Buying my first lens for 4x5

[removed account4]

Why do people continue to use incomplete names when making suggestions? There has never been a “Sironar-S”. It an Apo Sironar-S!

I know, pet peevve of mine too !
.. what can you do ? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ its the internet?
at least no one suggested one of those LF autofocus lenses
they are pretty expensive from what I hear and not worth the money...
assisting fees, lunch and after the shoot drinks tend to put one over budget if used on a regular basis

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I would like to buy my first lens for my 4x5 camera (Chamonix C45F-2). I want it to be somewhere around 180mm (which should be 50 in 35mm equiv.) and it should be a „no-compromise“ lens in terms of quality and speed even if that would mean it is a bit pricier - within reason. I don’t need rare, much sought-after, legendary lens, I want a reliable, high quality „work horse“ that will join me on my photographic journeys for the rest of my life.

180mm is a slightly long lens on 4x5. If you want the 35mm "50mm look," go for a 150mm lens instead.

Lens choice should include other considerations besides focal length as well. Coverage matters and size matters. For example, I'll never carry a 210mm Plasmat design lens (a lens that is "standard" for many) just because it's too big and bulky for me. The 180mm Plasmats are likely too big for me as well. I like small and lightweight.

If you start with a more "normal" 150mm or a 135mm lens, any of the more modern Plasmats from any of the big four manufacturers will be great lenses and not big at all.

If you really want to go with 180mm and want to stay small, look at the Fujinon A series lenses. The trade-off for size is a smaller maximum aperture. That doesn't bother me, but you may decide you want to go bigger and brighter if your eyesight is not the best.

It's all a compromise.

Doremus

 

[bonk]

I’d get a 210 not a 180 from one of the big 4 above. It ain’t 35mm ! My first two lenses were a 210 and a 120. Used them for years.

Could you elaborate why?

 

[ic-racer]

Most all Large Format lenses would be analogous to the name brand lenses of 35mm cameras, like Nikkor, Rokkor-X, Yashica ML, Hexanon, etc. So they are very high quality with not many differences.
There were not many "Spiratone" or other cheaper no-name brand large format lenses. Even the more affordable large format lens brands like "Caltar" were made by top manufacturers and are excellent quality.

So it really comes down to quality of the shutter, and condition of the lens elements, is a retaining ring or flange included. Is a lensboard that matches your camera included. Does it have the correct aperture scale, etc.

 

[Vaughn]

Could you elaborate why?

I'll chime in, since I was thinking of the same issue when I wrote above. Thinking ahead to adding lenses in the future, the 180mm is a little awkward. As far as spacing one's focal length, the 180mm makes both the 150mm and the 210mm a little close...both common and less expensive focal lengths, generally. Start with a 150mm (my personal preference) and one can bracket it with a 90mm or 120mm, and a 210mm.

The 180mm is a great one lens set-up. Later add a 135mm, or wider -- and for the long side, perhaps a 240mm or 250mm. But if you get a good lens/shutter deal of whatever focal length, use it, get use to how it sees, and you can resell it easily enough if you decide differently. Just joking...no one sells their lenses.

 

[GKC]

The issues with the127mm Ektar will be:
1. No wiggle room for movements
2. If it's coated, it will be single coated
3 Requires a slip on ring for attaching filters, hood, etc

Otherwise I agree it's a darned near beautiful lens.

If you want a 180mm by all means get a 180mm---it will either work for you or it won't.
Only you can decide.

Keep in mind there will be differences between samples of identical lenses from the same manufacturer due to manufacturing.
Rarely is this an issue but if you're working for, say NASA or something, you'll send a sampling of maybe ten identical lenses to a lab to document which one is superior.
That's overkill. Modern lenses from all the major players in newer copal shutters are the cat's meow. The condition of the glass and shutter will likely be the determining factor.

Old lenses in well respected old shutters are sure a lot of fun though, and their performance can be very impressive indeed!.

 

[Bob S]

The issues with the127mm Ektar will be:
1. No wiggle room for movements
2. If it's coated, it will be single coated
3 Requires a slip on ring for attaching filters, hood, etc

Otherwise I agree it's a darned near beautiful lens.

If you want a 180mm by all means get a 180mm---it will either work for you or it won't.
Only you can decide.

Keep in mind there will be differences between samples of identical lenses from the same manufacturer due to manufacturing.
Rarely is this an issue but if you're working for, say NASA or something, you'll send a sampling of maybe ten identical lenses to a lab to document which one is superior.
That's overkill. Modern lenses from all the major players in newer copal shutters are the cat's meow. The condition of the glass and shutter will likely be the determining factor.

Old lenses in well respected old shutters are sure a lot of fun though, and their performance can be very impressive indeed!.

I sold,a lot of lenses tomNASA for use on the Space Shuttle and for photogrammetry of shuttle landings on the ground.
We never sent them lenses for testing, other then when they bought LInhof or Rollei cameras for destructive testing for space flight qualification. They never sent back lenses as being unacceptable for their needs. And we never cherry picked lenses for them. They got the same off the shelf lenses as everyone else did.

 

[GKC]

I sold,a lot of lenses tomNASA for use on the Space Shuttle and for photogrammetry of shuttle landings on the ground.
We never sent them lenses for testing, other then when they bought LInhof or Rollei cameras for destructive testing for space flight qualification. They never sent back lenses as being unacceptable for their needs. And we never cherry picked lenses for them. They got the same off the shelf lenses as everyone else did.

Sorry Bob, I stand corrected! I realize I was thinking of a story about Bradford Washburn and the lenses he was considering for an aerial camera he was having built

 

[138S]

Linhof or Rollei ... They never sent back lenses as being unacceptable for their needs. And we never cherry picked lenses for them.

A question is if Linhof/SINAR cherry picked the manufacturer's lens production...

We know well that Linhof/SINAR had an additional QC, we also know that lenses delivered to those premium commercial channels were to meet those additional QC

As manufacturer (SK, Rodenstock) had obviously evaluated optical performance of each copy then a question arises... did the manufacturer cherry picked what glass was diverted to those premium commercial channels (to meet those additional QC) ?

 

[Bob S]

A question is if Linhof/SINAR cherry picked the manufacturer's lens production...

We know well that Linhof/SINAR had an additional QC, we also know that lenses delivered to those premium commercial channels were to meet those additional QC

As manufacturer (SK, Rodenstock) had obviously evaluated optical performance of each copy then a question arises... did the manufacturer cherry picked what glass was diverted to those premium commercial channels (to meet those additional QC) ?

I said in my post. The lenses for the LInhof Aero Technika for the Shuttle and the lenses delivered for the Rollei 6008 Shuttle cameras and the lenses delivered for photogrammetry records for NASA were picked at random off our inventory.
Further the lenses that we sold to the National Park Service, American Traffic System and all other government and commercial entities were also picked at random from our inventory. That includes the lenses sold to the official White House photographers as well as to national magazine photographers for recording inaugurations, major sporting events, world wide advertising campaigns, etc..

the only time that cherry picked, factory tested and color and resolution and distortion matched was for one very large order for an advertising studio for Apo Ronar lenses that they found unacceptable for table top catalog work and they replaced them with off the shelf Makro Sironar lenses.

furthermore, we, as the distributor, had no way to cherry pick lenses for customers and the factories wouldn’t without special charges for the service.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

A 180 is a bit longer than normal on 4x5... But I would probably use it more than the 150, which is considered normal. I also use a 210 a lot.

 

[138S]

I said in my post. The lenses for the LInhof Aero Technika for the Shuttle and the lenses delivered for the Rollei 6008 Shuttle cameras and the lenses delivered for photogrammetry records for NASA were picked at random off our inventory.
Further the lenses that we sold to the National Park Service, American Traffic System and all other government and commercial entities were also picked at random from our inventory. That includes the lenses sold to the official White House photographers as well as to national magazine photographers for recording inaugurations, major sporting events, world wide advertising campaigns, etc..

the only time that cherry picked, factory tested and color and resolution and distortion matched was for one very large order for an advertising studio for Apo Ronar lenses that they found unacceptable for table top catalog work and they replaced them with off the shelf Makro Sironar lenses.

furthermore, we, as the distributor, had no way to cherry pick lenses for customers and the factories wouldn’t without special charges for the service.

Bob, my question was beyond that, let me formulate it clearer: Had the same Rodenstock product the same QC requirements if diverted to SINAR than if diverted to Caltar ? Did a Technika stamp guarantee a higher (minimum) performance than other brands that offered better retail discounts?

We all know that production had certain varability, at least it is known that John Sexton owned several Nikon W samples until he got top performers, my understanding is that Technika stamped glass had QC performance levels that would not meet all the non Technika stamped units of the same design... Am I wrong ?

 

[jim10219]

P.S. get a 150 first. Or a bit wider, 135. Likely to be easier to find and more affordable than a 180.

Yeah, go with the 150. They're the most common 4x5 lens of the newer lenses, and you're going to get your best value from them. In other words, you can get a higher quality lens for less money in the 150mm focal length than any other focal length for a 4x5 camera.

Anything multicoated with a newer shutter from Fuji, Nikon, Schneider, or Rodenstock would be about equal. The Schneider 150/5.6 APO Symmar is probably the best of the bunch, but also the most expensive, and probably not worth the extra money unless you're doing scientific work. The Fujinon NW 150/5.6 will probably be the best value.

 

[138S]

The Schneider 150/5.6 APO Symmar is probably the best of the bunch, but also the most expensive, and probably not worth the extra money unless you're doing scientific work.

APO Symmar 150mm (1990's)
f/11 54 60 54
f/16 60 60 54
f/22 42 42 38

Symmar-S 150mm (1980's)
f/11 76 85 38
f/16 57 60 38
f/22 67 67 48


From Chris. Perez tests... ok, this is a not a Lab test but a DIY test with particular samples, and being peak performance not that important... The APO stamp is only an stamp, and in many cases we can find S samples outperforming APO samples.

Clearly the APO stamp is expensive, another thing is if it yields something more or not, the APO version may be marginally better in the corners but worse in the center, something that may be hacked by adjusting the inter-cell separation, still we should test several samples to know if this is a trend or an exception.

Anyway that old Symmar-S tested sample rocks, by f/22 it clearly outperforms the APO in all the field, still we are talking only about a DIY test, still shows what is practical yield, and that "better vs worse" is something "elastic".

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

APO Symmar 150mm (1990's)
f/11 54 60 54
f/16 60 60 54
f/22 42 42 38

Symmar-S 150mm (1980's)
f/11 76 85 38
f/16 57 60 38
f/22 67 67 48


From Chris. Perez tests... ok, this is a not a Lab test but a DIY test with particular samples, and being peak performance not that important... The APO stamp is only an stamp, and in many cases we can find S samples outperforming APO samples.

Clearly the APO stamp is expensive, another thing is if it yields something more or not, the APO version may be marginally better in the corners but worse in the center, something that may be hacked by adjusting the inter-cell separation, still we should test several samples to know if this is a trend or an exception.

Anyway that old Symmar-S tested sample rocks, by f/22 it clearly outperforms the APO in all the field, still we are talking only about a DIY test, still shows what is practical yield, and that "better vs worse" is something "elastic".

I bought just the Schneider 150mm APO Symmar. It was rich enough for my blood at around $500 from Japan, They wanted around $1400 for a Symmar S. Once thing be careful about is Schneideritis, which seem to have white spots inside Schneider lenses along the barrels. Some people claim it doesn't matter. But I'm not too sure. MIne doesn't haven't them.

 

[Bob S]

Bob, my question was beyond that, let me formulate it clearer: Had the same Rodenstock product the same QC requirements if diverted to SINAR than if diverted to Caltar ? Did a Technika stamp guarantee a higher (minimum) performance than other brands that offered better retail discounts?

We all know that production had certain varability, at least it is known that John Sexton owned several Nikon W samples until he got top performers, my understanding is that Technika stamped glass had QC performance levels that would not meet all the non Technika stamped units of the same design... Am I wrong ?

Both LInhof and Sinar bought The Rodenstock Siemens Star test rejects to test their lenses. This is the same system Rodenstock used in their QC. Sold Sinar before LInhof but never saw how they tested. I did watch lens testing at the LInhof factory.
Most lenses that LInhof rejected were rejected because of dirt inside the lens that their inspectors could not clean.
LInhof would pick some lenses for use on Technorama cameras, some for the Aero Technika and AeroTronica cameras and others for non specific cameras.

the LInhof logo on the lens represented the highest possible quality for that lens for the purpose it was intended for.

 

[138S]

Both LInhof and Sinar bought The Rodenstock Siemens Star test rejects to test their lenses. This is the same system Rodenstock used in their QC. Sold Sinar before LInhof but never saw how they tested. I did watch lens testing at the LInhof factory.
Most lenses that LInhof rejected were rejected because of dirt inside the lens that their inspectors could not clean.
LInhof would pick some lenses for use on Technorama cameras, some for the Aero Technika and AeroTronica cameras and others for non specific cameras.

the LInhof logo on the lens represented the highest possible quality for that lens for the purpose it was intended for.

Bob, thanks for your explanation. The single Technika stamped lens I have is a convertible Symmar 360, it is crazy sharp, I was suspecting yet that a Technika stamp was not merely decorative.

I bought just the Schneider 150mm APO Symmar. It was rich enough for my blood at around $500 from Japan, They wanted around $1400 for a Symmar S. Once thing be careful about is Schneideritis, which seem to have white spots inside Schneider lenses along the barrels. Some people claim it doesn't matter. But I'm not too sure. MIne doesn't haven't them.

Schneideritis has no impact in the image, it's a purely cosmetic issue. It may look problem is in the barrel inside, but if it was that it could be painted again... so it's not that easy to solve ! Problem is in the contact between the glass and the barrel, then the glass has to be extracted from the barrel to paint that contact area, so IMO better not trying to fix it.

Usually APO versions are more expensive, see this S one, at $175 looks a steal...

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Bob, thanks for your explanation. The single Technika stamped lens I have is a convertible Symmar 360, it is crazy sharp, I was suspecting yet that a Technika stamp was not merely decorative.




Schneideritis has no impact in the image, it's a purely cosmetic issue. It may look problem is in the barrel inside, but if it was that it could be painted again... so it's not that easy to solve ! Problem is in the contact between the glass and the barrel, then the glass has to be extracted from the barrel to paint that contact area, so IMO better not trying to fix it.

Usually APO versions are more expensive, see this S one, at $175 looks a steal...

View attachment 264801

The ad came up in Spanish. You have to be Spanish to use it.

 

[Ambrown31]

I would get any good condition multicoated 150mm. I think condition is more important than brand if you are just starting out.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

If you happen upon an older bargain lens and snap it up, and then get in the habit, you will want to remember Carol Flutot. She can fix anything you break.

 

[BradS]

....Carol Flutot. She can fix anything you break.

I wish it were true. I’ve donated three older Copal shutters to here scrap pile because she said she could not fix ‘em.

 

[Mark_S]

Bear in mind, 35mm and 45 are totally different proportions, so are you comparing horizontal field of angle or something else? 150 is a normal length for 45. 180 is a normal for 57.

I would agree with Bob on this. With 4x5, you are better off going wider. You can crop in the darkroom to get closer in, but you can't add something which is just outside the frame. With 35mm you are always worried about grain - grain is not a concern with 4x5.
As a first lens for 4x5 I would probably get a 150 - I have the Schneider APO Symmar, but others would do fine - you wouldn't go wrong with any of the options that Brad listed. With a 150 you will have plenty of room for playing with movement on the lens, which is a whole dimension which you don't have in 35mm. That said, the focal length that I shoot the most with is a 90mm (Super Angulon) - but not a lot of room for movement with that.