Basic Three

[blackdogphoto]

Ok I am asking for peoples thought's on the "Basic Three Lens" they would have in there LF bag O tricks.... Don't have to be the 1,000.00 or higher type's either. Just old workhourse's.
I am asking for my son in law who doesn't have access to a putter where he lives.

As for me 210/350mm, a 125 or 150, and maybe a 400 any more ideas

 

[roteague]

For me, it is my 90mm Nikkor, 135mm Schneider and 210 Rodenstock.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Robert's mix is a good one. A combination of 90/150/210 or 240 or thereabouts would be about right. If you want to keep prices reasonable, something like the 90/8.0 Super-Angulon, and 150 and 210mm Symmars would be a good kit. If he can afford newer multicoated versions, those are a luxury, but single coated lenses from the 1970s still make fine images and are very reasonably priced.

If he has a camera with 20" or more bellows, he could use a 210/370 Symmar convertible. The convertibles aren't quite as good at wide apertures as the later versions not designed as convertibles, but I have a few of them, and they are still fine performers at the apertures at which they are likely to be used. In the converted mode, they should be used stopped down.

 

[Ole]

That's the biggest question I've seen in a while...

I agree with the 90/150/210 - for 4x5".

Or 120/180/240 if your tastes run to slightly narrower scenes.

Some might prefer 135/210/360.

Others like wide vistas, and would like 75/90/120.

I find it a bit difficult to answer this, so I have 90/120/135/150/165/180/210/240/360/420 myself. And I'm looking for a 300...

 

[johnnywalker]

Ole, you should trade these lenses for the new Xchmeiglefump 90 - 500 f1.4 zoom.

 

[bobfowler]

4X5 - I'd choose my 90mm, 180mm, and either a 65mm or 10", depending on what I was shooting.

5x7 - 150mm, 215mm, 12"

The question is much easier for medium format... 50, 80, 150!

 

[Ole]

Ole, you should trade these lenses for the new Xchmeiglefump 90 - 500 f1.4 zoom.

For that, I would trade one 6" lens that doesn't fit in my nice metric procession!

 

[Jeremy]

180-305-432 (17")

This is for 5x7

 

[chiller]

I'm a 90 - 150 - 240 kinda guy. [5x4]

Steve

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

You asked about three, so I suggested three, but personally, I'm more like Ole. The usual 4x5" kit is 65/75/90/135 or 150 or 168/210/360. As for which "normal" focal length I use--135/3.5 Planar (cammed) if speed is important and I'm mainly shooting rangefinder style, 150/4.5 Xenar (cammed) if compactness is important and I need the option of shooting with the rangefinder, 135-235/5.6-12 convertible Symmar if compactness is important and I don't need the rangefinder, 168 ser. iii Dagor if I need maximum image circle.

 

[fparnold]

135/203/12" in eastern woods,
75/135/203 in open areas.

The 12" (300mm, though not marked as such), is seemingly too close to the 203 to often justify the extra weight, bulk, and bellows draw in wind.

Generally, I'm a two-lens type of person, so 135/203, though 135/300 would make more sense. The 135 symmar and 203 ektar are just so light and sharp, though, that it's hard to pack one of the other two.

 

[paul owen]

For 5x4 I use - 65 / 110 / 210. Seems to cover most eventualities (I don't go long!!).

 

[Troy Ammons]

I have used a few 90mm lenses and IMO the Nikon 90mm is the best for the $.

I also have a Rodenstock 150mm Sironar MC lens that is the sharpest LF lens I own. Actually its as sharp or sharper than some of my 35mm lenses. Very nice and my favorite. Paid $400 for it and highly recommended.

Just bought a G-claron 210mm lens, but have not tested it yet. Very small and F9, but it is supposedly sharp. I bought it because it covers 8x10 and is close to 28mm equiv on 8x10.

 

[removed account4]

90 - 150 - 210/370 convert.
older chrome barrel schneiders are sometimes overlooked because
of their age, but they are often an underdogs + good performers

 

[jmdavis]

How about 3 lenses for less than $1000 US. I use a 90 Fuji SWD f8, a nikkor 135w f5.6, and a Schneider Symar-S multicoated f5.6. The combined total for all of these was less than $1000.

To be fair, the Fuji is singlecoated and looks like it has schneideritis, but shoots very well and the taking surface is perfect. The nikkor was mint, and the Schneider has perfect glass, but a few barrel scratches.

I like the wider side of things here in the east, and the 90/135 are my two most used lenses. The Schneider's main use in the past year has been portraits.

 

[rbarker]

Too many variables left undefined, bDog. Which LF format? What's he shooting? How much bellows (which camera) does he have?

For most anything, camera-wise, in 4x5, the 90/150/210 combo is pretty versatile. But, if he shoots portraits and doesn't like wide scenics, swap the 90 for a 360T. etc., etc., etc.

 

[Ole]

How about 3 lenses for less than $1000 US. I use a 90 Fuji SWD f8, a nikkor 135w f5.6, and a Schneider Symar-S multicoated f5.6. The combined total for all of these was less than $1000. ...

My total lens lineup has cost me around $2000 - and that includes a 135/3.5 Zeiss Planar and a 150/4.5 Voigtländer APO-Lanthar. The most expensive was neither of these, but the 90/8 Super-Angulon which is also one of my most modern lenses.

List time again?

 

[Loose Gravel]

For 5x7, tough choice. 72/150/250. I can crop and get everything else if I have to.

 

[jmdavis]

My total lens lineup has cost me around $2000 - and that includes a 135/3.5 Zeiss Planar and a 150/4.5 Voigtländer APO-Lanthar. The most expensive was neither of these, but the 90/8 Super-Angulon which is also one of my most modern lenses.

List time again?

You are a master bargainer and scrounger. I defer to your abilities. The Zeiss Planar sounds interesting to me. Have you posted any shots with it?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have one in my gallery. I was using a 6x7 back, but it covers 4x5".--

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

 

[raucousimages]

4x5 in studio 150/210/250 imagon
4x5 outdoor 65/90/150
8x10 210/300/480

Lenses are tools. The more I have the better I can fit the tool the exact job at hand. I now have 65/90/127/150/210/250 imagon/250/300/480. I still want a 47/120 makro/180 and something about 800. I take my time, keep looking and talk to people. I am suprised how many times someone has said they know where to find something I am looking for. Often at a great price or even for some sort of a trade.

 

[jimgalli]

I'll have to assume 4X5. 125, 270, 450. 90, 210 would be useful to the kit also.

 

[Ole]

You are a master bargainer and scrounger. I defer to your abilities. The Zeiss Planar sounds interesting to me. Have you posted any shots with it?

I'm sure I have, but I don't always keep track of which lens I used for which shot. Eh - hang on - most of the IR shots posted here, elsewhere, or on my web page, were shot with either that, the APO-Lanthar, or the 210/4.5 Xenar. The 210 shots should be easy to distinguish, but I'm not so sure about the others...

 

[Mongo]

For 4x5 my current lineup consists of 90 (x2), 135 (x2), 150, 162, 210, and 250. But when I'm out-and-about, I almost always take a combination of 90 (SA), 135, and 250.

For 8x10, the current lineup is 150, 210, 250, and 480. I rarely take the 250 out when I shoot 8x10, so the usual lineup is 150, 210, and 480.

I totaled up the cost of all of the lenses (exclusing the 90 SA as it was a gift so I don't know the cost), and all told I have about US$1300 invested in lenses. I am an extremely patient shopper.

 

[John Kasaian]

Stick with one lens. I've got at least a half dozen on 8x10 'dorff boards and whichever one or two I take with me will nearly always be the least preferred for whatever scene I've discovered. This never happened when my only lens was a 14" Commercial Ektar!