an older schneider super angulon 90mm f8, any good?

[game]

I can buy a schneider super angulon in a copal 0 shutter with serial 8896984 for 175 euro (230 dollar) it is not like the new ones. it is not totally black.
but it is not a very very old model either.

Is it any good? will it be near my 150mm which is a recent rodenstock sinaron f5.6?

like to hear from you guys, thanks! kind regards Game

 

[Roger Hicks]

90/8 SAs are mostly very good; it's the 65/8 that is iffy.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

That's a good price, if it's in good condition. Check the slow speeds on the shutter. If they are sticking, figure $80 or so to have the shutter cleaned.

It is probably a single coated lens, and the image circle isn't as large as the latest f:5.6 and 4.5 wide lenses, but it's a pretty good lens nonetheless. I have one, and I use it fairly often. Here's a sample shot, which has a little front rise, and I don't think I owned a center filter yet at the time I shot this one--

 

[Ole]

An old 90/8 Super Angulon is one of my favorite lenses - on 5x7"!

 

[keithwms]

I definitely like my old 90/8 SA, even though it is missing a few shutter speeds. It doesn't have a good coating so a shade would help.

Here's a kinda poorly scanned 4x5 chrome taken with the 90/8 on my lowly crown:

Hmm Ole, that shot inspires me try 5x7 with it. I'll see if I can reverse the standards on my cambo.

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

90/8 SAs are mostly very good; it's the 65/8 that is iffy.

Hi Roger,

what's wrong with the 8/65 SA?

Ulrich

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi Roger,

what's wrong with the 8/65 SA?

Ulrich

Aaargh! Horrible mistake! I was thinking of the 47/8. Complete brain fade when I wrote the original post. Nothing wrong with the 65/8 -- I think I still have one -- but the 47/8 was bad enough that Linhof once rejected 11 out of 12 in one batch (the 47/5.6 was a vastly better lens). Others who used fixed 47/8 lenses also had high reject rates.

My apologies to everyone, including Schneider.

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

Aaargh! Horrible mistake! I was thinking of the 47/8. Complete brain fade when I wrote the original post. Nothing wrong with the 65/8 -- I think I still have one -- but the 47/8 was bad enough that Linhof once rejected 11 out of 12 in one batch (the 47/5.6 was a vastly better lens). Others who used fixed 47/8 lenses also had high reject rates.

My apologies to everyone, including Schneider.

Thank you Roger. I read this with great relieve. I have one for my little Crown Graphic.

Ulrich

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ulrich, not to disparage Roger at all, but surely the results you get with your lens tell you more about how good it is than he possibly can. I mean, you have the lens and he doesn't.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Ulrich, not to disparage Roger at all, but surely the results you get with your lens tell you more about how good it is than he possibly can. I mean, you have the lens and he doesn't.

Dear Dan,

I agree completely. I was referring only to buying the lenses -- and even then, I got the wrong lens! I would only buy a 47/8 if it were Linhof-selected, or had been though other additional QC procedures, or if I could buy it with return privileges. A good 47/8 is excellent: they're just a bit rarer than good 65s or 90s. Indeed, this is the only Schneider lens of which I have heard reports that are more often unflattering than not: most of my own modern MF and LF lenses are in fact Schneider.

On the other hand, it is easy to be made nervous, and to wonder what hidden problems may suddenly manifest themselves: will it suddenly fall apart, for example? Also, he might only recently have acquired it, and not have used it much. Once again, I apologize for spreading false alarm and despondency.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[joepi]

Hi all,

I would be careful to promote the 65/8 S-Angulon for 4x5 due to the tiny 00 shutter (lensboards hard to find) and the "just fitting" image circle.

Regards,

JP

 

[Dan Fromm]

JP, its really a lens for 6x9.

As for lensboards, holes can be drilled.

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

Also, he might only recently have acquired it, and not have used it much.

Exactly! The only picture I have printed so far is this one

. BTW There might exist variations between lenses of different vintage. My lens is built into a Copal 0. It is indeed built for 6x9. I am using it with a 6x6 rollfilm back in my 2x3 Crown Graphic actually.

Ulrich

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The 65/8 is indeed a tight fit on 4x5", and I'm often cropping with it, as in this photo--

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

or leaving the darkened corners Atget style, if it seems to work for the composition. I sent out a postcard once like this in one of the APUG postcard exchanges--scan of the 4x5" postcard attached.

 

[Richard Kelham]

Hi all,

I would be careful to promote the 65/8 S-Angulon for 4x5 due to the tiny 00 shutter (lensboards hard to find) and the "just fitting" image circle.

The earlier 90mm f8 Super Angulon's were fitted into the 00 shutter too. I'm not sure when they changed to the larger shutter.



Richard

 

[Ole]

My 90/8 SA is in a 00 shutter. It's a tiny little thing, well hidden behind the flaring front cell.

But it works, and once I mount it on the lens board for whatever camera I'm using that day there's no chance I'll take it off to use a different lens. Although I do take it off sometimes to put it on a lens board for a different camera (4x5" or 5x7") ...

 

[game]

well,
I picked it up today.
lens looks absolutally immaculate, not a single spot.
shutter sounds fine. I'm sure it will perform just fine.
It might look slightly dated in comparison to my way newer 150mm, but who cares.
thanks for the advice, kind regards gAME

 

[game]

well,
I picked it up today. (for 20dollar less than agreed...)
lens looks absolutally immaculate, not a single spot.
shutter sounds fine at all speeds. I'm sure it will perform just fine.
It might look slightly dated in comparison to my way newer 150mm, but who cares.
thanks for the advice, kind regards game