Super Symmar XL 80mm/4.5 vs Super-Angulon XL 90mm/5.6 vs Grandagon-N 90mm/4.5

[tony_black1]

I got my first lens couple weeks ago which is a 150mm rodenstock apo sironar

s. thanks for the advices. its great and super sharp.

 

now i want to add a wide angle lens to my toyo 45ax. above these 3 lenses

which one would be the sharpest, less distortion and easy to use with toyo45ax?

 

thanks.

[jimsimmons]

If size is an "ease of use" issue for you, the Symmar would be easiest, and the XL the least easy, as teh Symmar is small and the XL is large and fairly heavy. The Symmar is reputed to be less sharp wide open, but few people use these lenses without stopping down, so that would be a moot point. I have the XL because I need the largest image circle possible, and like the lens a lot. I'll never need to buy another lens in this length. I have a hard time imagining anyone being dissatisfied with the sharpness of any of these lenses. None should exhibit any distortion either.

[brucecahn]

The XL is not as sharp as the other two. Compared to the Rodenstock, which I would rate first, it looks like there is a very slight haze on the image. It is the only XL I don't like. Possibly mine was imperfect--I only used one. But it is the smallest and lightest, and will fit on any 4x5. It will probably have less distortion too. The other 2 lenses have huge rear elements and do not fit all cameras. Check before you buy.

[michael_briggs2]

Essentially all LF lenses have very low distortion, with "distortion" meaning the optical aberration of rendering straight lines in the scene as curved in the photo. This aberration is more a problem with SLRs, for which lenses have to be designed to clear the mirror. With any very short lens, for the format, you may obtain weird perspective effects which are also called distortion -- there is nothing that the lens designer can do about this.

 

The 80 mm Super-Symmar XL is smaller and a bit lighter than the other types of wide-coverage lenses, but it has somewhat more off-axis falloff. There are many happy users. The 90 mm Super-Angulon XL is a HUGE lens, with the most coverage. My opinion is that is has more coverage than most 4x5 photographers need, and that most should pick a different lens because of the size and weight. There are also happy 4x5 users of this lens. There are some 4x5 cameras that can't use this lens because of the size of the rear element. The modern wide-coverage lenses: Super-Angulon, Grandagon(-N), Nikkor-SW, and Fuji-SW have similar designs and you won't go wrong with any, particularly in the 90 mm focal length, particularly if you stick with one recent enough to be multicoated. Recent designs (Super-Angulon XL, Apo-Grandagon) have additional coverage, which is a plus in the shorter focal lengths, but not much of an advantage for 90 mm and 4x5.

[michael_briggs2]

I suggest that sharpness (at taking apertures) and distortion are characteristics for which modern lenses will be very similar, while there are other characteristics for which the lenses have wider differences, such as size, weight, filter size, etc.

 

Both the 90 mm Super-Angulon XL and the 90 mm f4.5 Grandagon-N are heavy lenses, 665 and 700 g respectively. However the 90 mm SA-XL is larger, e.g., the rear cell diameters are 86 mm and 70 mm. As already mentioned, some cameras can't accommodate the rear cell of the 90 mm SA-XL. (Later versions of the 90 mm SA-XL have a removable ring that allows reducing the diameter of the rear cell at the cost of reducing the protection the the rear glass.)

 

You could go lighter, e.g., the 80 mm SS-XL at 271 g, or the f6.8 version of the Grandagon-N at 460 g. Rear cell diameters: 43 mm and 60 mm.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Like Bruce Cahn, I'd rate the Rodenstock 90mm f/4.5 Grandagon as the pick of the litter wit ha clsoe second being the Nikon 90mm f/4.5 SW-Nikkor . Why aren't you considering the Scheider 110mm f/5.6 Symmar XL?

[michael_briggs2]

Ellis, with Tony's first lens being 150 mm, don't you think 110 mm is rather close in focal length?

[tony_black1]

as Michael stated, my first lens is 150mm. thats why i will go with 90mm or 80mm.

 

can i use 90mm rodenstock without the recessed board with toyo45ax or its better to get a recessed board to have more flexibility?

[friedemann_pistorius]

I have a Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S 150 as my normal lens and a Super-Symmar 80XL as my wide angle lens.

<br>They make a nice combination in terms of size and weight. At f/11 and smaller apertures the SS-80XL produces stunningly sharp images, comparable to the 150mm lens, which is one of the sharpest lenses around.

<p>For landscape and some architecture the image circle of the 80mm lens is more than enough. If you don't need the large image circle of the other lenses and/or if you want to go light, I'd suggest the Schneider lens (for which you'd need a Schneider IIIB center filter).

[tony_black1]

thank you all.

[yaal_herman]

<p>I have been using the 80XL for 617 format <a href="http://phototourisrael.com">landscapes</a>. the lens covers the frame easily. <br>

although this lens is small and lightweight i find it hard to focus (unsharp at open apertures) and light fall-off on open apertures makes is hard to compose. However, when stepped down to f16, image is sharp and clear from one edge to the other. basically i am using this lens at f11.5 to f22.</p>