Choosing (calculating) tele-lens for 4x5 system

<p>Due recent posts about completing "3 lens system" I would like to hear from you what do

you think what may be "fine" complete in my situation.</p>

<p><i>Well, I know that it is up to photographer, his personal decision... his budget, his

preferable, his jobs... but any "more experienced" opinion on this topic may help me.</i></p>

<p>I have stared building my system few months ago (4x5 sinar) with 135mm Symmar (old

one). Now I'w got 90mmm Super-Angulon (old, chrome, f=1:8) and I'm thinking of buying some

lens which may be called "moderate tele lens". I was thinking of 240 G-Claron, but my

"instructor" (really friendly seller) is "pushing" me to buy some 300mm lens, of course, he did

suggest me an Apo-Sinaron but he realized that this lens will go far beyond my budget so he

have found one older and cheaper Apo-Ronnar. I don't know the specs of that particular lens - I

have to wait for him to get back to country. In the mean vile I have found one G-Claron, but

much shorter: 210mm in Copal 1 for about 300 Euros (some 320 USD, I think)...</p>

<p>One more think - main purpose of that lens will be (about 60% of shots, I believe) "macro",

or better to say "1:1 photography" (+/-, depending on subject).</p>

<p>90-135-210 is about 1:1.5, but looks to me a little bit short at the end. Like I will need some

"315" (305/355) lens soon. Sure, that is just my personal feeling, and worst in mine situation is

that it is totally unexperienced. I have never seen lens longer than 150mm... And I live in country

where we can not rent lens...</p>

<p>Any comment and suggestion will be blessed :-))</p>

<p>Tnx, Janko.</p>

Janko: Hard to make a suggestion without knowing what you want to photograph...but I think that since your 135 is a little on the short side of normal I certainly would not skip over the 210 and go all the way to 240. I'm a big fan of the 240 mm G Claron, but if I only had three lenses I would have difficulty with that big gap between the the 135 and the 240. I'd go for a 180 or a 210. The 207mm Ektar is a very inexpensive lens which performs very well. The 210 Claron would, of course, be just the ticket for the close ups you are planning. Good luck.

I agree that it is difficult to make a recommendation based on lack of knowledge of what you want to photograph. It is fairly common for many photographers to double the preceding lens focal length. So it would normally be 90 mm for instance, then something in the 150-180 focal length, then something in the 300 mm length. Since your 135 is outside of that parameter I would think that something in the 300 mm length would still be in order. By way of another lens in that length outside of the higher cost selections is the 305 mm RepoClaron. I have this lens in my 4X5 system and it is very sharp when stopped down. It has less coverage then the G Claron but I have not had coverage problems at any time with this lens. I spoke to Schneider before I bought it and they said it made an excellent long lens for 4X5. These lenses do come up on Ebay at times and are relatively reasonable insofar as the cost.

The first thing to look at, Janko, is the maximum extension possible on your bellows if you are going to be doing a lot of 1:1 shots. Remember, you'll need 2x the focal length to reach 1:1. You don't say which Sinar you have, but the P2, for example, only extends to 457mm with the standard bellows and the optional rail extension. Thus, you might need a longer bellows for anything over 210mm for 1:1.

The angle of view for a given focal length lens is the the angle that the film can "see" when that lens is used. Mathmatically:

 

View_angle = 2*arctan((format_dimension/2)/focal_length)

 

Using 120mm for the format_dimension (the 5 in 4x5), your 90mm lens lets the film see 68 degrees. Your 135mm lens lets the film see 48 degrees, or 20 degrees less.

 

A 240mm lens lets the film see 28 degrees, or another 20 degrees less. If you want equal steps between lenses, the 240mm is just the ticket.

 

I would suggest a Fujinon-A 240mm f/9. Like the G Clarion it's a process lens. Does great as a macro lens, is tack sharp from 1:1 out to infinity, and it's compact and light weight. They show up fairly frequently on the used market and on eBay.

<p>Well, with this lens (which ever will be) I will do mostly 2 "kind of shots" (sorry on my clumsy

english). That will be food (mostly real close-up shots) and <i>"church dishes"</i> (don't know

the word... maybe something with <i>"goldsmith")</i> like chalice, monstrance... That will be at

least 60% of my work with that lens. the other 40% will be nature... landscapes and on-location

macro.<br>

For bellows extension - I have Sinar F (also called F1) with 60cm of rails with 2 MP bellows

(could make 90cm of extension If I get longer rail).</p>

<p>One more additional info: I'm using mostly strobes (2400 J in total) or just ordinary

torch.<br> The mentioned dishes might be <i>"church vessels"</i> according to summary form

one museum catalog...<p>

Janko,

 

First, your english is just fine so, no need to keep apologizing...

 

Second, "Chalise" is a good word that describes your subject matter. Also, I

think "Eucharistic Objects" is a reasonable term for the general items found in

a religious Altar or Church... -Just a thought...

 

Third, my only lens right now is 135 mm . I recently viewed through a 240 mm

lens and it is quite nice. Given that I have a field camera and the bellows are

of-course, limited, it seems that a 90, 135, 180 and 240 would cover any

possible situation (for my style of photography). Only time will tell though,

what lenses are most useful...