58XL for 6x12 Center filter needed??

Tom Stanworth · Oct 17, 2006

Hi,

For 5x4 I know one is mandatory for colour if even exposure is required. However, I am only interested in 6x12, which should not be quite as bad. Has anyone used a 58 on 6x12 for colour and how did they find it? What about monochrome?

While I am at it, what about a 65mm on 612. Basically I am trying to get away with not using one (have not decided on which lens yet), but will face up to it if I have to!

Cheers,

Tom

Matthew Gorringe · Oct 17, 2006

Hi Tom,
I can't help much with the XL but I've found that using a 65mm Grandagon on 6x9 needs a centre filter if I start using much shift on the long axis of the film. I think if I was using 6x12 I would get the centre filter straight away, especially if I wanted to use movements.

In the end I haven't bothered getting one but am careful with shifts beyond about 25mm. I only do B+W and while you can dodge it out this isn't very satisfactory to my mind so I try to avoid the problem. I believe the Grandagon-N design has very slightly better fall-off performance than the XL or the APO-Grandagons which is why I chose it in the first place.

Matt.

MAGNAchrom · Oct 17, 2006

here is a recent handheld 6x12 taken with Kodak Portra 400NC and a 47mm lens, location: Santa Fe NM:

As you can see, it definitely vignettes. Your 58mm is also going to vignette by a similar amount. Yet for some subjects it seems to work. If you were doing precise architectural work however, I'd think your clients might prefer you to use a center filter. However, that being said, I rarely use any filters at all these days as I like the speed (and freedom) one gets with high-speed roll film and a 6x12 back.

David A. Goldfarb · Oct 17, 2006

I find I'm always using a center filter with my 55/4.5 Apo-Grandagon, 65/8 Super-Angulon, and 75/4.5 Grandagon-N with anything larger than 6x7. If you don't have one, you can still make interesting photographs, but chances are if you have it, you'll use it all the time (unless you're shooting handheld like Michael).

One good thing, though, is that while it's nice to have the "dedicated" filter, it's not absolutely necessary. I use a Schneider III filter on the 55, 75, and when I need it on the 90/8 Super-Angulon. Technically, I should use the IIIb on the 90, but I've checked and they're only 1/4 stop apart in the center. The Rodenstock filter for the 55 is stronger, so maybe one day, if I'm using the lens a lot, I'll get it.

The reality of the situation is that the center filter only partially corrects for falloff. Bob Salomon mentioned on the LF forum that at one time I think it was Rodenstock used to provide stronger center filters that corrected more accurately, but they were unpopular, because they would eat up 2-3 stops. So even the "dedicated" filters aren't necessarily matched so precisely to the lens, and which one you use is arguably a matter of taste. It does have to fit the filter thread of the lens, though, without any adapter rings or other filters between the center filter and the lens, so I use the dedicated filter for the 65/8 S-A, which takes 49mm filters, and the Scheider III on the other three lenses, which all have 67mm thread.

Baxter Bradford · Oct 17, 2006

Hello Tom

I was talking to Matt Sampson at Robert White yesterday about the XL range and centre filters. They had a 2nd hand centre spot filter (think it is now sold) as I was just buying a used 80XL. He said that it really was needed for the 58XL but not for the 80XL.
Having used a friends 58 once there wasn't a huge excess of movements on 5x4 and I used the filter after composing the shot. You probably could use it for B+W without the filter if not using much movement, but suspect the darkroom rescue work would become tiresome if you intend using the lens much.

Hope all is well

Tom Stanworth · Oct 18, 2006

I was afraid this would be the case! From my use of 65s on 5x4 for mono I suspected that what gained by the lower coverage required for 612 I would lose when using colout film. Hmmfff. Those CFs are so expensive and none of my filters will fit the external thread either. Maybe I could not use it for mono and use it for colour, for which Idont use any filters in any case (want that reality look).

Couldn't you have lied?

naturephoto1 · Oct 18, 2006

Baxter Bradford said:
Hello Tom

I was talking to Matt Sampson at Robert White yesterday about the XL range and centre filters. They had a 2nd hand centre spot filter (think it is now sold) as I was just buying a used 80XL. He said that it really was needed for the 58XL but not for the 80XL.
Having used a friends 58 once there wasn't a huge excess of movements on 5x4 and I used the filter after composing the shot. You probably could use it for B+W without the filter if not using much movement, but suspect the darkroom rescue work would become tiresome if you intend using the lens much.

Hope all is well

Hi Baxter,

Having spoken with or communicated with several people that had the Schneider Super Symmar 80mm XL I was informed that with transparencies, the lens almost always has enough falloff to require the Center ND filter. That is why I opted to keep my Rodenstock 90mm f6.8. On the other hand, I just got a Congo WA f6.3 90mm lens from Jim Galli for backpacking and long hikes. Jim has indicated that this tiny lens is a sharp one (I need to test it); it should not need a Center Filter. On the other hand it has very small image circle coverage (only 175mm at f22).

Rich

Ole · Oct 18, 2006

The tinier the lens, the bigger the falloff.

That's very roughly, but mostly true: Miniscule lenses like Angulons and WA Protars have a light fall-off roughly corresponding to cos^4(theta), while bulkier lenses like the Super-Angulons and similar approach cos^3(theta). Of course if (theta) small, the fall-off is small. So a 90mm lens has less need of a center filter than a 65mm lens, since the angle between the light ray to the corner and the lens axis is a lot smaller.

If you compare Schneider's graphs of illumination you will see that the 80mm Super-Symmar XL has a lot more fall-off in the corners (of 4x5") than the 90mm Super Angulon (any version).

Baxter Bradford · Oct 19, 2006

Thanks Rich and Ole

Will see how I fare with some transparency film in next few days. Not planning to sell old lenses just yet.

I have friends who use it happily without the centre spot. Generally I do not use massive movements with such short lenses, but there is always the possibility........! It is an expensive 'what if' item.

naturephoto1 · Oct 19, 2006

Baxter Bradford said:
Thanks Rich and Ole

Will see how I fare with some transparency film in next few days. Not planning to sell old lenses just yet.

I have friends who use it happily without the centre spot. Generally I do not use massive movements with such short lenses, but there is always the possibility........! It is an expensive 'what if' item.

Hi Baxter,

One of the people that I had communications with had an early lens. I believe his observations were not only due to movement, but the lens has that much light fall off toward the corners, particularly in the sky. He suggested that it was very annoying to the point that he almost always felt the need for the Grad ND Center Filter. However, at least some of the fall off can be corrected in Photoshop or like program. I have had several conversations with Bob Salomon of HP Marketing, US Distributor of Linhof and Rodenstock. He has indicated that he is not too happy with the light fall off characteristics of the new Schneider Super Symmar XL lenses in general.

Also, for me, in addition to my Rodenstock f6.8 90mm Grandagon MC lens I also have the Rodenstock f6.8 75mm Grandagon MC lens. Also, early on I purchased the Heliopan Grad ND Center filter for the 75mm lens. This only has a correction of 1 1/2 stops and is a 58mm filter size.

Rich

Baxter Bradford · Oct 19, 2006

Maybe it wasn't such a bargain then!

I'm off to Robert White, my local toy shop right now, so will see if they still have the filter. Unless Tom found it was still available......

Have to say only used 80XL once with Acros and it has produced great results.

naturephoto1 · Oct 19, 2006

Baxter Bradford said:
Maybe it wasn't such a bargain then!

I'm off to Robert White, my local toy shop right now, so will see if they still have the filter. Unless Tom found it was still available......

Have to say only used 80XL once with Acros and it has produced great results.

Baxter,

Certainly check the lens before the purchase of the filter. But, I know for the 75mm lens I wanted the option. You may find it to be OK for you. As I said, the one person had an early lens. It needed to be readjusted by Schneider. He also was very critical in his opinion. But, it discouraged me from the purchase. And it is not an inexpensive lens by any stretch of the imagination. Also, Bob Salomon is also probably basing his opinion on what he has read (including the published Schneider graphs) and heard from others.

Rich

JohnArs · Oct 19, 2006

As I see every photog has an own meaning on thad!
I very seldom use a CF on my 47 XL and on my 55 APO Grandagon and I use them with 4x5 not with 5,6 x 12 cm!
If I would use it only for 6x12 I would not have one!
My 2 cents!

Ole · Oct 19, 2006

naturephoto1 said:
Also, Bob Salomon is also probably basing his opinion on what he has read (including the published Schneider graphs) and heard from others.

Same with my opinions, except that I own and use both Angulons and Super Angulons. Yes, there is a difference. Yes, it can be visible. So why don't anyone use center filters on plain old Angulons??? They need it more, but since the angle of coverage is smaller they are usually not used for quite as wide shots, so the falloff towards the corners of any given film size is less (I use a 90mm f:6.8 Angulon on 4x5", and a 90mm Super-Angulon f:8 on both 4x5" and 5x7").

Tom Stanworth · Oct 19, 2006

The thing is I can get a new Nikkor 65 for a great price from BH photovideo...miles cheaper than a 58XL at any rate. I am happy that I can get away with the 65 without CF but for colour I suspect I will need one on 612. The 65 F4 Nikkor plus CF is teh same price as the 58XL without. A used 64 f4 being even cheaper. Looks like the Nikkor 65 f4 is the winner...

micek · Oct 19, 2006

For what it is worth, I never thought it necessary to use a CF on my 65mm nikon lens, except when shooting 4x5 and applying some rise/shift.

58XL for 6x12 Center filter needed??

Tom Stanworth

Matthew Gorringe

MAGNAchrom

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Baxter Bradford

Tom Stanworth

naturephoto1

Ole

Moderator

Baxter Bradford

naturephoto1

Baxter Bradford

naturephoto1

JohnArs

Ole

Moderator

Tom Stanworth

micek

58XL for 6x12 Center filter needed??

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency