Which 120mm for 4x5

[pgomena]

You might want to consider a wider lens, such as a 90mm. I find my 120 super angulon pretty useless for architecture on a 4x5. It is about the equivalent of a 35mm lens on a 35mm camera. Not wide enough for many large buildings or spaces. It's a good lens, don't get me wrong, but the focal length on 4x5 is a bit tight for architecture. I'd invest in a 90mm with a minimum aperture greater than f/8.

Peter Gomena

[largeformat pat]

Schneider Super Angulon 121mm f/8. I would recommend. I actually use it on my 8 x 10 super level with no movements and get great results. Like a 13mm lens with out the fish eye. The 121mm is a great lens.
Pat

[edtbjon]

I have nothing of value to add to this thread other than a question: I have seen Angulons (Super and normal) of 120mm and 121mm. Are there any differences other than a 1mm difference in focal length?


Steve.

About the Super Angulons (120 and 121) there isn't much difference except that the 120 is a redesign and the 120's are multicoated. (The 121 isn't multicoated, but that shouldn't make much difference when shooting b/w which is the intention of the OP.) Both of these lenses cover about 288mm at working apertures, i.e. not really 8x10, but close enough. (Strange though, the IC of the SS-XL 110mm is also 288mm!)
The Angulon (without the "Super" prefix) is a totally different story. While it illuminates an 8x10 it looses too much sharpness in the corners. At working apertures (f/16-f/32) it is more or less only sharp in the corners of 5x7 (with an image circle of 211mm according to the Schneider website), i.e. without much room for movements. It's very compact though.
When shopping for a used lens, as always try to make some test shots to check both the shutter and the general performance of the lens.

//Björn

[Doug Webb]

I'm not sure what you mean by architecture, if you mean what full time professional architectural photographers mean by shooting architecture, especially interior architecture shots, then a 120mm lens might be a lens that you wouldn't use as often as a 90mm or even wider. I do a lot of what could be called architectural shots in that there is a building, usually a barn, old house, or something similar included in what some people would think of as more of a landscape shot. From a moderate distance on 4x5 this is one of my most used lenses for this type of shot, and yes, it is near a 35mm film equivalent of a 35mm lens. I do not use a super angulon, which seems to be a little bit of overkill on 4x5 compared to my angulon. Newer angulons are single coated, have so much coverage, around 211mm image circle, that you would have a very hard time running out of coverage on 4x5, but are really tight on coverage and very wide on 5x7and useless for most purposes on 8x10. The 120 angulons are smaller, cheaper, lighter, and will produce a sharp image within limts, meaning no mural sized prints, and meaning that you will be stopping down to f32 on almost every shot, especially when using extensive movements. If you haven't actually seen a 120 super angulon or comparable lens, you may be a little surprised at how big and heavy they are. If you want ultimate quality and 5x7 coverage, they may be the only way to go. I have what I would call an architechtural infrared shot in the gallery section. If you can borrow a 120 angulon you will be able to tell relatively quickly if it meets your needs, if you buy one you probably won't have trouble selling it unless it is in bad shape. They are not as easy to find as the 90mm angulon, so you may have to look a little while.
Good luck with whatever you choose.