david_tolcher Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 After going round the houses for quite some time on lenses I would like to get down to a basic set of lenses to stick with. Wideangle end is sorted with the schneider 80 / 110 XL and a 150mm. I have choices how to cover up to 450mm and each is a trade-off of some description. For reference I have a 5X4 with bellows up to 450mm taking TK panels and an old Gandolfi whole plate (and 5x4 reducing back) which takes TK panels too. Ideally want to cover both with one set and I can just swap out the gandolfi for the 5x4 in the same bag and know I have everything. The Gandolfi will just accomodate the 110 XL with limited ability to do movements due to bellows compresssion. My works is exclusively landscapes on 5x4. I am fortunate to have a choice from: 1) 200mm / 300mm / 450mm Nikon M which gives a nice 6 lens kit although quite petite. The 200mm wont cover the whole plate. 300mm is probably too long as a shortest lens on whole plate. Its a very nice set of lenses but 6 is probably too many with not a big enough gap between 150 and 200 but a leap up to 300 is too large. 200mm is a tiny bit short for close up work and 300mm a tiny bit long. 2) Fujinon 250mm F6.3 / 450mm Nikon M. The 250mm is quite a large piece of glass and occupies the space and weight of both the 200mm and 300mm nikkors but does cover whole plate easily. The 250 is about spot on for macro work. The Fujinon is a gorgeous lens producing a lovely image quality. I cant really keep both sets so it comes down to selling either the Fuji or the 200/300mm nikkors. I am leaning to 2) but the Nikkors are such lovely lens and took a long time to find at reasonable prices. To part with them I would need to be sure that this wasnt a mistake. Any advice ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheldonnalos Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Have you considered option number 2, but swapping out a Fujinon A 240mm f/9 instead of the 250mm? The 240 has more coverage, is better for macro (process lens design) as well as probably sharper at infinity, and is much smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_tolcher Posted August 30, 2008 Author Share Posted August 30, 2008 Hi Sheldon, a friend I photograph with regularly swears by his 240mm F9 so it is an option. I was trying not to buy anything else having been very happy with the way the 250mm lens renders pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlend sæteren Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 I always regret selling lenses I love. If you can afford it. Keep them all. Swapping the the 250 for the lighter 240 f9 saves you weight, but you lose an f stop. Some days you will go for a walk with limited bacpack. One day you want to carry 110 and 200, another day 80, 150 and 250, next day you are tired and only packs the 150 the day after that you are heading for something closer to the car and packs it all. One nice detail about the 250. It is probably the fastest 240-250 lens available in the tiny copal1-shutter, so it has a nice weight-power ratio. If you like the looks wide-open: Keep it. If you always stop down:You can replace it with a 240:9. Another option is the big, heavy, expensive, Copal3mounted Rodenstock Apo-Sironar W 210 5.6. This is a fantastic wide lens that covers 8x10 with movements. It is one of the best allroundlenses. Good for close-ups too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard baznik Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 I looked for the Fuji A 240 initially, but couldn't find one in my price range. I bought the 250 about six years ago and have not been disappointed at all. The images have wonderful tone and contrast. I do wish it was as light as the A 240, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlend sæteren Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Hi David, I posted my words before i saw your comments on the 250. I think you gave the answer yourself "very happy with the way the 250mm lens renders pictures". That means you need to keep it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_tolcher Posted August 30, 2008 Author Share Posted August 30, 2008 Thanks for your comments. Re the 210mm - I have ( and am selling) a nikon 210mm AM ED which covers 400mm and is lovely but weighs in at 1.2kg ! The IQ isnt a big enough draw to compensate for size and weight. It would be nice to keep all and carry a selection depending on mood and practicalities - maybe that is the answer. Sometimes more is less and in this case I feel I'd rather not have to make a choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_owen Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 No David!!!!!!! Don'tkeep the Nikon 200mm - sell it to me (before putting it on the auction site) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlend sæteren Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Hi David! The 210 Nikkor, is it a macro? The 80degree Sironar W is not and covers well at infinity. Of course the weight is a problem, but that problem goes for most wideangles for 8x10. I wonder if something lighter exist, maybe called Angulon 165 or Wide-field Ektar: I am not sure which lenses covers. Forgetting the very wide on 8x10 is an option. You have the 250, and the 80 for 4x5. Or you can use the 110 XL on 8x10 and crop away the dark corners . I dont know how much imagecircle it gives you, but if yo get a super 6x8", that is awesome. I vote for the 110 xl and 250 as your 8x10 wideangles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlend sæteren Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 David . Is your 150mm a normal, or is it a Super- Symmar XL for 8x10"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_tolcher Posted August 31, 2008 Author Share Posted August 31, 2008 Hi there, thanks to all. Paul, suspect that your advice may just be tainted ! Erlend, The 150 is the normal APO L Symmar so only covers just over 200mm and the nikkor is the rare macro lens. I think 250 is probably wide enough on whole plate. Having been out this morning with the 200 and 300 it was interesting that I ended up with compositions using both lenses ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_owen Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Drat, somehow he saw straight through me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gone fishing Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 The 165 Angulon can be a decent choice - depending on the specific lens! Some seem to be good while others are too weak in the corners. I have a 210 Angulon that I use frequently and I have never had any complaints with either coverage or performance. I tried a 165 Super Angulon for a couple of years but never liked it because of size/weight and performance. The 165 Angulon doesn't allow for much swing/tilt/shift but the 210 Angulon covers with considerable movement. I would look for the Compound shutter rather than the Copal 3 because of size/weight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_tolcher Posted September 2, 2008 Author Share Posted September 2, 2008 Having been out on Sunday I think I am inclined to go with the brighter GG of the 250 vs the 200 & 300 nikkors. The other possibility is to trade the 150 for a 180 and then the spacing is better with a 80/110/180/250/450 set vs 80/110/150/250/450 but this is splitting hairs I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlend sæteren Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Don´t hurry selling. Enjoy the 150 for a while. Remember that the 150 is the most popular for the days when you carry only one lens. And 80-150-250 is an ideal 3pack. And the Apo L Symmar 150 is a very fine 150 that covers 5x7 nice. Kidding. Sell it to me before putting it on ebay;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
friedemann_pistorius Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 David, <p>I shoot mostly landscapes, using 4x5 exclusively. However, when selecting my lenses I tried to spread the focal lengths evenly (using a 1.5 to 1.8 ratio, approx). Also, after years of trying, bying and selling I have settled on two lens sets, because (as others have already pointed out) photographic situations and hiking distances vary greatly. <p>The "not too far from the car" set consists of 6 lenses: Schneider 58 - Nikon 90/8 - Fuji-CMW 135 - Nikon-M 200 - Nikon-M 300 - Fuji-C 450. <br>The "long distance hiking and overnight" set consists of 3 lenses: Schneider 80XL - Schneider 150 Apo-Symmar L - Schneider G-Claron 270. <p>I don't agonize over focal lenghts anymore, but only grab the right set for the right distance. Others base their lens selections on totally different needs and tastes. But, for me, both sets work absolutely fine. <p>Don't know if this helps - - good luck with your decision! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_tolcher Posted September 4, 2008 Author Share Posted September 4, 2008 Friedemann, thank you - that was a very useful insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now