Schneider-Kreuznach Lenses

Discussion in 'Large Format' started by steve_stracquodaine|1, Jul 31, 2011.

  1. Hello. Just got an older Linhof Color (I think 6x9) view camera on monorail and with 3 Schneider-Kreuznach Technika lenses. The Linhof is too big and clumsy for me to take into the field. If I sell the Linhof Color and use the cash to pick up a field camera which I think is more manageable for me. So my question is whether I can still use the 3 lenses that I have. They are a Symmar 1:5.6/135mm, Symmar 1:5.6/240mm and Super Angulon 1:8/65mm. Thanks, Steve
     
  2. Hi Steve,
    Those are all good lenses. The 135mm would be considered a "normal" lens for 4x5 film, while the 65mm is a wide angle and the 240 an moderate telephoto. A good selection for a basic lens kit.
    The basic question of lens/camera compatibility for large formats is the "flange focal length" (FFL) of the lens and the bellows draw of the camera.
    The FFL is the distance from the film to the front of the lensboard when the camera is focused at infinity, i.e. that is the shortest distance between the two. FFL is related to, but not the same as, the lens focal length. You can find the FFL on any spec sheet for all large format lenses.
    Similarly, you can find the maximum and minimum bellows draw for any large format camera on the camera spec sheet.
    As long as your FFL is greater than the minimum draw, the system will focus at infinity.
    The close focus distance is determined by the maximum bellows draw. As the subject gets closer, the lens moves farther from the film. For a full-size image (1:1 ratio), the lens must extend forward from its infinity focus position by a distance equal to its focal length.
    - Leigh
     
  3. All of your lenses will work with 4x5 film, but the 65mm f/8 was really designed for 2x3 format. It will cover 4x5 if you stop down to about f/22. There is a very slight amount of vignetting if you use it wide open. I think you could also buy a center filter, but you'll still be shooting around f/11 or f/16, and it will be more difficult to shoot with. You'd be better off with either a Nikon 65mm f/4 or Schneider 65mm f/5.6. I would give it a try to see what you think.
     
  4. 65mm is a VERY wide lens for 4x5. If you want to go this wide, follow Michael's advice ( Fujinon-SW 65/5.6 and Rodenstock Grandagon65/5.6 are first class lenses too).
    I'd suggest something in the 75mm range - still very wide, but more room for movements.
    I have 65mm, 80mm and 90mm wide angle lenses and find myself using the 65mm lens very seldom.
     
  5. I have 65mm, 75mm, and 90mm, and like you, I seldom use the two shorter ones.
    I was simply commenting on the lenses the OP already has, not making suggestions for future acquisitions.
    - Leigh
     
  6. Thank you for your responses. Although I am an old dog at photography (35mm and medium format) this large format stuff is a new language for me. If 65mm is too wide for a 4x5, then I wonder why the previous owner had this lens in his kit. I suppose I could sell the 65, but what I would really like to do is to sell the Linhof Color and buy a nice 4x5 field camera that is not as unwieldly as a 4x5 camera on a monorail. I was able to find a copy of the Linhof's owner's manual on the internet, but I really need to read more before I can attempt to use this camera. Steve
     
  7. Yes, studio monorails are not well suited for field use IM[-H]O. :D
    I expect you could get a decent price for the Linhof and buy a good field camera with the proceeds.
    The 155mm image circle of that 65mm lens is a hair too small for 4x5. While you might be able to use it, you would have no movements available.
    It would be a fine choice, with a narrower angle of view and some movements possible, on a smaller format.
    - Leigh
     
  8. If 65mm is too wide for a 4x5, then I wonder why the previous owner had this lens in his kit.
    In your original posting, you said your camera was 6x9?
    With regard to wide angle lenses for large format, most amateurs (i.e. people who take pictures for fun) will find they never need anything wider than 65 mm for 6x9 cm or 90 mm for 4x5 inches. Pros, particularly architectural photographers, have to get shots under all circumstances and will therefore invest in costly ultra-wide angles.
    Suggestion re gear - if your present camera is 6x9 and you have rollfilm holders for this size, the simplest way would be to sell the Linhof Color and buy a 6x9 Linhof Technika (great but expensive) or a 2x3 [inch] Century Graphic (a little less versatile, excellent quality and probably available for not much more than you would get for the Linhof Color).
     
  9. what I would really like to do is to sell the Linhof Color and buy a nice 4x5 field camera that is not as unwieldly as a 4x5 camera on a monorail​
    There are many 4x5 field cameras from different manufacturers available, wood or metal, folding or not folding design, new and/or used, like Tachihara, Wista, Shen-Hao, Chamonix, Speed/Crown Graphic, Canham, Ebony, Lotus, Deardorff, Walker, Gandolfi, Horseman, Toyo.... just to mention a few. Some are not in production anymore, some are very expensive.
    There's a lot of information here in PN or in the web.
     
  10. "There are many 4x5 field cameras from different manufacturers available, wood or metal, folding or not folding design, new and/or used, like Tachihara, Wista, Shen-Hao, Chamonix, Speed/Crown Graphic, Canham, Ebony, Lotus, Deardorff, Walker, Gandolfi, Horseman, Toyo..."
    And, of course, Linhof. With the current Master Technika Classis and the Master Technika 3000 as well as the recently discontinued 2000 and the Technikardan 45 S and its older version the Technikardan 45.
    But you already have an early Linhof field camera which was made from a Technika front and rear standard mounted to a rail if you have a Linhof Color 69. Are you sure that is what you have It weighed 2.5kg (about 5.5 lb)
     
  11. You can figure out the size of your camera by measuring the open area of a film holder (did it come with some?) or the ground class. Is it about 6 x 9 cm or 4 x 5 inches? These two sizes are different enough that they are easy to distinguish. The lens selection seems more plausible to me for 4x5 but that isn't conclusive.
    Are the shutters working well? They might need a service (cleaning, lube, adjustment) ... the oil dries with age.
     
  12. "There are many 4x5 field cameras from different manufacturers available, wood or metal, folding or not folding design, new and/or used, like Tachihara, Wista, Shen-Hao, Chamonix, Speed/Crown Graphic, Canham, Ebony, Lotus, Deardorff, Walker, Gandolfi, Horseman, Toyo..."
    And, of course, Linhof. With the current Master Technika Classis and the Master Technika 3000 as well as the recently discontinued 2000 and the Technikardan 45 S and its older version the Technikardan 45.
    But you already have an early Linhof field camera which was made from a Technika front and rear standard mounted to a rail if you have a Linhof Color 69. Are you sure that is what you have It weighed 2.5kg (about 5.5 lb)
     
  13. 6x9cm seems an odd size for a monorail, since most photographers want the extra quality of 5x4 or 10x12cm if they're going to bother with a studio camera. Plus most 6x9s use a rollfilm back rather than cut filmholders.
    Can you post a picture of exactly what you've got Steve?
     
  14. 6x9cm seems an odd size for a monorail​
    What ? Not at all! Linhof, Cambo, Arca Swiss and others all made/make medium format monorail cameras. They are excellent for studio work. In fact there is even greater emphasis on MF technical cameras now as platforms for either film or digital capture. That roll film holders have been made for half a century, for just about every large format camera (excluding wooden stuff) also blows away any idea of it being "odd". The Linhof Color may have been the odd man out at the time, simply because Linhof were pioneers in this concept, as they were with the Technika, which has been copied by others, from Tinseltown to Tokyo.
    Today's top of the range, 6x9 Monorail, Linhof M 679cs which is the current descendant of the Linhof Color
     
  15. I have to thank everyone for taking the time to share their thoughts about my Linhof view camera. It's definitely a monorail. The focusing glass has two sets of squares etched on it. The smaller set reads 56 x 72 and the larger set of lines reads 9 x 12. Besides the name Linhof the only other markings on the frame of the camera are the letters DBP and West-Germany. There is a S/No. on the cold shoe. The shutter on the Symmar 135mm/f5.6 lens seems to work fine down to 30th sec, but at 15th sec and slower the shutter doesn't close. There is a small lever on the lens that I have no idea as to its function. For the Super-Angulon 65mm/f8 lens, the shutter is also erratic below 30th sec. As I actuate the shutter, it seems to be improving, but still not right. The shutter on the Symmar 240mm/f5.6 seems to be working fine. My idea was to sell the Linhof and buy a nice folding 4x5 field camera and use any of the 3 lenses that would work with a 4x5 field camera. Any lens that I could not use, i would sell. But now I don't want to put money into CLA'ing the shutters on the 135 and 65 lenses, so now I'm thinking to just list the whole kit. I'm not sure what to do.
    00Z8Fk-385751584.jpg
     
  16. It is only with your last posting that it becomes clear what size your camera is! It is 9x12cm/4x5 inches, and a 4x5 monorail is quite a handful in the field (and a Linhof Color is bulky compared with other 4x5 monorails). As regards selling/keeping lenses, the 135 Symmar would be the most useful for 4x5 but offers little scope for camera movements, the 240 Symmar would be next most useful as a long focus-lens with plenty of coverage for movements (the previous owner probably used it in the studio for still-lives - "pack shots", etc.), and the 65 Super Angulon is the least useful (too wide for most purposes, as others have said needs to be stopped right down to cover 4x5). If lenses/shutters require a CLA, this will reflect what you can sell them for, probably having them CLA'd yourself and then selling them would make you more money, if people buy something that's not working properly, they factor the costs of a worst-case repair into the price they're willing to pay.
    In terms of an ideal 4x5 field outfit, you would probably be best off selling everything (except maybe the 240) and buying a wooden camera with 150 and 90 lenses. There are lots of threads on photo.net about choosing 4x5 field cameras, the debate is usually between those (like me) who favor the inexpensive, lightweight, robust but slightly limiting Speed/Crown Graphic and those who prefer full-feature Canham, Shen Hao etc. models. Either of these two options would be dramatically lighter and more compact than your monorail.
     
  17. Dave,
    Excellent answer. I have a camera repair shop not far from me (Koh's Camera). I know he works on Leica and Rollei but not sure if he works on Large Format lenses. I will ask him for a quote to CLA these lenses. The Linhof is in nice shape and probably 99% complete, but I think it's missing a few minor items (no focusing hood, no loupe, no cable release (all minor things) but not sure if there is a film back on this camera. i just don't know enough about view cameras. I could always bring everything to B&H Photo large format department and ask them what I need to make this set up worl. Also, would love to trade the whole kit in for one of the field cameras you mentioned or to pick up either a Linhof or Fuji 6x12 pano camera (Hassy X-Pan II would be nice too) but I wonder if this kit can generate enough cash. We'll see. A friend of my cousin's uses an 8x10 camera and absolutely loves it. I can't imagine carrying something that big into the field when I'm so used to medium format (Hassy 503CW, Mamiya C330S and a variety of my 35mm shooters). This has been a real learning experience for me. I am so grateful to the Photo.net community. Thank you all.
    00Z8Mq-385891584.jpg
     
  18. Just one more silly question for David. If the camera's ground glass is etched with 6x9 guide marks, then how can this also be a 4x5 camera? 6cm X 9CM = about 2.36" X 3.54" which is way short of 4x5. Please let me know. Thanks again, Steve
     
  19. Steve, there are 6x9 roll holders that fit 4x5 cameras. That's why y'r Linhof Color has two sets of frame lines etched on its ground glass.
     
  20. Hi Steve, Glad to hear we are getting to grips with your query! Firstly, CLA – for any experienced repairman, servicing a leaf (or “interlens” or “Compur” or “Copal”) shutter is a routine operation. Secondly, “missing” parts – the focusing hood on the Linhof is missing, this means trying to find another one and focusing with a black cloth over your head until you do. Bit awkward but not a deal-breaker. A 4x5” focusing hood does not routinely include a loupe – most times large format (LF) photographers hold one in the hand (and will need to remove the focusing hood to be able to lay the loupe on the screen). I personally do not use loupes – I feel they give a great view of the grain of the ground glass screen but think I can focus better without one. Cable releases are routinely bought as accessory items – easy to find (standard fitting for all leaf shutters). Back to the focusing hood for a second – rather than use a hood or a black cloth, a particularly elegant solution is a viewer (either monocular or binocular) which is essentially a box with a 45 degree mirror and an eyepiece for either one or two eyes – really good for viewing the screen under bright conditions outside.
    The camera back (like almost all modern 4x5 backs) is a “Graflok” type, invented by the Graflex Corp. back in the 1940s. This can be pushed away from the camera on spring-loaded arms to insert a 4x5 filmholder, just as in the case of the older-style “spring” back, but also allows these arms to be pushed down to disengage the hooks on the end from recessed pins, allowing the whole screen and holder to be removed. This can then be replaced by 120 rollfilm holders in a variety of formats such as 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, 6x12, and also by instant-film backs or even a digital back, which are secured by 2 sliding bars. The scribe marks on the screen are to help framing when using a rollfilm back (RFB). As you can see, a regular 4x5 field camera plus a 6x12 RFB will do everything that a dedicated panoramic camera can do for much less cost!
    Glad to help with any further questions!
     
  21. Steve, if you post the serial number that is on the accessory shoe then I can tell you exactly which Linhof you have and when it was made.
    The back on your camera accepts the Linhof Folding Fousing Hood, the Linhof Focus/Metering Bellows and the Linhof Right Angle Reflex Housing. But the least expensive of these, the Folding Focusing Hood, is $666.00 list. So you might want to look for a used one since that is more then your camera is worth. Jimmy Koh has cable releases and loupes in stock and could also have one of the viewing accessories as well. Be aware though, to use either the Focus/Metering Bellows or the Right Angle Reflex Housing you must also have a Fresnel screen installed. You would probably want one installed anyway. Jimmy can show you where it goes and what it does.
     
  22. Steve, a view camera with just a ground glass will be brighter in the center and get very dark toward the edges, regardless of the speed of the lens. The Fresnel or "field lens" evens the spread of light out over the entire viewing area. This is especially important when using a metering bellows which lets you meter directly through the ground glass or with a reflex viewer. There are some special screens that are available or were available for view cameras like the Linhof Super Screen, the Beattie screen the Boss Screen and some others that offered an "enhanced" viewing and brightened the ground glass and evened the spread of light across it as compred to the normal groundglass. As your camera seems to have both the 6x9 and 9x12 frame markings it is a pretty sure bet that you do not have one of those enhanced screens. But it is also possible that your camera already has an older Fresnel lens installed under the ground glass. Jimmy will be able to tell you if that is the case. But do bear in mind, the current ground glasses and Fresnel screens are much brighter then the ones used when your camera was made.
    Another very important note for critical focusing. Make sure that whatever type of reflex viewer you might try that it has a front surface mirror rather then a standard type mirror. Front surface mirrors are very expensive but if you don't use one you will be out of focus by the thickness of the glass used for the mirror. Front surface mirrors are also very fragile as you clean the actual mirrored coating when you touch it rather then a cover glass.
     
  23. I believe this camera is called a Color Kardan or maybe it's "Kardan Color". In a lot of ways (but probably to over simplify) it is Linhof Technika standards put on a monorail. Monorail cameras currently don't seem to have much value on the resale market. Field cameras seem to be what the market wants now.
    On a typical monorail, all of the controls are out in the open where they're easy to find. The knobs and locks are big and secure. A monorail is a great camera to use when learning large format. If you're new to large format, I would encourage you to use this camera for a while. Find out if composing upside down is OK for you, what lenses you like, and what movements you find yourself using. You'll learn a lot, and if LF is really for you, you'll have some good ideas what to look for if you still need a field camera. If this camera is in good shape, you'll get spoiled by the quality!
    Remember that even if you have a camera body that's a bit lighter and smaller, you still need the tripod, the meter, the film holders, dark cloth, etc. You've got some bulk to deal with in any case.
    Have fun!
     
  24. If the camera has a one piece monorail and rear rise it is a Kardan Color. If it is the earlier version with a one piece rail and no rear rise it is the Linhof Color.
     
  25. Thanks Guys. All good advice. I'll shoot for this Saturday at Jimmy Koh's. I know him a while. My friend had a studio and I worked with him for many years shooting weddings and other events. We always shopped at Koh's. The S/No. on the cold shoe reads: 2622049. The monorail seems to be one piece and the rear does go up and down. The S/No. should reveal if this is a Kardan Color or a Color. Wonder why Linhof called it a "color?"
     
  26. Just a final word about fresnel screens – LF photographers managed without them for 100 years, so they are far from essential. I would say that they are superfluous in viewing situations in which ambient light is totally excluded (such as viewing with a dark cloth over your head or using a monocular/binocular viewer). Fresnel screens are very useful when you are viewing a screen out of doors via a focusing hood and have your face 2 feet or more from the screen. The downside of fresnel screens is that they can work too well – they can give an even viewing image even in cases where the camera lens concerned is vignetting (darkening its image towards the edges). In fact, with a fresnel screen fitted, it is very hard to spot when a lens is running out of coverage.
    In the end it is a matter of taste – some LF photographers like to contemplate their focusing screens for a long time and even carry out critical focusing at taking aperture (e.g. f16, 22 or smaller) – if you do this, you will need all the help you can get from a fresnel screen. Others (including me) focus at full aperture, use camera movements to get most of the depth of field they require and then simply stop down to f16 or 22 without re-checking the focus. Among very old lenses, problems may be encountered such as focus shift on stopping down or wide-angle lenses cheerfully engraved “f6.3 for focusing only”, where the sharpness at full aperture was poor and not representative of stopped-down performance, but today’s WA lenses such as the Super Angulon, Symmar XL, Nikkor SW etc. do not do this.
     
  27. "Just a final word about fresnel screens – LF photographers managed without them for 100 years, s"
    Fresnel screens, or Kodak Ektalite Field Lenses, have been used on view cameras since at least the 1950s. They simply make viewing and composing much easier.
    however, there are some third party enhanced viewing screen systems which can create problems, especially if you do noy keep your eye centered in the optical axis. Smaller format cameras, 35mm 6x45, 6x6, 6x7, etc. all have a fresnel type system in the viewing system.
     
  28. Fresnel screens, or Kodak Ektalite Field Lenses, have been used on view cameras since at least the 1950s.
    Absolutely! The 100 years I was referring to was from 1839 to 1950 (to be exact. that is of course 111 years :)).
     
  29. That also means that most modern photographers have had the benefit of them. Many of those old photographers also transferred their equipment by mule cart and Conestoga wagons. They could't drive or fly. Jusy because Brady didn't have access to a modern piece of equipment or to an approvement to his equipment means that we have to also do without it. And he would probably have been first in line to add it to his equipment if it had been available and he was solvent at the time.
     
  30. Bob, it really is a matter of horses for courses. In many years of professional LF studio photography, I used cameras with plain ground glass screens. As the camera back in this situation is outside the lit area, I found I could see the screen image perfectly well, as indeed I could and can, even at the age of 62, in any situation where the camera screen is in darkness (which is the case in the studio and even outside with a monocular or bincocular viewer). I'd rather have a plain screen than a bright screen which does not accurately represent what will find its way onto the film - of course I'd fit a bright screen if I was using an exposure metering system that was calibrated for one. I do have a Beattie screen in my Crown Graphic - since this has limited movements, I do not have the problem of trying to judge lens coverage by viewing the screen.
     
  31. The fresnel does accurately show what will go on film. It lets you see evenly into the corners but, if the lens has fall-off it also shows that as well. And if a lens vignettes it also shows that.
    The below statement is just plain wrong.
    ". I'd rather have a plain screen than a bright screen which does not accurately represent what will find its way onto the film "
     
  32. Bob. the Linhof S/No. is: 2622049
    Any insight would be appreciated. I'd really like to know which model this is and approximately what year it was made.
    Thanks, Steve
     
  33. That is a Kardan Color 45 made in about 1966
     
  34. The fresnel does accurately show what will go on film. It lets you see evenly into the corners but, if the lens has fall-off it also shows that as well. And if a lens vignettes it also shows that.
    The below statement is just plain wrong.
    ". I'd rather have a plain screen than a bright screen which does not accurately represent what will find its way onto the film "
    Bob, I am SO sorry that I don't agree with you! Have it your way - I know what works for me.
     
  35. Then why not state why it doesn't work for you?
     
  36. Well,my eyes are 63 turns around the sun. I put my 65/8 Super-Angulon on a self-constructed 6x12 camera, scale-focused , so no worries about focusing brightness either.
    I really like my SA 90/8,and can focus it just fine on 4x5.It would be the one lens I would put a fresnel lens behind,but I would buy a $6.00 plastic model from Office Supplies.
    Anything longer - fresnel,what fresnel?
    You have a good 4x5 setup as it stands.
     
  37. Bob, pardon me for asking a slightly personal question, but in your photo.net profile you state your main activity as being associated with marketing and distribution. Is it the case that you have gained most of your (obviously extensive) product knowledge from reading catalogs and handling equipment in showrooms rather than from everyday professional practice? Knowing this would help me to understand where you are coming from.
    As regards stating why I don’t use fresnel screens – I have mentioned this in previous postings, but to recap briefly: Experience with the camera (Nikon F3) for which I have the most different screens (6 or 7) indicates that a fresnel screen gives increased viewfinder brightness with standard or near-standard lenses of large aperture. As the lens parameters move away from these (long-focus lenses, high-magnification macro, extreme wide angle, small apertures, lens off-axis due to camera movements), things like fresnel rings, microprisms, spilt-image rangefinders, etc. become less useful and even darken and therefore get in the way. Interestingly, my Leitz Visoflexes, specially made for the cases such as long-focus lenses etc. mentioned above, all have a plain ground glass screen which is not as bright as a fresnel but is equally good for all optical conditions.
    It has been my experience that the same principles apply to LF photography – on the one hand, as I said, if you can exclude all extraneous light while looking at the screen, a plain screen will be fine for almost all shooting situations, while on the other I have found that I am not able to accurately see the limits of lens coverage when viewing with a fresnel, so on balance I do without one, and incidentally save myself upwards of $1000 in the case of my 8x10 camera. If you set up 2 cameras in a brightly-lit showroom with focusing hoods, one with a fresnel and one without, the screen image of the one with the fresnel will look infinitely better, but this does not translate to everyday working conditions. I am a very experienced LF photographer, but even I was caught out the first time I went outdoors with my (then) newly-acquired MPP Mark VII technical camera, fitted with a Beattie screen, and an also newly-acquired Nikkor SW 135 mm lens – the screen image looked fine, even with quite a lot of swing front applied, but there was heavy vignetting on the negs.
    As far as advice to the OP goes, what I wanted to suggest above all was that it need not necessarily cost him a fortune to start in LF and that a fresnel screen, while advantageous under certain circumstances, is not essential – the Chinese viewing hood which I referenced plus a plain screen would work fine too.
     
  38. David,
    I am a graduate of the USAF Photo School at Lowry AFB. I entered the USAF as a ByPass Specialist in Photography, I was an USAF RecTec photographer, I owned a studio in CT for most of a decade, I was a photographer for several news papers. I have been a salesman in photo stores as well as managed several photo stores in CT and NY, I was the Product Manager for Beseler enlargers as well as the Beseler Topcon Super D, I was Adminstrator of Studio Lighting for Rollei of America, I was Product Manager for Professional Cameras and Flash for Rollei of America. I was the National Sales Person for Sinar, Broncolor and Ademco for EPOI.
    I have done professional catalog as well as news, portrait and wedding photography and I am currently involved in the sales and marketing of the products imported by HP Marketing in the USA. If you do not know what they are you can check our web site; www.hpmarketingcorp.com.
    Every Nikon has a fresnel in the viewing system. But Nikon offered speciality screens for specific ranges of lenses, as you noted. Large format is different. The fresnel screen sold by a large format manufacturer is designed and picked to work with as wide a range of focal lengths as possible. Some manufacturers, like Wista, also offer special Fresnel screens for long focal length lenses but the standard one works with extreme wide to the longest normally used lenses.
    View finder aids like split image rangefinders and microprism systems are not the Fresnel. The Fresnel is simply a field lens.
    Some people buy enhanced viewing screens and those can sometimes create a problem when focusing and viewing with a view camera. With shorter lenses they lose "bite" making it more difficult to see the subject "snap" into and out of focus. They also can make focusing long lenses, when doing movements - especially with base tilt cameras, difficulty as if your eye does not remain on the optical axis the screen can black out.
    These are not issues with modern ground glasses and Fresnels as supplied by the camera manufacturers.
    And yes, a Frenel is a lens, and its focal length is matched to work with the normal range of lenses used on a camera. That was why Nikon had a choice dedicated to specific lenses.
     
  39. Thanks for the background, Bob -looks as if the OP now has plenty of info as the basis for deciding what he wants to do!
     
  40. I disagree with the statement that 65mm is "too wide" for 4x5. As always, the usefulness of a lens depends on the purpose for which it is used. If 65mm were "too wide" then why would Schneider have made a 58mm Super Angulon XL for 4x5?
    I own a 6x9 Linhof Technika IV that came with, among others, a 65mm f/8 Super Anglulon. I have on occasion mounted that lens on my 4x5 Technikardan. I used this to make panoramic images on 4x5 film, in which case any vignetting at the corners is irrelevant as those are cropped during printing. I have enlarged the resulting 4x5 negatives to 12 x 20" with excellent results, one of my top selling photographs was made with this combination. I now own the 58 XL and can get even nicer panoramics. Neither of the two lenses allows any significant rise or fall but again for my purposes that too is irrelevant.
    Ron Gratz
     
  41. "why would Schneider have made a 58mm Super Angulon XL for 4x5?" or a 47mm and why would Rodenstock offer the 55 and 45mm Apo Grandsons?
     
  42. Bob, I think you mean Grandagon's. :)
    Ron
     
  43. Spell checkers!
     

Share This Page