question about wide angle lenses

[matt_borengasser]

Hello all,

 

I am still considering the Ebony that I posted about a couple of weeks ago.

 

The man at the camera store showed me a wide angle lens that was quite

expensive. He seemed to indicate that with 4x5, the wide angle lenses are

longer and less expensive, but I want continue using my 6x7 enlarger. (I want

to use a 6x7 film back.)

 

QUESTION: Is it true that the smaller EBONY camera wide angle lenses will be

necessarily MORE expensive due to the size of format and camera? Is that one

of the prices one pays (pardon the pun) for the smaller 6x9 format vs 4x5?

 

thanks!

matt

[mike_earussi1]

You can buy wide angle lenses that are designed to cover just 6x9 and still mount them on a 4x5 camera. The 47mm Super Angulon comes to mind and runs used for around $400 on EBay. Now if you wanted a 47mm that would also cover 4x5 then that would be really expensive and perhaps was what the salesman was talking about.

[brian_ellis19]

"He seemed to indicate that with 4x5, the wide angle lenses are longer and less expensive."

 

Wide angle lenses for 4x5 are more expensive, not less. In general, with 4x5 150mm lenses tend to be the least expenisve, anything longer or shorter is more expensive and the longer or shorter you get the more expensive you get. Not sure what he meant by "longer." Did he mean longer focal length compared to say 35mm (which of course would be true) or physically longer and if the latter, physically longer than what?

[bohdan_pryszlak]

Just wondering . . .

It seems like you are considering the purchase of one of the most rediculously expensive (but very nice) 4X5 cameras made in order to shoot with a 6X7 back. If it's just to have movements, then why don't you just get a cheaper but very nice used (or even new)4X5 and put a 6X7 back on it? You'll have plenty of money to spend on pretty much any lens you would want and even a 4X5 enlarger or scanner.

[matt_borengasser]

yeah. I'm confused. :) But thanks for all the answers.

 

(to Bohdan Pryszlak: I was under the impression that if I used a 6x7 back on 4x5, a 4x5 wide angle would appear as much less wide. )

 

I think the thing to do is to rent a camera and get some books sent to me.

[bohdan_pryszlak]

Matt,

You aren't as confused as you think. In fact, you're quite right when you say "I was under the impression that if I used a 6x7 back on 4x5, a 4x5 wide angle would appear as much less wide". Absolutely true. It's rather like putting a non-digital 35mm lens (e.g. a 50mm) on a modern digital SLR: because the digital sensor is smaller than a 35mm film frame, that same 50mm lens will render an image as though it were an 80mm lens. In essence, it has become slightly telephoto.

Now let's imagine you have wide angle lens (for 4x5 it would be a 90mm lens or less) on your favourite 4x5 camera body and you're looking at the ground glass. On the gg you see a full-length view of your girlfriend - but that's with the full 4x5 area (20 square inches)! Once you mount a 6x7 (and that's centimeters not inches) back onto your 4x5 camera you are only going to get about 30% of the view rendered onto the film. Essentially, your angle of view has greatly diminished and you have turned your 4x5 wide angle lens into a "telephoto lens" for 6x7 film.

Like I said before, jump into 4x5 for one of two reasons only - you want a big piece of film or you need camera movements to control perspective, depth of field etc which is something you can't do with medium format.

[big toys are better]

Ebony makes a very nice 6x9 view camera. While less expensive than the larger sheet film units, it is still quite costly, but it seems to be an ideal choice if you want to only use roll film backs and still have all the movements. I've run into one of these cameras in use out in the countryside of Maine, and its owner was quite pleased with the 6x9 and seldom used his larger sheet film cameras. In particular, very portable.

[abrepsom1]

I have been using an Ebony SW23 for almost two years now, with several wide angle lenses (47mm, 55mm, 65mm) and have to second what has been said before. It is a real joy to work with such a camera out in the field. Some of these lenses can be used on 4x5" too, but that doesn't make any problem. They are equally good on 2x3" than on 4x5" cameras. I have limited my selection of lenses down to 3 (wide, normal, tele) because I want to travel light. Just imagine that it all fits nicely in the bottom part of a Lowepro Rover AW II, together with a rollfilmholder, lightmeter, a lens shade and some filters.

 

If scanned on a decent film scanner (Nikon 8000, Polaroid Sprintscan 120, ...), your 6x9 cm slides can be printed up to 60x90 cm in excellent quality.

 

Just go for it!

 

Regards

 

Aender