not get one because the 90/8 Fujinon does not cover 5x7.

Fujinon had a known commitment to good quality control for their LF lenses. Of the 11 Fujinon lenses that I purchased on the usedmarket, I have not had a single bad one. Qualitatively, I would generalize that one or two were average to somewhat above average while the rest were excellent or better.