Newbie - help with lenses

[g_guhan_gunaratnam2]

Hello,

 

I need some help choosing lenses for a 4x5 camera. I want two

lenses, equivolent focal length to 24 or 28mm (on 35mm film - I

think this is around an 80mm lens?) And then a lens suitable for

portrait - on 35mm I like an 85mm, for 4x5 I don't know. I'd like

to increase the subject to camera distance since the camera is

larger and potentially more intimidating. I don't know if the

equivolent focal length in 4x5 would mean that the camera is in the

same position. (Does the equivalent focal length mean - the same

viewing angle at the same distance?) If so, I'd like to extend the

distance a bit.

 

I'd like a lens which will allow for quite a few movements. I know

this will be expensive and heavy for the wide lens....I hope not too

expensive. Unfortunately price is a deciding factor.

 

I haven't decided on the field camera I want yet. But it looks like

I will get a field camera to start, and not a monorail. I think I

will be more likely to take a field camera out than a monorail.

 

As for cameras, I'm thinking either Wista (DXIII), Toyo, or a

Shenhao.

 

Thanks in advance

[Troll]

Surprising as it may seem, your experiences and preferences with smaller cameras may not be applicable to your LF needs. Before deciding in advance what lenses to buy, first of all get your camera, and a more-or-less standard (inexpensive) lens for it. That would be something in the 135-180mm range. Use it for a while before deciding that you want/need another focal length, and what it will be.

[raymond of rish]

I can't help you with specific lenses or camera, but I can do the math for you:<br><br>

A <strong>24mm</strong> in 35mm would be approximately equivalent to an <strong>85mm</strong> in 4x5<br>

A <strong>28mm</strong> in 35mm would be approximately equivalent to a <strong>100mm</strong> in 4x5<br>

A <strong>80mm</strong> in 4x5 would be approximately equivalent to a <strong>22.3mm</strong> in 35mm

[raymond of rish]

Actually, let me revise that...<br><br>

<strong>24</strong> in 35mm: <strong>86.6</strong> in 4x5<br>

<strong>28</strong> in 35mm: <strong>101.1</strong> in 4x5<br>

<strong>85</strong> in 35mm: <strong>306.9</strong> in 4x5<br>

<br>

<strong>80</strong> in 4x5: <strong>22.15</strong> in 4x5<br><br>

To convert from 35mm to 4x5, multiply by 3.61101118<br>

[edward_kimball]

For a portrait lens either a 210mm or a 240mm would be about right. The 240mm would be equivalent to your 85mm in 35mm. They are more expensive than most 210mm lenses because they also cover 8X10. A couple of the older lens companies - read: out of business - used to make 229mm lenses. You might be able to fnd a used one cheap.

 

As for the wide angle, the 90mm is a much more common focal length than 80mm. As such, they are more readily available on the used market and are much less expensive.

[jbq]

90mm and 240mm seem to be the focal lengths that you're after.

 

When comparing focal lengths between 4x5 and 35mm, never forget that the aspect ratios are vastly different, and that you want to be careful about whether you compare vertical, horizontal or diagonal angles of view.

[janko_belaj]

When I started with LF (4x5) I was surprised with differences in focal lengths, better to say

in "feeling" they give me. I did a math and thought that 90mm Super-Angulon will sit in

between 24 and 28 on 35mm system, I thought that 210mm will be just like some 70

-80mm lens in 35mm system, but there is (my opinion only) huge difference. <br>

I was told that 90mm won't be a that wide as I calculated, and that 210 won't be that

narrow... but, I have found that shallow depth of field on f1:9 210 G-Claron suit my needs

in portraits much more than some 85mm 2:0 in leica format. I also found that I always got

(well, at least in 1st 10 or 20 shots) much more in my frame with 90mm S-A than I was

expected... (that was before I bought Fresnel lens).<br>

So, If you wish inexpensive but good lenses to start playing with that wonderful format, I

will recommend you just those two lenses (plus some fine and bright 135mm)... just my 2

cents.

[macgregor_anderson]

A word of warning from another newbie who bought a lens hastily. Be sure to check the coverage, as it was not made very clear on one of the major sites that this large format lens didn't cover 4x5. It is 100% my fault of course, but I wouldn't want you to make the same mistake.

 

www.lfphoto.info has a good piece on lenses. There is a link to a chart that has technical data on these lenses and I'm sure it would be very useful to you.

 

Also, be sure to check maximum extension of the field camera against your longer lens. And if you try to go wider than you were talking, minimum extension, etc. I think the Toyo CF for instance might have trouble with a 240mm lens.

 

Good luck! I hope you find it all as much fun as I have.

 

Mac

[g_guhan_gunaratnam2]

Thanks for all the info guys.

 

For wide angles, I've been looking at these two - how are they as far as image circles...will they need recessed lens boards?

 

a) Rodenstock - Wide Angle 75mm f/6.8 Grandagon-N Lens with Copal #0 Shutter

 

b) Nikkor - Wide Angle 90mm f/8 Nikkor-SW Lens with Copal #0 Shutter

 

How are they as far as image circles, etc? will they be sufficient even if I go away from a field camera to a monorail with increased movements?

[leica ron]

A further warning about the differences between 35mm and Large Format.

 

Some people seem to suggest that you should buy lenses based on your likes from 35mm cameras. This theory has many 'buts' and 'howevers'.

 

The 75mm Grandagon is quite wide and like most wide angles suffer from fall off from the centre quite quickly. I rarely use mine. It's image circle also limits too many movements.

 

The 90mm is a fabulous lens (I have the f4.5 Grandagon) but they can be very big and heavy. Many rave about the Nikkor 90mm.

 

Ever since I bought the Super Symmar XL 110mm f5.6 the 90mm hasn't been used.

 

The 150mm f5.6 is a tiny lens, again since I got the 110, it's rarely used.

 

The 210mm Sironar-S wow, I love this lens.

 

305mm G-claron, another favorite of mine.

 

450mm Fujinion C (will be) great for 8x10.

 

The question is how many lenses do you see yourself owning ? I always thought that I could never afford a 110mm Super Symmar XL but I found a way. If I had this all planned out I would only have bought three lenses, the 110, 210 and the 305. All have copious image circles and the glass is awesome ...

 

If I had to choose a one lens system, the 110mm would be it. Worth every penny IMHO.

 

As for cameras, also look at Tachihara. Ther are quite a few well priced used Wisner's out there. I used one for about six months, lovely camera. Weight will always be an issue so take this into account. I agree with your assessment of monorails ...

[brian_ellis3]

The stated image circle of the Grandagon N 75mm F6.8 is 187mm (presumably at f22 but I'm not sure of that). The Nikkor SW 90mm F8 stated image circle at F16 is 235mm.

[User_503771]

Regarding sufficiency of image circles:

 

Getting one of the modern 90mm lenses for 4x5 should serve you well, with plenty of movements. Even an old Calumet-Ilex f/8 Wide Field has done very well by me, and its image circle is around 215mm. The Super Angulons and Nikkors, etc., should get you 235mm or better image circle. This should provide all the movements you could use on 4x5. Any more, and you'd get unacceptable distortions in your photographs. So if you need a wider view than that, it's probably best to go with a diptych or triptych approach, or change format to suit (pano maybe).

 

I've never used the wide-field 75s, but from what I've read, the other posters on your question probably provide all the answer you need: image fall-off issues and lack of coverage with movements will be things you have to face. But on the other hand, how wide do you need? I find the 90 to give me much more view than I want for most shots so I don't use it that much anymore. It just doesn't work out in compositions. However, it could be very versatile for 6x12 or 6x17, which I intend to try as soon as I can get my hands on the equipment or make my own. And when I do need it, it definitely suits. I have no intention of getting rid of it, or replacing it with anything newer.

 

Anyway, hope this helps narrow it down a little. One of the other posters suggested a few lenses, and I concur mostly. If I had it to do over again, I'd probably start with the 90, a 120-135 (within that range), a 165-180, and a 210-240. Top that off with a 300 and you've probably got all the kit you'll ever need for 4x5, plus you can move some of those lenses up to 5x7 or even 8x10 later on.

 

If you limit your first choices to two lenses, probably a 120 and a 180-210 would get the most use for everyday photography, and you'd get the most bang from your buck from those. Plus, you can always use an old 90mm Raptar Wide Angle or Angulon for your first 90mm, for those shots that require that lens -- limited movements but they do the job, allow you to get that rare shot at all, especially if budget is an issue. But don't spend too much on one of those older 90s; for what some of the Angulons go for these days, you can get a nice older Caltar f/8 for not too much more, and it might just be the last 90mm you need to buy.

 

Keep in mind that Edward Weston made a whole lot of his best shots with a $5 Rapid Rectilinear; Ansel Adams made many of his best shots with old Cooke, Dagor, and Ross lenses that many today wouldn't consider putting on their cameras. There's nothing wrong with an old Tessar if that's what you can afford, and you make pictures with it.

 

Hope this helps.

[dimbulbsetting]

I may sound like a broken record, but if you're not sure which lens to buy, and you're in a

major metropolitan area, it is well worth the few $$ it takes to rent a lens and try it out.

[cxc]

I vote for a 90 and then a 210. Anything wider than 90 is pretty dang wide, and probably has limited movements, and may require a wide angle bellows or reveal other shortcomings in particular cameras.

 

For the 210, consider the G-Claron. It is readily available (used) and reasonably priced. It is technically a macro lens, but quite nice all the way out to infinity as long as you close it down to f/22 or more. Then you will also have a close-up lens.

 

IMHO there is little or no need for a lens in between 90 and 210. Conceivably you may want something wider someday, but I must say my 65mm is pretty much a specialty item, not used very often. At the other end, the Fuji 450mm is what I would recommend as an eventual 3rd lens. But remember that with the large piece of film, more cropping is OK, so longer lenses are a less pressing need.

 

The Shen-Hao is a nice camera, I had one for a while. It's also a bargain.

 

Be sure to budget for a tripod as well. Something that isn't so bulky and heavy as to drag you down, however far you expect to haul it. And sturdy enough to handle the chosen camera.

[john_gerndt1]

As I am sure you have noted, opinions vary considerably, so too, do lenses, even within a single brand (though quality control has come a long way in the last 60 years).

 

So, it is a good idea to test out what you buy.

 

I think most of us would confess to buying a lot of lenses. I think you will be no different. Try to buy used and for a decent price and don�t feel bad about swapping until you get what you need. It is a personal learning curve and it will cost you some money to learn. Don�t sweat it. The whole thing about LF is to take your time.

 

Shutters are quite variable. Take some time to have them tested. Don�t worry too much about multi-coating or coating flaws, separation and fungus are another matter. Shoot a bunch of film with each before you change to another lens. Happy hunting.

 

PS. I will add my personal experience with using barrel lenses mounted to a single large shutter (an Ilex #5) has been good.

 

Cheers,

[terence_m.]

Check out the "Badger" brand field camera at Badger Graphics' website. It's new, so somewhat untested, but appears to best bargain around right now. They also have a very lightweight and portable monorail which would be worth looking into. I have the Toyo CF, but wouldn't buy it today at the current price (I got it at an introductory rate). It's a good light camera, but it's workmanship is a little subpar, even for the price range, and the plastic (carbon fiber means plastic) gets scratched up real easily in a backpack. The Shen Hao's are very nice as well. I handled one, but haven't used it. Very nice fit and finish for the money.

 

On the lens front, I have a 210 Claron and love it for landscapes, architecture, etc, but find it too sharp for portraits (shows every blemish). Look for a nice older, uncoated lens for the portraits.