choice of wide angle lenses for crown graphic

ill be using the lens for 4x5 scenics, and around town building

shots and etc.. ill also be using it for a standard lenght 6x9

roll back lens on the crown for whatever comes up.. my choices seem

to be point to a 65mmx 5.6 single coated schneider for about 550-

600. a mutlicoated version of the same lens for aprox 700 or little

more.... or a new 58mm xl for about 1100 bucks.. i dont shoot

much any more , so dont want to pay alot of money but 700 seems an

alot of money for a used lens when i can buy a new xl for 1100.. the

problem is that- is a 58 xl going to be a good lens for my purpous

(sp)? your input will be apreciated...thanks in advance, dave..

700 $ for a SA 65/5.6 MC seems excessive to me - I very recently bought one in mint condition (a recent one engraved "Linhof" on a Sinar plate) for the equivalent of 322 $ on ebay Germany.

 

I think they shouldn't be too rare, because photographers with some money replace them with the XLs because of their much wider image circle.

 

I had to ask the forum members with experiences with this lens about the center filter: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CWUV

 

If you would like to shoot architecture on 4x5" you might have problems with the limited movements of the SA 65/5.6. According to Schneider you can shift vertically 12 and horizontally 10 mm. I'll use the lens mainly for architectural interiors and therefor I can do with little or no movements. I would fancy a lot the 72 mm XL for extreme movements (church facades...), but I can't even dream of it - I only occasionaly can make a few bucks with my photographs...

P.S.:

 

I wonder why the Super Angulons XL 47 and 58 have exactly the same image circle... For architecture on 4x5" I would hesitate to go for them because of the very limited movements (I could only replace my 65/5.6 for interiors...), while the 72 XL offers some movements even on 5x7" ...

to me the movements that the 72 has is just marginally over the image size of the 65mm sa 5.6 if any over at all.. why not just take the photo with the 65mm and crop to the part of the photo you want and skip the time setting up for the shift? also the crown will probably just focus at a little under infinity with the longer lens.. where the 65mm will fit in the box on the inner rails and give me some closer than infinity latitude with the bed down.. when in the crown box their can be no movements to speak of becouse lensboard is captivatated inside that box. 12 mm is about right.. out side the box very far i would be on the exterior rails and couldnt drop the bed.. and it would be in the wide angle photo. so its a catch 22. iv had a big camera and do not wish to go that rout as i cant get the gear and family in the car when on vacation, the main reason for the 4x5 for me. did any one say glacier, or yellowsotne park??.. even with a truck for that matter noone will ride in back for several hundred miles.. but i do appreciate your input and would like to discuss the probabliliteds of the 72 xl on the crown and if it would be feasable.. ive asked this before, but has anyone used the 72 xl on the crown?.. cost as mentioned above would be more yet im guessing than the 58xl. dave..

<p><i>"I wonder why the Super Angulons XL 47 and 58 have exactly the same image circle... </i>" I think the 58 mm SA-XL came out first, with about the same coverage as the other Super-Angulon-XL models. For the 47 mm SA-XL, Schneider did their utmost to extend the coverage to be sufficient to cover 4x5 with very slight movements. If the coverage of the 47 mm SA-XL had been insufficient for 4x5 (e.g., the same angular coverage as the 58 mm SA-XL), sales would have been much reduced.</p>

yikes! the 72 xl is over 1500.00. anyway here are the flange distances i come up with on my crown.. .. all the way in with bed down shortest- flang distance on the crown is about 53mm to the fresnell..... perched on the very outside of the inner rails not completly on the inner rails but pretty solid and with maximum extention is 108mm flange distance to fresnell.. with the bed down and the lens board on the rails and the slide all the way in- the lens starts hitting the inner rails at 117mm.. in this mode the lens board raised is all the way up to be level with the center of the fresnell. so there is no upper movements with bed down and lens on outer rails.... on the inner rail i can raise the lensboard one inch if it is 82 mm from the lensboard.. .. it would seem to me in my ameture way of thinking that this camera is best suited to the 58 to 65 mm lens best........ The 58xl flange distance at infinity and f22 is 69mm, the 65mm is 72.5, the 72 xl is 82.2.. to use the movements on the 72 xl i could only be focused at infinity, and i douubt i could move it much becouse it would start to hit the bellows inside the camera.. the rear element size on a 72 xl is 75 mm, quite a bit larger than the 65mm which is 57mm.. i could raise the 65m one inch but would loose 1/2 inch on the negative.. at infinity i could also use an ofsett lensboard to get 1/2-3/4 inch rise inside the box.. about if i need the height i dont see a problem with this as the bottom 1/2 inch could be cropped.. i would be very curios to find out what focus range the 65mm 5.6 is in the 108mm to 117mm void that i will have on the crown.. actually i could do this area with the bed up and have some movements, and crop off the lensboard that is in the shot.. giving me somewhere in the range of a 3x5 or so.. which is not the end of the world to me.. i also just looked at the maximum rise with my 135 rodenstock symar s set at 82 mm flange distance to fresnell,, and 3/4 nch rise is all can get until the rear cap hits the bellows.. the rodenstockwith rear cap on is 57 mm the same as the rear of the 65mm 5.6 lens.. i know this is very hard reading but maybe some of you can figgure out with me if the 65mm is my best choice in this situation. dave..

I just got my Graphic Graflex Photography(1958)book by Morgan & Morgan down. I thought 90mm (they say = 3 1/2" {88.55mm})was the limit and for the 4x5 Crown Graphic that is the wide angle lens listed. This would be a "normal" lens for your 6x9 rollfilm back and wide for the 4x5 cut film.

 

Of course you will be able to mount others but dropping the bed has its limits too.

 

Hope this is of some help, Paul

yes paul you got me thinking and i have a 90mm.. i wanted a wide angle for 6x9 lynhoff back i have for the crown.... thats how little i shoot any more.. a 65mm would be a little wider on a 6x9 than a 55mm would be on a 6x6.. so that is what i want.. im not very excited about the quality of the 55mm mamia twin lens' resolution so i was going to put my money into the 65mm schnieder and kill two birds with one stone.. dave..

Dave, for 6x9 I can recommend the 58mm focal length, though I would think you will run into bed clipping on a crown graphic even with a dropped bed.

 

I will attempt to attach an image I took using a Rodenstock Grandagon 58mm on a Graflex XL and 6x9 film, Sold the camera and have the lens today.

 

Paul<div></div>

Paul, the shortest lens I shoot on my Century -- Dave, this is a plastic-bodied version of the 2x3 Crown -- is a 38/4.5 Biogon. It doesn't put image in the corners, but it more than covers vertically. When I drop the bed, I don't get a hint of bed in the pictures I take with it.

 

My second-shortest lens for the Century is a 47/5.6 Super Angulon. It puts good image in the corners, works just fine with dropped bed.

 

Third shortest for the Century is a 65/8 Ilex. It makes infinity on my 2x3 Pacemaker Speed as well as on the Century, fills the frame with good image, and requires that the bed be dropped.

 

The shortest lens I use on my Speed is a 1.75"/2.8 Elcan in barrel. Yes, 44 mm. Same situation as the 38 Biogon. No image in the corners, no bed in the image when I remember to drop the bed.

 

A person who posted on the www.graflex.org help board as notmpp reported good success with a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon on his Century.

 

Paul, modern w/a lenses can have greater flange-to-film distances at infinity than the ones available when the last edition of Graphic Graflex Photography was published. And when a nice modern lens can be obtained ...

 

Dave, take the hint and go to the right place for help with Graphics.

 

Regards,

Sure Dan, there are always exceptions but I am sure you would agree that a great place to start is the manufacturers guidelines. We can mount any lens that will fit on the lensboard but that does not mean it will cover corners. But when Dave goes to 6x9 format he has changed the lens rules and can play with little lenses from little camera or even go pin hole and use no lens at all. . .Paul

Paul, yeah, sort of, I guess.

 

But Graphics are so flexible that its hard to restrict 'em to standard-issue lenses from the '50s. And its hard to use 'em only as if they were big Leicas. They can do more. And we now have lenses that weren't available when Graphics were in production. I mean, your 160/5.6 Pro Raptar isn't on the recommended list.

 

Regards,

 

Dan

Ah Dan, the blue faced Pro Raptars are secret. . .