Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,269   Posts: 1,534,382   Online: 885
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,315
    If you're really asking which lens to buy, I'd go with the super angulons. They're newer than the angulons, and a better bargain than the latest, greatest models. I own a 120 and a 90mm, and they're outstanding lenses. The 90 is really pretty small and is supposed to cover 5x7, so you'll not run out of image circle on 4x5. The 120 is not so small, and not that wide on 4x5, similar to 35mm on a 35mm camera. If you want a good, versatile wide angle lens, go with a 90 SA. Get the 5.6 if you can afford it, although I don't have a lot of trouble focusing the f/8 I own. They are plentiful on the used market.

    Peter Gomena

  2. #12
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Super Angulons are super. They give you the ability to make more movement than their similar Angulon models. And yes, you are corect; this means that they are also bigger.

    I agree that this question could probably be merged with about 2,500 others on the Internet.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  3. #13
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    The Angulons may also work out better for leaving mounted on field cameras when they are folded for transport.

    Lee

  4. #14
    stradibarrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Monroe, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,382
    Images
    163
    I think most of you understood the heart of the question. There is information that gives very technical descriptions of a lens but I have learned to trust the opinions of many of you here on this forum. In my OP I asked the true "functional" difference between the two. I think many of you also understand that many of the reviews given on the web are in the strictest sense correct but the differences drawn between "A" and "B" are of no real consequence in the day to day use.
    "Generalizations are made because they are generally true"
    Flicker http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradibarrius
    website: http://www.dudleyviolins.com
    Barry
    Monroe, GA

  5. #15
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Davenport View Post
    ... The pre-war versions have more coverage than the post-war ones ...
    Well, as I see it the main difference between the coverage of pre-and post-WWII Angulons was in the definition of "coverage". My little test of a 1936 model and a 1964 one, both 90mm, used on 5x7" film, showed a very slight difference in that the transition from sharp to unsharp is a little more clearly defined in the later model. At f:32, the corners were a little more diffuse with the newer lens while the sharpness at the edge of a 4x5" section at larger apertures was sharper with the newer lens.

    That said, I have used a 210 Angulon on 8x10" with so much rise that the lens axis was pretty close to the top of the film - in portrait orientation. Yes, the top of the image is a bit soft - but that hardly matters since it was mostly (overcast) sky.

    I have every Angulon from 65mm to 210mm, and Super Angulons from 47mm (XL) to 121mm (old f:8). I see no reason to carry a longer Super, the 165mm and especially the 210mm are so huge that I would have to leave all the other lenses at home!
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  6. #16
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,418
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by stradibarrius View Post
    I think most of you understood the heart of the question. There is information that gives very technical descriptions of a lens but I have learned to trust the opinions of many of you here on this forum. In my OP I asked the true "functional" difference between the two. I think many of you also understand that many of the reviews given on the web are in the strictest sense correct but the differences drawn between "A" and "B" are of no real consequence in the day to day use.
    I think that every time a familiar question is asked, the answer becomes a more concise and comprehensive assessment of the question. For that reason, its a-okay in my book for newcomers to this field to ask redundant questions.

    However, you'd probably save yourself some time (if that's a priority) by looking at a variety of information sources and drawing your own conclusions.

    As for the lenses; from an economy standpoint, you can pick up a 90mm Angulon for maybe $100 to $150. Super angulons will be quite more expensive, correct me if I'm wrong. From what I understand, they simply don't allow any movements on 4x5", for full frame coverage. Used 'straight on' I think they are a fully capable wide-angle for 4x5. Besides... it'd be a fun exercise to effect perspective in the printing stage; something I've always wanted to try.
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    951
    My friend gave me his 65mm SA, i thought it will be so big or heave lens, but i found it that it is just normal weight and it is not that much heavier than my Rodenstock Sironar-N 150mm, i am going to buy 75mm SA lens, that 65mm is not good to use with my Shen Hao, he is using Sinar, so i am going with few lenses, i know that i didn't use 75mm to decide, but i have a big feeling that 75mm will work more or better on Shen Hao than 65mm, and i really don't know what is the difference between a Super Angulon and a Angulon but i think i am not buying many lenses, so SA will be my choice.

  8. #18
    Tony-S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    718
    Images
    14
    On the subject of Angulons and wars (and at the risk of a thread-jack), does anyone have info on this beast?

    Edit: Found a web site that says my serial number makes it an October 1954 lens.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails angulon-1.jpg   angulon-2.jpg  
    Last edited by Tony-S; 03-21-2011 at 11:40 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #19
    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
    Looks like a good 210mm Angulon to me - and if you think that is a beast, look at a 210mm SA!

    The 210mm Angulon is a very capable lens. As designed it covers 24x30cm with movements, and I can personally attest that it can be used on 30x40cm (12x16") at small apertures - albeit with somewhat soft corners.
    -- 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  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin