|
|
|
-
Looking for a 90mm lens - Things to look for?
Folks,
I have a Shen Hao 4x5. I bought it (in China!) with a Schneider 150mm 5.6 and, based on how and what I shoot, I think a wide(r) angle lens would be the best choice on my next purchase.
From reading here, it seems a 90mm is a good choice for me. Is there anything in particular to keep in mind when shopping for a used version of this lens?
FWIW, I shoot a few landscapes; mostly people or buildings and my needs are really simple. Not a lot of swings or tilts.
Any advice on makes or models or anything else is, as always, much appreciated.
-
My 5.6 Super Angulon can't be beat. Covers 5x7, is as sharp as a lens can be. Kind of expensive though. The f8 Super Angulon will cost less and is still a good lens. Those are Schneider lenses.
-
I have a 90mm f8 Nikon Nikkor SW. It's almost supernaturally sharp, lightweight, and compact. The only downside is a slow (f/8) 90mm lens is very tough to use in dim interiors or at night. Outside is no problem, but I do find myself wishing for a faster lens at times.
-
I second the Nikkor--BUT in all honesty it is the only 90mm I have used on 4X5. But I like it small, light, and sharp.
-
We don't know some important things. You have a Symmar, yes? Do you like it? It has the kind of quality that contemporary lenses produce. If so, maybe the SA or the Nikor would be a good choice for you. I had a Symmar for a long time, and when I sold it, hardly missed it at all.
Having said that...
I have an f/8 super angulon (47mm that I use on 6x9). I wouldn't dream of using it on people unless I wanted them to look rather severe. I prefer gentler lenses. My favorite wa is a Goerz Rectagon 75mm (f/6.7), and my next favorite is a Ross wa in a barrel, 100mm at f/12. These might be considered a bit awkward for many people but the quality they give is very loving. Sharp? The rectagon is, if you stop down. The Ross is sharp enough, but nothing like the super ang. Both have the most wonderful ability to present the juicest color I've ever seen from a lens. Yummy. Oh, yes, I should mention that I have a number of versions of the f/18 Zeiss and Zeiss B/L protars, which I absolutely adore!
My experience with the SA is a bit mixed. Wonderful for some things (I'm going to keep it), they are too damn contrasty for others. It can sometimes be a problem unless you have the center spot filter, because while the center may be manageable, the outside will be underexposed due to the cosine issue, or if you expose extra to compensate, the center gets heavy. This is mostly true in hard light, of course. Since they are on different parts of the curve, correcting center vs. edges may be problematic even if you expose enough. The lenses mentioned above don't have that problem so much, not because they are exempt from the laws of optics and free of the cosine, but simply because they have less contrast.
While I doubt that you would find either of these particular lenses without a protracted search, there are many other lenses that might serve. I had a 90mm Schneider Angulon once (not super at all) that I liked a lot. It was great, but didn't have much in the way of movements. AA liked the Ross Xpress, as I recall.
Older lenses, yes, sometimes uncoated ones, have entirely different characteristics from the new ones. It is entirely possible for one to acquire a number of them for the price of a new or even used Super Ang. Then, trying them and seeing what you get is an adventure with a bit of dimension.
I think that most people wouldn't be interested in what I'm saying here, and you may not be. I'm ok with that. I am of a very old school, in which we fossils thought more of subtle differences which may verge on the intangible. It seems to me that lenses today are evaluated on fairly limited criteria. You know. Sharp. Contrasty. Etc. Strand, Weston, etc. used lenses that many hobbyist photographers today wouldn't look at for a minute.
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
The f6.8 90mm Grandagon is a superb lens (also badged as Caltars), not to heavy, mine's a bit smaller & lighter than my f8 90mm Super Angulon. Both lenses give the same contrast as my Sironar's & Symmar's which has never been a problem. I prefer to stick with German glass as the characteristics are similar between the focal lengths.
Ian
-
I would second Ian's recommendation of the f6.8 90mm Grandagon-N. I bought mine second hand a few years ago to replace my Schneider 90mm Angulon, which I still have and is a super really tiny lens compared to the modern 90 mm's. However the Grandagon offers a lot more coverage (if that's important to you) then the older Angulon and has a nice sharpness and contrast without being over the top. This sharpness holds good even at the limit of its image circle.
-
the chrome barrelled super angulons ( f8 i think )
are often overlooked because of their age.
they also cover 5x7 and are a great little lens.
the schneider website offers a TON of information
about their products
you can figure out anything from hyper focal focusing,
to the age of a lens...
the age of lens chart should be here: http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/...nses/index.htm
-
Most of the F/8 lenses have less coverage. The Nikon F/8 is on par with the fast 90mm. The fast F/4.5 lenses are big and heavy. The Nikon F/4.5 uses 82mm filters [IIRC] But if you need the speed you need it.
If you're shooting outdoors the F/8 Nikon is hard to beat.
-
Thanks all. I don't see a 90mm as a portraiture lens -- just useful for landscapes or similar scenarios. I've gotten to know how to use wide angles well during 15+ years as a newspaper photographer, but I know it's a big leap to LF.
And bowzart -- if I didn't have respect for old-school methods and thinking, I wouldn't be here! 8^)
|
|
Adv Reply
