Subject: 47 or 58, that is the question

[geoffrey_swenson]

Could some of you familiar with the 47 and 58 mm. focal lengths tell

me, which one makes more sense to get? I am thinking of the Schneider

47 XL (Or is it Super Angulon?) or a 58 XL.

 

I�d like to get an extra-wide lens for situation that my 75 mm.

cannot handle at times. In addition when using my 6x9 back most of my

lenses are just not including enough of the scene.

 

Currently, I have 75, 110, 210 and 360 mm. lenses, and I mainly use

them on a 4x5 Linhof Technika.

 

Thank you all, G.

[paul_owen]

I'm very pleased with the 47XL. It is slightly too wide for my taste on full frame 5x4, but is a fave lens when used with 6x12 or 6x9. When you get to this short a focal length there is very little visual difference between the 47 and the 58. I would favour the 47 for use with roll film.

[zitherist international]

I would agree with Paul´s reasoning. Using the 6x7 "divide by 2" rule of thumb to equivalence focal lengths to 35mm, 47 and 58 are approx. the same as 24 or 30mm lenses. The 75mm is about equivalent to a 35-38mm lens. Though there is a 200Euro difference in list price, the 47 would give you more breadth to your lens set.

<p>

Whichever way you go, you should take a look at mounting the lens in the newly announced Technika lensboard. According to the Linhof info sheet, the lensboards have a built-in screw focus (concentric to the lens). This seems to be a more elegant solution than their old wideangle device that moved the whole board. The same info is on the linhof.de website.

<p>

With either lens, the front standard will be compressed into the camera body. This means on the Technika the only practical movements will be through using the back, and perhaps a few millimeters of front rise. Still reasonable, though, to get your lens mounted onto a Technika board (see another thread concerning using Technika mounted lens on other LF cameras).

[bob_salomon]

You can use the 55 through 65mm lenses on a Technika 45 with the Wide

Angle Focusing Device. 35 to 47mm lenses will not work properly at this time.

 

Linhof introduced some new wide angle focus mount/lens boards at

Photokina that will let you use lenses from 35mm to 65mm without the need

for the Wide Angle Focusing Device but each lens will need its own

lensboard/focus mount to work.

 

If you have the Technika 2000 you can use any lenss from 35mm to 65mm

without the need for a special focus system as it is built into the camera.

[geoffrey_swenson]

I am sorry for not stating that I have a MT2000, thus I won't need additional accessories for focusing. Nevertheless the new wide-angle focus mount/lens board is a good concept.

 

Thank you for your responses, G.

[ellis_vener_photography]

the 47mm XL Super Angulon is <I>extremely</I>wide when used on a 4x5.

Along the 5' side of the format it covers a wider angle of view than a Nikon

15mm for a Nikon film SLR. There is an unavoidable amount of near/far 3D

spatial rendering distortion -- translation; it can make a decent sized room

look like a small aircraft hanger. But some times you need that kind of

coverage. <P>I haven't used the 58mm (My next shortest lens is a 65mm) but I

think if you can only afford one, you will get more usage out of the 58mm XL

Super Angulon.

[upscan]

Geoffrey: I think you may want to consider Perspective as an important consideration in your lens selection. The lens you will want depends on your style and what looks you want from your pictures. Jack Dynkinga prefers the 58XL while David Muench uses the 47mm quite frequently. Looking at their work would give you an idea of what these lenses do. For some landscape photographers (William Neil) the 90 is as wide as they want to go which illustrates how personal lens selection can be. Fortunately there is ample published work to let your eyes guide you rather than abstract numerical mumbo jumbo.

[scott_jones2]

I am also interested in wide angle lenses. My widest is 90SAXL. Can anyone point out or link me to images specifically taken with these lens lengths so we can compare? Here is a good use for picture uploading or hot links. Ellis, do you have any specific image comparisons?

 

Scott

[lars ake vinberg]

One issue with the 47XL is filters.

 

On 4x5, any 67mm filter will vignet, you have to use oversize filters which are expensive, or a stepup ring to 77 or 86mm, which is cheap.

 

On 6x9, one or two 67mm filters is OK with no movements but might be a problem with extreme movements.

 

Another issue is that the front lens surface is close enough to the front of the lens that most filters actually will touch the lens before screwed all the way in. I have found that Hoya polarizers are OK to use with this lens (both the standard pola and the HMC Super thin pola). B+W (which are made by Schneider!) will not work.

[paul_owen]

I must admit I've not had any problems using filters on the 47XL.

I use a 67-82mm step up ring and haven't noticed any problems

with vignetting.

[michael_fox]

How about center filters, followed by, say, a polarizer? Or a center filter followed by a Lee Filters adapter ring? Anyone doing this on either the 47XL or the 58XL? If so, did you have to use a particular polarizer or did you have to modify the Lee adapter ring?

[bob_salomon]

"How about center filters, followed by, say, a polarizer? "

 

You probably do not want to add a polarizer to an extreme wide angle when

used for shots with sky in it. Since parts of the sky will already be polarized

you would get banding if you used a polarizer.

[david_bradley1]

<blockquote>

<I>How about center filters, followed by, say, a polarizer? Or a center filter followed by a Lee Filters adapter ring? Anyone doing this on either the 47XL or the 58XL? If so, did you have to use a particular polarizer or did you have to modify the Lee adapter ring?</I>

</blockquote>

When I bought my 58XL and center filter I also bought a few B&W 86mm filters, including a polarizer, to screw into the front threads of the center filter. I was disappointed to find that they did in fact vignette. I haven't done any precise experiments, but my guess is that they reduce the image circle enough to make movements almost impossible. (Even without filters, the image circle of the 58 allows only very limited movements.)

<P>

When fully screwed in the filters project forward about 1/4" (about 7mm). I would expect the Lee holder to project forward at least this much, and that therefore the Lee holder would vignette too. Unfortunately Lee doesn't appear to make a wide angle ring in the 86mm size, probably because of geometric limitations. However, SK Grimes might be able to make a Lee ring that slips over the outside of the center filter. On his site he says he makes 100mm slip-on Lee rings, so why not 86mm too?

<P>

Another possible factor in choosing between the 47XL and the 58XL is whether the center filter would be reusable with other wide angle lenses in your kit. The Schneider 58mm XL, 80mm XL, and 110mm XL all share the same center filter. The three of thse together would be a powerhouse "wide end" to a 4x5 kit. And at over $300 each and an 86mm diameter, you probably don't want to buy and carry any more center filters than necessary.

<P>

As others have posted, 47mm vs. 58mm is a personal choice. When shooting 35mm I love my 20mm ultrawide and have happily used even wider. So when moving to 4x5 I thought I would love the 58mm XL. However, I've found that I don't use it or even like it very much because it is too wide. It's also hard to work with, but I would put up with that if I liked the compositions it afforded me, but for some reason I don't. Perhaps it's all the stretching in the corners. However, when shooting with a 6x12 back I like it much better. I guess what I'm saying is that you won't know what you will like until you've worked with them a bit, so I would suggest renting one or both of them (if you have access to rentals, of course) and see how it goes.

[geoffrey_swenson]

I think after reading all your responses, I would tend to go with the 58mm., but it is also a good idea, as David pointed out, to try one before buying to make sure it�s not just an extra weight in my bag.

I too thought that the 47 mm. would be over the top distortion wise. My main reason in wanting one, that even though rarely, my 75 mm. is just not wide enough sometimes. For my 6x9 back the 47 would be better, but I only want to buy and carry one extra lens.

As for the vignetting, I wonder if any of these two lenses have filter threads at the back?

 

Thanks again, G.

[bob_salomon]

"but it is also a good idea, as David pointed out, to try one before buying "

 

Then you should also try and compare it to the 55mm Apo Grandagon 4.5.

[michael_fox]

I know that "thin" polarizers (usually with no front threads) are designed to overcome vignetting problems such as described above. Does anyone have experience with a particular polarizer that does NOT vignette when on top of a center filter on either the 47XL, 58XL or the 55 Apo?

[bob_salomon]

" know that "thin" polarizers (usually with no front threads) are designed to

overcome vignetting problems such as described above"

 

First Heliopan slim mounts (except for the polarizers) do have front threads.

Secondly slim mounts are simply slim. They extend the length of the lens.

They do not "overcome vignetting" except in limited cases.

 

Th prevent vignetting you would either use a wa filter or a step-up ring to a

size at least 2 sizes larger then the lens and use that size filter.

 

The Heliopan/Schneider/Rodenstock center filters are a good example of

what a filter should look like to eliminate vignetting. Small in back and large in

front.

[rainer_viertlb_ck]

i think you should buy the 58mm. you have then the choice to buy later a 37mm schneider or a 35mm rodenstock lense for 6x9. the 35mm is a absolute great lense for 6x9 or 6x12. and my experience is that it is comfortable to work on 4x5" with the 58mm. you see everything good with a fresnell ....and so on. the things become little bit more complicate with the 47mm,- but still manageable. i use all the three lenses 35/47/58/72mm , normally for architecture,- and here i find situations where i need all this extreme wide angles.

 

in your collection of lenses you should thing too, that the step from 75 down to 47 seems to be too large.

 

about center filters i am not very exact,- cause i dont see a noticeable difference between the different offers from schneider,- so i use a center 3c, which shades 2stops down for the 35, 47, and the 58mm. a center 3b,- which shades 1,5 stops,- i use for the 90mm f8 and ( sometimes ) for the 110XL. the 72XL has its own center.

[renee_galang1]

Folks, I have the cambowide with 47xl and been very happy with it. I therefore recomend the 47xl. In some subjects you can never see any distortions but slight with some. About the cf plus pola, I have recently bought a 93mm hasselblad pola and ask Eric Owen from Queensland Australia to make a step-up ring from 86 to 93mm. The ring was beautifully done but unfurtunately it is vignetting. The problem is that the hasselblad pola is very thick and thus it is enough to produce a vignetting effect. Mind you, there is no problem if you are working up to 6X9! But 4X5 is definitely a big no good.

[michael_fox]

I had a similar vignetting problem with a 40mm Hassy CFE lens. Wanted to mount a polarizer on the front of a Lee filter holder to allow 1 other filter to slide in - like a split ND. Tried a 105mm polarizer and it vignetted. Had to use a 122mm B+W. Big sucker! Had S.K.Grimes make a beautiful adapter ring. Love it.

[renee_galang1]

Michael, thanks for that info. I was going to trade in this hassy pola to a nikon 105mm but according to your experience it still vignetted. I am sure that it will vignette with my 47xl. Thanks once again.