6" f6.3 Bausch & Lomb Metrogon vs. Nikon 150mm f/8 SW

[bicycletricycle]

I am looking for a wide angle lens to use for 6x24 and/or 4x10 at night. It looks like the nikon will cover both of these wide open as will with the metrogon. The As i understand it the Metrogon was an aeriasl lens and thus was made to shoot wide open and so maybe it will be a little sharper at these big apertures? Has any one ahd a metrogon here? I could not fing information about the Metrogon, specifically information about fall off. Any information will help.

 

[JG Motamedi]

I have tried to use Metrogon and Metrogon-type lenses before, and but have never found them satisfactory; the most notable problem with these lenses is their fierce fall-off. Does the 1/2 stop difference between f6.3 and f8 make a significant difference in your exposures? If not I would recommend using a modern WA lens.

Unfortunately there are few fast wide-angle lenses at this FL. If you can afford it, the 150/5.6 Super Symmar XL might be the best available.

 

[bicycletricycle]

I was thinking more along the lines of better resolution

since the metrogon was mde to shoot wide open do you think that it would be sharper. The half stop difference is not that big of a deal.

 

[MarkS]

There have been big improvements in lens design, especially in wideangle lenses, since the 1940's. The multicoating that the Nikkor has will also be a big help in reducing flare and ghosting, when shooting at night.

 

[JG Motamedi]

since the metrogon was mde to shoot wide open do you think that it would be sharper. The half stop difference is not that big of a deal.

Well, it was designed to be used open wide, but as Mark points out above, lens design has changed quite a bit since 1933, when the Metrogon (AKA Topogon) was designed. I am a great fan of old lenses, but in terms of sharpness and eveness of coverage modern WA Biogon-type lenses just can't be beaten.

 

[bicycletricycle]

more coverage wide open

So i guess the only real advantage would be that the Metrogon covers 90 degrees wide open and using information from the Nikon specs it looks like the 150 sw covers a little less wide open. Do you think that the metrogon would have more distortion? maybe at the edges? It was made for aerial photography for the military so i would imagine that they would have tried to correct for that as much as possible.

 

[Ole]

Aerial lenses were not made to be sharper, but to have minimum distorsion at operating conditions. Just like repro lenses, just that the "original" is at a lot farther distance.

Comparing a Metrogon to a Nikon SW is - like comparing apples and eggs.

Fall-off can be grouped into two broad classes: HUGE rear elements give somewhat less fall-off than lenses with smaller rear elements. That's not lens design, it's simple geometry. You get fall-off anyway.

My personal preference for this application would be a 165mm f:6.8 Angulon; or a 121mm f:8 Super-Angulon. Both were designed to cover 18x24cm, the somewhat narrower "metric" equivalent of 8x10".

 

[bicycletricycle]

I was looking at the angulons....

but i thought that there wasn't much of a chance that the 121 would cover 4x10 wide open and the nikon is wider (i am looking for the widest that will cover wide open) than the 165mm. Do you think that the SA 165mm would be a "better" lens than the 150mm nikon SW? and if so why? I really like that picture of you with the 5x7 tech, i dont think there is another 5x7 you could shoot handheld.

 

[bicycletricycle]

strangely enough the metrogon looks like an egg

Laugh out loud

 

[Nick Zentena]

The 120mm Nikon SW covers 8x10. Not by much but it makes it. Also who has a 150mm SW for sale? You see the odd 120mm for sale.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Oh wait you mean wide open?

 

[Ole]

but i thought that there wasn't much of a chance that the 121 would cover 4x10 wide open and the nikon is wider (i am looking for the widest that will cover wide open) than the 165mm. Do you think that the SA 165mm would be a "better" lens than the 150mm nikon SW? and if so why? I really like that picture of you with the 5x7 tech, i dont think there is another 5x7 you could shoot handheld.

The 121 SA is actually not too bad wide open on 18x24cm, which is a bit more image circle than both your options. "Not too bad" is of course subjective...

The 165mm SA is a BIG, HUGE lens. What I use is a 165mm Angulon; a relatively small, lightweight lens. It covers 5x7" very well, and 18x24cm adequately (that's what it was made for, after all).
Is it "better" than the Nikon 150 SW? No probably not. But in my opinion price and weight are important too, so I have a 165/6.8 Angulon and no Nikon 150 SW. So in that regard it could be said to be "better". Besides it's a lens I have,am familiar with, use a lot, and which has given me some of the best pictures I've ever shot.

Any camera can be shot hand held if it's too difficult to get the tripod to where you are, and the shutter time is short enough...

 

[bicycletricycle]

121 angulon wide open

By not too bad do you mean that the image is really dark or distorted in the edges? I already have a 150mm nikon that i might be selling if i can figure out a better option. The best data that i could find showed the 121 SA with 290mm coverage @f22 or something, I thought that it would loose more coverage opened up.

 

[Dave Wooten]

Series III A EX WA f 12.5 8 x 10 Wollensak 159 mm

 

[bicycletricycle]

THe Wollensack is too slow

i need a lens for night time shooting and the wollensack is too slow.

 

[Dave Wooten]

i need a lens for night time shooting and the wollensack is too slow.

There is also an f/9 version of this Wollensak, I havent used it however...

1. If you are shooting roll film on your 6 x 24 are you planning on using a film like Delta 3200?

2. Are you hand holding or for your particular application to you need to hand hold?

3. What is your night scenerio, street scenes by street light, NYC on Broadway, Las Vegas Strip etc. In the second 2 scenerios f/8-f11 and even f /16 can be used successfully with the Delta 3200 Film... for other night scenes, I would think you might be using a tripod and longer exposures which would eliminate the necessity for "large" aperture lenses (?)

 

[Kobin]

I have a metrogon from Surplus Shed, but haven't used it yet. Also got the 6" red and yellow center filters from an ebay auction, and I was going to suggest these filters to bicycletricycle, but they would slow down the metrogon a few stops. I suppose then only the price of the lens would be adventagious.

It would be interesting to know how this plays out. Keep us informed.

K.

 

[bicycletricycle]

I need to get this lens for a project in complete darkness

I am planning to use this lens to shoot out were there is no artificial light and i will not be using 3200, hate the grain. Probably exposures of a couple hours. For the 6x24 i am planning to get the fotoman camera. Does surplus shed still have these? How much does a bausch and lomb 6" metrogon usually go for?

 

[bicycletricycle]

not cmplete darkness, just the moon

moonlight only

 

[vet173]

I have a metrogon. Only $135. for the whole nose assy. Glad I got it that way as there are different apature and shutter spacing locations. If you only have the cells you might not know whitch. Now buy a shutter, have it machined, I'm into it about 6 bones in the end, so don't think of it as being on the cheap. I have shot it with Fp-4 without the center filter and I have not experienced the light falloff to the extent some described. My plan was to use it for landscapes. On 8x10 the horizen gets too small too fast. I found it is a much better fit for the 5-50ft scene.

 

[fotoman]

How About???

Not a direct answer to your question, but what about the Fuji 125/8 SW?. I've used it on our 624 camera and think it's a great lens for that format... wider, cheaper and a lot more available than the Nikon 150SW. I've only shot with it at f22 or smaller (very sharp), so I can't advise on how it performs wide open. I haven't used it on our 4x10 yet either, but Fuji's specs indicate it will cover (@f22) with 7mm to spare.

 

[Ole]

By not too bad do you mean that the image is really dark or distorted in the edges? I already have a 150mm nikon that i might be selling if i can figure out a better option. The best data that i could find showed the 121 SA with 290mm coverage @f22 or something, I thought that it would loose more coverage opened up.

The 121 SA has the same fall-off characteristic at all apertures, so no: It isn't "really dark and distorted at the edges". The sharpness in the corners at f:8 is somewhat less than at f:22, but there is no more darkness or distortion.

I haven't used the 121 SA that much, but I've used it's "little brother" the 90/8 SA at all apertures on 5x7". It's a nice lens for that size film when I need really wide shots!

 

[Jerevan]

I am planning to use this lens to shoot out were there is no artificial light and i will not be using 3200, hate the grain. Probably exposures of a couple hours.

As far I can tell from reading your answers, you're gonna ride out into the sticks with a 6x24 or 4x10, and a lens covering the format wide open and then do several hours of exposure in moonlight with some film that is not Delta 3200?

I can't see why a f12.5 lens is "too slow" if you are talking about exposures of several hours? Almost anything would do when you get into that exposure range. Unless you want to get a minimal depth of field, but that can be done with movements on a LF camera. If it's a problem with focussing, then bring a flashlight. And you're talking of B/W shooting - some of the fall-off can be compensated for in printing.

You should have been more specific about what you wanted to do from the beginning, it would have made it all a bit easier to give advice.

 

[Dave Wooten]

moonlight only

For Moonlight only you do not need to shoot wide open at all, you can pick any aperture...if landscapes and you need dof you can stop down.

If you are shooting stars and star trails etc you do not need to focus, just set your lens at infinity and point. Use the "middle" apertures of the lens.

If you are shooting the moon itself directly, remember that the moon is reflected sunlight, daylight exposure, and follow the sunny 16 rule,

for 400 film for example shoot at 1/500 of a second at f/11 or f/16, no need for a time exposure, hand hold it if you will. For 125 film, shoot at f/16 or f/11 and shoot at 1/125 second. Hope that helps.

Seemingly for your application you do not need a "fast" lens, you just need to hold it still-tripod.

Good luck

 

[bicycletricycle]

Im not going to shoot the night sky, star trails, moon, etc

I am planning to use this set up for a particular project i have had in my mind for a long time, it involves shooting landscapes when the available light is from the moon. I already shoot a lot at night and would prefer not to sit around for hours but sometimes you have to, reciprocity failure is a killer. I dont like grainy images so generally i stay away from fast films. I am more familiar with 120 film and usually use illford pan f 50. What I am really curious about is if the metrogon lens, which was made to shoot wide open, might be better for this application than using something like the nikon (or other modern wide angle) The reason i focused on the nikon is that as far as i can tell from the research i have done the 150 sw seems to be the widest modern wide angle that will cover these formats, 6x24 and 4x10, wide open. It is hard to find specs on lens coverage wide open but nikon did publish thus data. Ole says that the 121 SA will cover wide open which is really usefull information because that lens is wider and cheaper and smaller than the nikon 150SW and probably has similar resolving power. Not many lenses for large format have been made to shoot wide open and so i thought that the metrogon might be something to look into.