Crown Graphics 4 x 5 better with which Shchneider super angulon 90 mm or Super symmar 110 XL for landscaping?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
I am going to buy a lens for my 4 x 5 Graflex, which lens is more functional and more superb: Super angulon 90 mm or 120 mm XL super symmar?
-- Fred Taie (email@example.com), April 18, 2002
Fred: These are relatively large heavy lenses which would, in my opinion, be a bit much for a Crown. You are paying a lot in cost and weight to get a lot of covering power for a camera with very limited movements. In other words, the camera just can't take advantage of what these lenses can do (yes, they are great lenses), so I don't think either are a combination which makes sense. I have a Crown and love it, but it's at its best with smaller lenses. A 120 mm APO Symmar is small and light and would be fine if you want a modern multicoated lens. It has a reasonable amount of coverage for this camera. I can't tell you which of two (im my opinion) bad choices is better.
-- Kevin Crisp (KRCrisp@aol.com), April 18, 2002.
OTOH, the super symmars are superb optically. The 110 (I assume that is what you meant since there is no 120) has become legendary in a very short time. If you look at a thread from a fdw weeks ago in this forum you will find that it was, hands down, the most popular lens among 4x5 users. Is it overkill for the Graphic, yes. Would thta bother me, no. You may well outgrow the and/or replace the Graphic but the lens can serve you well for a very long time. Nothing wrong with the 90 SA eitehr but not quite the performer of the 110.
The 110 is not light as mentioned. It is in a #1 shutter. If these are considerations then a 120 Apo Symmar or similra from Rodenstock or Fuji might serve you better but all of these have fairly smaill image circles.
-- Ted Harris (firstname.lastname@example.org), April 19, 2002.
For what it's worth, if I had enough money for a 110mm XL Super Symmar I would replace the Graflex with a used Wista DX or new Shen Ho and get a 90mm f/6.8 Grandagon. The lens is nice and sharp and it has plenty of coverage for movements.
-- Edward Kimball (email@example.com), April 19, 2002.
A couple other things to consider: What is the shortest lens that will work on the Crown? I believe you will have problems with the 90mm: The bed must be dropped and the front standard is no longer properly on the rails. ( this is by my recollection: someone correct me if I'm mistaken) As I recall a 127mm Ektar was close to the limit before the front standard would 'jump the tracks'.
Also, do you still want to be able to close the front with the lens in place? (a nice feature with these press cameras) The larger front element on these modern wide angles will not fit between the rails. ie: you can't close it with the lens on.
I think a WF Ektar is a nice match and these lenses are still very sharp by modern standards. If you can go a bit longer in FL, a 135 Symmar or Sironar, etc. will still allow the front to close with the lens in place.
-- Gary Frost (firstname.lastname@example.org), April 19, 2002.