110mm/5.6 Super-Symmar XL v. 120mm/5.6 HM

Hello all:

 

For you pros, besides the IC, the obvious FL, and lens volume what are the main

differences between these lenses, if any?

 

Can you tell me what is 110mm and 120mm in 135mm format? I have conflicting

info. I have heard that the 110mm is anywhere between a 25mm-30mm in 135

format. My 110mm appears to coordinate with my Leica 35mm summicron lens.

However, we know that the Leica 35mm is not exactly full frame.

 

Help is appreciated. Thanks - Paul

They do not translate exactly as the length/width ratios of 4x5 and 35mm are different.

If you compare 2x3 to ( .66x4) by 5, you will get one answer. If you compare 24x30 to

4x5 you will get a different one.

 

Go back to Pythagoras or however we spelled it in high school. length squared + height

squared equals hypotenuse squared. Keep all the units of measure the same in both

formats. 1" equals 25mm.

 

A starter, 24x36 diagonal is 42mm, the focal length of a normal lens. 150 is normal for

4x5 cropped to 2x3 ratio. 150mm divided by 42 =3.57. The same ratio for 110 is

30.8mm, just about what i found when measuring my 35mm zoom against 4x5 with a

110 on it.

 

You do the rest of the math using what exact formats you wish. Compare diagonal to

diagonal.

As Ronald wrote, the two formats don't have the same aspect ratios, so there isn't a single comparison. Typically people use the diagonal as a compromise.

 

The dimensions of 135 are 24 x 35 mm, of 4x5 95 x 120 mm. The diagonals are thus 43 and 153 mm, making the ratio by this measure 3.5. So 110 mm in 4x5 would be about 31 mm in 135 equivalent, 120 about 34 mm. If you go by the short or long sides, you will get slightly different results.

 

What focal lengths do you have now? You might consider the focal length spacing that you want. If you have trouble deciding between 110 and 120 mm, it might be better to get the wider since you can also crop, but you can't add on.

Valuable advice. Thank you.

 

Presently I have the 110mm Super XL ASPH [huge piece of glass]. Comparatively, I wanted 28-30mm in 135 format. Appears I am on track. Balancing out my 2-lens kit a Nikkor-W 210mm.

 

Thanks again - Paul

32 and 34mm

Keep in mind the 110SS is one of the best lenses ever made.

 

It also takes 67mm filters.

 

I am not sure I would call that huge.

Both lenses are smaller than the traditional 120mm Super-Angulon or equivalent lens that they replaced (only for 4x5 use in the case of the HM). I would not call them huge either. The HM 120mm is slightly longer than the 110Xl (80.3 vs. 60mm), whereas the 110 XL is heavier than the 120HM (425 vs. 370g for Copal shutters), mostly because the 120mm HM uses a Copal 0 vs. the Copal 1 of the 110mm XL. Both use 67mm filters. I own both lenses and both are superb. If the image circle is not a point, I would say within its image circle the HM is a tad sharper at f/16 or wider open than the XL. No discernible difference at f/22.

If you crop your 35mm to 4x5 aspect ration then the conversion factor is x4.2 (i.e. the 110 is a 26mm)

 

However if you crop your 4x5 to 3x2 ratio then the conversion factor is 3.5 (i.e. the 110 is 31mm)

 

However, 4x5 isn't quite 4x5 so I use 4x for the first ratio and 3.35x which gets your 110 pretty close to your 35 (actually 33)..

 

Tim