65mm vs. 75mm Super Angulon for Linhof Technar?

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

I have to choose between the 65mm and 75mm Super Angulons in helical focusing mounts for both 4X5 and 6X9 shooting using a Linhof Technar camera.

This camera has no bellows and no movements, it is designed for rapid hand held wide angle shooting. A viewfinder is mounted on top for composition, while focusing is either gestimatated or done on the ground glass if using a tripod.

This camera is a sort of a stripped down Technika for certain uses and would complement my Master Technika (which I use hand held with 90, 135, and 210mm lenses).

The ONLY lenses available currently for this camera in Technar mounts are the 65/75/90 Super Angulons. The lenses focus down to 5 feet, and thus shooting can be done using the hyperfocal distance.

Pictures of the Technar, which according to Linhof is still available, can be seen on Linhof's newly revamped and extensive German language website at www.linhof.de The English language portion is under construction...

So what are the pros and cons of the 65mm vs. the 75mm Super Angulons?

-- Mark Nowaczynski (archivalprints@home.com), October 27, 2001


According to Linhof we bought, and delivered, the last Technar they could manufacturer in August. Currently the factory is unable to manufacture, or deliver additional cameras that we have sold.

Call the factory before you go too far. There are other items on the updated web sitewhich arealso listed but are out of stock and production due to a sub supplier going out of business.

The Technika 2000 would prove to be a more versatile WA hand held camera and less expensive to equip.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 27, 2001.


How are you envisioning using the Master Tech 2000 handheld, given that it has no rangefinder and the high tech focusing device that it was initially introduced with has been out of production and unavailable for years? Just curious.


-- Nathan Congdon (ncongdon@jhmi.edu), October 27, 2001.

Exactly the same way one would use a hand held pancake wild angle camera like the Technar or a panoramic like the Technorama. First you add the Anatomical Grip which mounts to the side of the 2000 and is the saqme grip as the Technar. Then you add the Multifocus Finder which works with standard masks for lenses from 75mm to 360mm (compared to 135mm with the Technar or 180mm with the 617 or 135mm with the 612. The masks are available for 75 to 360mm for 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, 6x12 and 45 formats. We can get custom masks for focal lengths from 35mm to 65mm for formats from 6x6 to 6x12 cm. Then you have service calibrate the focusing scales for the lenses you want to use. Three focusing scales fit on a Technika focusing stage and there is no limit to the number of stages one can use. Then you scale focus just like the Tecnar, Tecnoramas, etc. Of course, like the Technar, the 2000 is supplied with the same folding focusing hood and ground glass and accepts the same focusing and ground glass viewing devices as the Technar. Should one want to use either on a tripod.

And the 2000 adds camera movements when desired on a tripod.

No problem at all using it handheld.

In fact there is even one photographer in Hawaii who does hand held waide angle on a TK 45 with a finder he added.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 27, 2001.

What about the merits of the 65 and 75mm Super Angulons?

-- Mark Nowaczynski (archivalprints@home.com), October 27, 2001.

There are no merits. The deciision is how wide do you need. They are both good lenses so the decision should be based on how wide you want to sgoot.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 27, 2001.

There are no merits? Are they good lenses by current standards? Does the small image circle of the 65mm make it more problematic to use than the 75mm, especially if not at f22 but say at f11?

-- Mark Nowaczynski (archivalprints@home.com), October 28, 2001.

No they are both good lenses that fully cover 45. The decision is how wide you need.

If you need a lens as extreme as a 65 there is no way to consider a 75.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 28, 2001.

"Are they good lenses by current standards?"

They are current lenses. Are you buying an older used lens?

Then you need to know how old?

The Technar was introduced in 1978.

If you are questioning a specific used lens why not post that info originally?

If they are new lenses they are current so it would still be how wide?

in either case on 45 you will probably have to use the center filter.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 28, 2001.

Bob, RELAX, I'm on your side. Last year I bought a Master Technika and three cammed lenses NEW from Lihnhof along with a growing list of accessories, also all bought NEW.

If and when the Technar becomes again available I will buy one NEW, along with a NEW lens from Linhof.

If people like me don't support companies like Linhof, how can these high end manufacturers survive? Prices of new vs. used are not an issue for me. Helping to ensure the survival of companies like Linhof is paramount.

So back to my original question. The Super Angulon 65mm and 75mm f5.6 lenses are an older design than the Super Angulon XL series. Are they decent compared to my Grandagon or to the SA XL lenses? Choosing between these two focal lengths is not simply a question of how wide, but also a question of image circle and image quality. The 65mm has an image circle diameter of only 135mm at f5.6, and 170mm at f22. As I shoot hand held at apertures larger that f22, will the 65mm lens provide sufficient coverage at f11 or even at f8? Image circle diameter is not an issue with the 75mm lens, but may be a problem with the 65mm lens, hence the question of 65 vs. 75mm lens choice for 4X5 shooting.

-- Mark Nowaczynski (archivalprints@home.com), October 28, 2001.

They are both excellent lenses. Choice is how wide. Noy how good.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 29, 2001.

Mark: The 65mm SA is generally considered to cover 5x4 only 'in a pinch'. It's really a 6x9cm format lens, and it won't cover 5x4 properly until it's stopped down to at least f/11. Even then, the illumination fall-off in the corners really needs a centre filter to even it up, losing you about another 2/3rds of a stop of precious light. The 75mm SA would be the safer and more versatile option, IMO.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), October 29, 2001.

The image circle of the 65mm Super Angulon @ f22 (the optimal aperture) by Schneider's literature is 170mm which easily covers 45. At f22 on 45 you would have enough coverage with an adjustable camera, for 12mm of rise and 10mm of shift in horizontal position.

Unless you are looking at an Apo Grandagon 35mm none of the modern wide angles are designed to be used at f11. They are mostly all designed to be used at f22 ( Apo grandagon 45 and 55mm are f16).

If you need the coverage of a 65mm the 75mm will not be acceptable. Both lenses are more then adequate of covering the 45 maximum image on a Technar. Both will probably benefit from the center filters.

BTW the 75mm has a 198mm circle at f22 and has 30 and 26mm of movement.

Schneider uses 153.7mm as the diagonal of a 45 negative.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmarketingcorp.com), October 29, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ