LF lens questions

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

Hello, I'm a LF newbee and have some questions about 2 recent lens

aquisitions.

 

One is a Wollensak 6 1/4" (159mm) f9.5 Raptar Wide Angle lens. I

bought it for 4x5 but the wide angle designation suggests that it is

meant for a larger format (5x7?). No problem using it for 4x5

right? It jsut means it has lots of coverage capability. Can

anyone speak to its performance?

 

The other lens is a Schneider 90mm f6.8 Angulon. It is in a Synchro-

Compur shutter that also says Linhof. Is this a Linhof select lens

then or does the Linhoff or Technica name have to be on the lens

surround for that to be true? I understand through my reading that

it will jsut barely cover 4x5, so no movements are possible. How

about its performance?

 

Your help is very appreciated.

[dan_fromm1]

Frank, when your lenses were made they were probably ok. Since then they've had many adventures, some excellent, others not. The only way to assess their performance now is to try them out.

 

Go shoot! You'll learn more and better that way than from opinions expressed here by people who haven't used the very lenses you have.

 

Be brave. Use film. Ask the lenses themselves, not strangers who aren't acquainted with them.

 

About shooting your 159 on 4x5. People here carry on at length about the horrible effects of using a lens with more coverage than needed. It throws a huge cone of light they say, that is reflected off the bellows' supposedly light-absorbing surfaces and causes image-destroying flare. Nice story, eh? I'm not sure about it. I shoot 2x3, use lenses that will cover much larger formats on my little cameras. I can't focus to save my life, but don't have flare problems with my big and huge camera lenses. I do have flare problems when the mount adapters aren't well-baffled, but that's another story.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

"Go shoot! You'll learn more and better that way than from opinions expressed here by people who haven't used the very lenses you have.

Be brave. Use film. Ask the lenses themselves, not strangers who aren't acquainted with them."

 

Yes, of course. But at the moment I'm refinishing my Iston 4x5 field woody (so it's in pieces and I've got paint remover singing my fingers) and I don't have spare lens boards for my Speed Graphic, so I'll try out the lenses using temporary cardboard lens boards soon.

 

In the meantime, I just thought I'd ask about these lenses.

[shotz]

That wide angle Raptar should be fine and the 90mm Angulon should be fine too. Neither has the reputation as 'stellar' but as stated above nobody here has used your particular samples and nobody else here has your exact standards of performance, camera technique, darkroom technique, etc.

 

My own experience dictates a 165mm lens that covers 4x5 is better than one that covers 8x10 because it tends to be smaller and lighter and brighter with a smaller, faster shutter. But my criteria are not necessarily yours too. Also, something like a 165mm Caltar or a 135mm Raptar or Xenar is just so darn cheap!

 

I don't care to settle for something that is uncoated but after that, they all seem to do a fine job to a greater or lesser extent.

[john_kasaian1]

Frank,

I've got a 6-1/4" Wolly WA and its a peach of a lens. I think it will out work fine for you. As others have suggested, shoot with it and make up you're own mind.

~Cheers!

[jim_rhoades]

Frank; I'm suprised no one has told you but that 159 Wolly will cover 8x10. That should be enough movements for you. The 90 will cover 4x5 with very little room for movements.

 

About that 159, always hang on to it. Sooner or later you will buy an 8x10.

[jim_galli4]

Frank, The 159 Wollensak has an image circle of about 380mm. Almost 10X12! If it's uncoated, (most were) the best thing you can do for it is come up with a compendium lens shade and baffle a whole bunch of that un-used light away. Like others have said there are a host of better performers on the cheap end that were made for 4X5. I've had several 90 Angulon's. They're actually very nice for things that are a bit closer to the camera than infinity landscapes. You'll find it very nice in the middle with edge sharpness falling off gradually, then drastically out at the corners. Something fun to try is to take the front group off and use as a convertible. Burke and James used to advertise 6.8 Angulons as convertible lenses in their catalog. Now forgotten.

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

Jim, What is the focal length with the front element of a 90mm Angulon removed?

[jim_galli4]

About 159MM @ f12 or so. Nevermind. Not such a good idea perhaps. jg

[brian_ellis16]

The Wollensak 159mm F9.5 is an 8x10 lens so it will cover 4x5 with lots of room for movements. I owned one for a while and made excellent 8x10 contact prints from negatives shot with it. However, I don't know how it would be for enlarging. My guess is that it wouldn't be all that great just because Wollensaks in general were inexpensive lenses and this one is quite old to boot. However, that's just a guess, try it and see. IIRC the fact that it's a Raptar means it's single coated, the ones that say "Velostigmat" were uncoated (hope I don't have that backwards).

 

I've never used the 90mm Angulon but I've read many comments about it. When this lens was made Schneider's quality control supposedly wasn't what it is today so there apparently can be a considerable variation in quality from one lens to the other, making others' opinions not necessarily valid for your lens. But since you own it, use it and see what you think.

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

Thanks everyone for your help.