Anglon 65mm f8 - Super or Not?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
Hi Folks, I have a question that may not have a definitive answer, but here goes anyway.
I will shortly have a choice of two Schneider 65mm f 8 optics - a Super Angulon and a 'regular' Angulon. One of them has to go and I would appreciate your views on whether the extra $100 or so difference is better in my pocket or on the lensboard.
I am an amateur and favour scenics in colour and mono trannies on 6 x 9 format.
-- Clive Kenyon (email@example.com), September 05, 2001
Go with the Super-Angulon. It's a nice small and light lens. And quite sharp as well. The Angulon is an older design and might not be as sharp but I never used that one.
-- Georges Pelpel (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 05, 2001.
I had a 65mm Angulon with a 2x3, and it was an "OK" lens. But, you'll have a lot more movements with the Super Angulon, and it will be sharper. Plus, the SA 65mm f8 will just cover 4x5, so you would have that advantage, as well. I don't think that the Angulon will cover 4x5.
-- neil poulsen (email@example.com), September 06, 2001.
I could be wrong here, but weren't the "regular" Angulons all f/6.3s? Haven't all of the Super Angulons been either f/5.6 or f/8? Wouldn't this mean that both of the lenses you mentioned are Super Angulons? Like I said, I could be wrong, so if anyone knows about this it would help me also.
-- Ken Burns (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 06, 2001.
Ken is nearly right - my older Angulon is actually f 6.8 not f8 as originally stated.
-- Clive Kenyon (email@example.com), September 06, 2001.
The wide-field Ektars are f6.3, the angulons that I've owned are f6.8's. Neil
-- neil poulsen (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 14, 2001.