Older Linhof select lens

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread

After A 9 year sabbatical from large format photography, I'm back with renewed interest, energy, but with a smaller budget (my kid likes to eat and wear Nikes). I have purchased a very clean Linhof Technika III with a Linhof 90mm f6.8 Angulon. Let me drift for a second. Bob... I used a 90mm f5.6 Super Angulon 10 years ago and while it may be a much better lens than the 90 Angulon, I get better opportunities for great photos with the 90 Angulon because of its small size and weight. This is one case where more modern optics does not always equate to better images. Now let's get back to my original subject. I would like to buy a couple more lenses such as a 150 and 210. Budget will require me to buy older lens. Is there any sound reason for going after older Linhof/Schneider select lens vs an older non-Linhof select lens? Will I have to pay more for the Linhof name on the lens?

-- Ron (leica@interpath.com), August 02, 1999


Ron, I don't know about you, but I sure can't tell anything about quality by looking at a lens [unless there are big gouges!]. However, the skilled German engineers who check each lens before the Linhof name is put on it, probably know their stuff. I figure that I need any help that I can get, so if there's a Linhof sig. on the item, I'm pretty assured that I won't get a dud. And yes, you probably will pay more for a "Linhof" lens, but the nice thing about glass is that it moves easily from camera to camera, so your investment might last a lifetime!

-- Dick Fish (dfish@javanet.com), August 02, 1999.

By all means, look for the selected lenses. They were not wasting time doing those tests! It is one way to assure quality, provided the glass and shutter are otherwise in good shape.

-- Alec Jones (alecj@bellsouth.net), August 02, 1999.

It's true a 90 5.6 super is a better lens than the 6.8. The 5.6 has more and more even coverage but there is nothing wrong with the 6.8 that can't be fixed with a little dodging. But don't just buy linhof select over all else because they are available. My 90 6.8 linhof lens is sharper than many of the 5.6's and older 8's but there are days when I'd glady trade the weight savings for more moves. If you are looking to buy a normal or "long" normal lens especially in 150 and 210 you should look everywhere. Of all focal lengths these two are probably the most common and made in the largest numbers and therefore the best bargain may not be the linhof select. The same can be said when comparing lanthars with their modern equivalents. So look around and do some research....there are many lenses in 150 and 210 to choose from and for the increased price of a linhof select you may find a better lens. Or maybe one that would cover 8x10 for a future purchase for slightly more? your fellow addict, Trib

-- trib (linhof6@hotmail.com), August 03, 1999.

Price wise, my experience has been, that the Linhof branded lenses here in the midwest are usually priced competatively, with non branded lenses.

-- Marv (mthompson@clinton.net), August 03, 1999.

I have a 25 years old Super-Angulon F8/121 Linhof and a 7 years old 5,6/90 non-Linhof. Altough the first is good, the second is sharper. These two together weigh nearly as much as the rest of my glasses. I also have an Apo-Symmar 5,6/150 and a Xenar 6,8/210 and some more extreme lenses. These two are small, light-weight and have plenty of coverage for 4x5. In addition, they are sharp and are the least expensives. If I had to equip myself new, I would maybe get a Super-Symmar 5,6/120 instead of the Super-Angulon 120. My comment would be: For colour, a more recent non-Linhof might be better than an older Linhof lens (but that's no secret).

-- Paul Schilliger (pschilliger@vtx.ch), August 07, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ