Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,315   Posts: 1,536,694   Online: 928
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Roger, HERE is my 90mm-Angulon-on-5x7"-comparison page. There are slight differences between different models of the Angulon, so you may both be right!
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Gent Belgium
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2
    Hi Ole,

    If you are still looking for a 90 mm ... I have two Grandagons and want to sell one...I have a newer version

    Rodenstock Grandagon N 90 mm F 4,5 MC till f 45
    Prontor Professional shutter on Linhof board
    Couverage 236 mm
    very clean 775 Euro + port

    and an older version but very good lens...I made B&W prints 1m x 1m20 from 4x5 without problems ...for a softer price

    Objectif Rodenstock Grandagon 90 mm F 6.8 till f 45
    in compur shutter
    Coverage 221 mm
    335 Euro + port

    I can send you pictures upon request.

    Kind regards from Gent Belgium

    Marc De Clercq
    marcdc99@yahoo.com

  3. #13
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Marc, it's not me who is looking! I have two at present, plus a few "historical" ones. I don't need any more (right now).
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  4. #14
    Willie Jan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Best/The Netherlands
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,910
    Images
    49
    The Rodenstock Grandagon N 90 6.8 is a nice lens which I also use.
    If you are planning a new lens, i would buy a modern one. Prices are very attractive these days. I used a angulon 6.8/90, but with a very little movement it's out of the circle of confusion. besides that i did not like the quality, but that's personal. is weight more important than quality?

  5. #15
    JosBurke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    KY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    462
    Images
    9
    Hmm ! I'd seriously consider the Fuji f90 f/8 version---very sharp and 67 mm filter thread ---I had one and it was terrific--I ran across the SWD 5,6 Fuji and sold my f/8--I ended up with the 5,6 version for the same as what I sold the f/8 version for---pretty good swap--If you wonder why--the 5,6 is easier to focus plus it covers 5x7 with ease--the f/8 version will not. OTOH the f/8 uses the moderately expensive 67 mm filters as opposed to the very expensive 82 mm on the 5,6 SWD--- I had to buy a new 82 mm polarizer--ouch!!
    Joseph Burke

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Naestved, DK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole View Post
    Roger, HERE is my 90mm-Angulon-on-5x7"-comparison page. There are slight differences between different models of the Angulon, so you may both be right!
    Ole
    Did you find out what caused the "flare"?
    I have seen something similar when shooting my f/8 SA into the sun.
    No hexagons just a blob of "flare" in the opposite site of the frame/image.
    Kind regards
    Send from my Electronic Data Management Device using TWOFingerTexting

    Technology distinquishable from magic is insufficiently developed

    S°ren Nielsen
    Denmark

  7. #17
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Oh yes - it was obvious when I thought about it!

    I had set everything up with the lens nicely shaded - then noticed the railing of the porch intruded in the bottom of the picture. Suddenly having forgotten why I put the camera where I did I pushed it 5cm forward instead of raising it 10cm, thus getting the lens right out in the sun. Since the sun was outside the field of view I managed to overlook it completely, but the sunshine falling on the front of the lenses gave that flare. I would have reshot if I hadn't already sold one of the lenses!
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin