Lenses for my first LF

[ed_prest]

I just purchased my first 4x5 (Sinar P) - mostly to learn on. I want

to mirror my MF setup (40,50,80, 150 and I rarely use the 50). It

comes with a 150mm Schneider Symar S. I know I want something around

80 or 90mm and then something like 250 or longer But what make and

brand? I shoot a bit of everything but won't be carrying it far when I

do go out side. I have a limit of 1500$.

 

I thought a nikor 90 4.5 would be good with movements and not as dark

as f8. What to do for the longer lens - I have no idea?

[danny_liao]

a Sinar P for a beginner...impressive. you got yourself a beast of a camera. anyway,

90mm or wider is good for architecture. a 150mm is a good starter/all round lens. a

210 is a great for portraits. anything that's faster than a f8 is always a

plus...especially with architecture. i think with 1500, you could get atleast 2 and

maybe 3 great lenses. it will really help if you first narrow down what you really like

to shoot first before you start blowing money on lenses. you don't want to spend

money on a wide lens if you and up shooting mostly portraits...you know what i

mean? or vice versa.

[wayne_crider4]

Danny has hit it on the head. The only other thing I will caution is, if you like to

do any twilight or night time photo's, especially of buildings or downtowns, the

wider apertures are a big plus for ground glass viewing. My 90mm F8 Nikon

was a bear. And if you are going for table top stuff, consider a macro lens.

[michael_briggs2]

<p>I think a focal length spacing of a factor between x1.5 to x1.75 work well. So starting with 150 mm, this suggests 90 mm and 240 or 250 mm. The 240 / 250 mm focal length is less popular than 210 mm, but I think 210 mm is a bit close to 150 mm.</p>

 

<p>The "big four", Fuji, Nikon, Rodenstock and Schneider all make fine lenses. Currently wide-coverage lenses for the 90 include the Nikkor-SW, Grandagon-N and Super-Anglon, regular and XL. For a wide-aperture (f5.6) longer lens, 240 or 250 mm, there are the Fuji-CMW, Nikkor-W, Apo-Sironar-N and -S and Apo-Symmar-L. One reason that 240 / 250 mm isn't so popular is probably the weight, but the weight increase is trivial compared to a Sinar P. Some like the 240 f9 lenses for their smaller size / weight: the recently discontinued G-Claron and the Fuji-A.</p>

 

<p>It is probably best to start with a smaller number of lenses and learn them well before getting a bunch. I used only one lens (180 mm) for a few years -- it wasn't the drawback that it might seem. 90 / 150 / 250 would give you a general purpose kit: wide / normal / long, but not any extreme lens. More specfic advice would depend on particular photographic goals.</p>

 

<p>Some manufacturer's websites: <a href="http://www.europe-nikon.com/category.aspx?countryId=20&languageId=22&catId=148">Nikon</a>, <a href="http://www.linos.de/en/prod/obj_analoge_fotogr.html">Rodenstock</a> and <a href="http://www.schneideroptics.com/photography/large_format_lenses/">Schneider</a>.

Fuji LF lenses aren't officially imported to the US, but are readily avaiable from several dealers.</p>

 

<p>You might want to browse or search the archives of this forum. The advanced search page of google can be useful -- you can limit the search to the domain www.photo.net.</p>

[dave schlick]

my opinion only.. the 250 is like going from 50mm to 85 mm.. to me its a waist of money... take the the shot with the 150 and blow it up to what you want.. a good 150 shot could print better than a so so 250.. get the nikon 450 (i think it is.) if yo want tele.. ive never shot either so its simply an opnion.. i have a 135 rodenstock simar s, and a 90 f8 schnider. and your right 8 is hard to work with.. im not willing to pack around the extra bigger lenses.. the 90 and 135 all fit in my camera bag with a crown graphic, flash, meter, and my choice of backs for the day, thiere is room for a lienhoff 6x9 or polaroid 405 pack back, or readyload insert, whatever i choose for the day.. .. id put the money into a couple good backs... or a good tripod, or good meter.. good enough for this ameture.. the 250/450 is fine if you have the other basic accesories.. dave...

[ronald_moravec1]

The 4x5 equavalent of a 150 MF would be a 300-360 by angle of view. What will suprise you is the working distance will increase significantly say for studio portraits.

[bob.]

If you multiply your 35mm lens sizes by three, you get the equivalent 4x5 lens sizes (roughly: the difference in aspect ratio between 35mm and 4x5" complicates matters) so for your 40mm lens, the corresponding replacement becomes 120mm. You may find 90mm a bit wider than you were expecting, roughly a 28mm in 35mm but as I say, the differing aspect ratio complicates direct comparisons.

 

90mm f/8 is perhaps the most common second lens. Undoubtedly, f4.5 is much brighter but f/8 is never a problem while the sun is above the horizon, even on an overcast day... If you do a lot of low-light (dense forest, twilight, pre-dawn etc) or interior shots then the extra cost, size & weight may be worth the extra two stops to you. If you can rent one locally, it may be worth trying one first.

 

Have a read at www.lfphoto.info where there are several articles on lenses.

 

Cheers,

[bob.]

Whoops - misread - multiply your MF lens sizes by two...