First lens for 4x5- good "allrounder"?

[PerTulip]

I am considering going into 4x5 photography. I have enough experience with 135/120 and am aware of film/developer/etc. I also informed myself on shutters (Copal,...), movements and other technicalities.

What I am struggling with is: what lens should I buy? I will waste many exposures, learn along the way, so I am not going to buy more than 1 lens to start.

With 35mm the 50mm is considered the lens you should buy if only having one. I found I prefer a 35mm as an "allround lens". Pricewise, I found the 35/1.8 acceptable enough, even when 35/1.4ies on paper have better performance. Just to give some perspective what I mean with "allrounder".

So my question: what would be a good lens to hunt for? What would be a good "35/1.8" for 4x5? (slight wide angle, doesn't break the bank, good enough for my first LF experiments).

 

[radiant]

First task: find out what large format focal length matches 35mm in 35mm

Only tip I can give; make sure the shutter is good. That is the most expensive part in your lens. If you need to CLA first, be prepared for time+money ..

 

[PerTulip]

First task: find out what large format focal length matches 35mm in 35mm

Only tip I can give; make sure the shutter is good. That is the most expensive part in your lens. If you need to CLA first, be prepared for time+money ..

Ok, equivalent focal length would be 105mm. I see there are a lot of 90mm lenses for 4x5, I guess I would be fine with both.

As for CLAs: I will try to avoid that. Because of that I will only try to buy a lens in excellent condition. That's where I am kind of stuck. "Schneider Kreuznach" seems to be the brand one should buy, but they are really expensive if "near mint".

 

[radiant]

Ok, equivalent focal length would be 105mm. I see there are a lot of 90mm lenses for 4x5, I guess I would be fine with both.

As for CLAs: I will try to avoid that. Because of that I will only try to buy a lens in excellent condition. That's where I am kind of stuck. "Schneider Kreuznach" seems to be the brand one should buy, but they are really expensive if "near mint".

Large format isn't cheap or easy hobby. And actually excellent condition lenses are expensive.

I payed 450 euros for 210mm Nikkor-W with serviced shutter. I purchased from kamerastore.com so I truly could know that the shutter was properly serviced. I also bought 90mm Super-Angulon from ebay (UK, damn brexit) and while the seller said the shutter is in good condition, it was not. I needed to CLA .. So don't trust to words, demand proof.

You probably need only one lens and it lasts life-time if it has been serviced. So think it as a long term investment which provides you good quality and reliablity. Large format is larger than life and you need a good reliable lens because you have other things to think ..

 

[Nige]

I'd suggest if you like slightly wide (35mm on 35mm) then a 120-135mm would suit better. I find 4x5 to 'wider' than the direct comparison suggests.

 

[PerTulip]

Large format isn't cheap .... 210mm Nikkor-W .... I also bought 90mm Super-Angulon from ebay (UK, damn brexit) ..

Medium format also isn't cheap. ;-) And I am completely aware that buying used equipment always is risky.

"Nikkor-W". I have absolutely no idea how good/bad Nikon lenses for MF are. And I have read several times "Super Angulon" is something I should be looking for. I see several ads for "Super Angulon 90mm MC", both in f8 and f5,6. Should I be looking for one of those?

 

[Huub]

Working with large format is pretty different from MF and 35mm photography and you don't necessarely prefer comparable focal lengths over the different formats. I would start with a 150mm as a first lens, as it has enough image circle and is a good allrounder. With prices slowly rising you can always sell it again when it doesn't suit you, but it will give you a good starting point to find out what you want next. But then, the same applies to the 110mm and 120mm lenses.. The f8 105mm Fujinon lens is an option as well.

You can get any of the f5.6 lenses from Nikon, Schneider, Rodenstock or Fuji, preferably multicoated, but single coated will do as well. A well functioning shutter is important as well, tho i would not hassle on Synchro-Compur, Copal or even an older Seiko. It depends a lot on condition, but when they work well they are good enough. The Large Format Photograpy site has a lot of information on what is available in which focal lenght and what is suited for 4x5.

 

[radiant]

Medium format also isn't cheap. ;-) And I am completely aware that buying used equipment always is risky.

"Nikkor-W". I have absolutely no idea how good/bad Nikon lenses for MF are. And I have read several times "Super Angulon" is something I should be looking for. I see several ads for "Super Angulon 90mm MC", both in f8 and f5,6. Should I be looking for one of those?

Generally most of large format lenses are pretty damn good. The reason is probably that they are designed for professionals. And google is your friend.

I would also prefer f5.6 lenses because f8 starts to being pretty dim for focusing. Not horrible but extra stops are not bad when focusing.

 

[bernard_L]

Medium format also isn't cheap. ;-) And I am completely aware that buying used equipment always is risky.

"Nikkor-W". I have absolutely no idea how good/bad Nikon lenses for MF are. And I have read several times "Super Angulon" is something I should be looking for. I see several ads for "Super Angulon 90mm MC", both in f8 and f5,6. Should I be looking for one of those?

If you want to get a taste of LF, and architecture is not your main subject, you might consider the cheaper (but good) Angulon 90/5.6 instead of the Super Angulon, significantly bigger and more expensive.
https://www.kenrockwell.com/schneider/90angulon.htm
And I second the advice of Nige concerning the choice of focal length; 90mm is more like 28mm in 24x36.

 

[bdial]

What sort of camera are you working with?
A 90 is fairly short for 4x5, some cameras can’t accommodate one without a recessed lens board.
The 90mm Angulon doesn’t have a large image circle, so you are slightly limited in the amount of movements you can use. The Super Angulons give you more coverage at a corresponding increased cost.
My recommendation would be something a bit longer in a 135mm to 150mm range. It will be easier to fit to most any camera platform. The larger image will make it easier to see the effects of movements for correcting perspective.

 

[PerTulip]

I am considering buying an Intrepid 4x5. I am aware of the limitations (construction, stability).

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I also shoot almost exclusively with a 35mm lens on my 35mm cameras, and had the same reflex of wanting the same equivalence when I started large format. Confused me as hell. Formats are just too different to be compared, and you use the cameras in totally different ways - things that I would shoot close with a 35mm lens I prefer shooting from far with a 180mm or a 210mm lens on the 4x5 because they look better or more interesting with the longer lens in that format. Problem is you only realize how different the formats are when you're looking at the ground glass, so it does make choosing a lens very difficult.

Just one lens is a tough one. Really depends on what you want to do - very wide, you can do architecture but no portraits, a longer lens will help with the portraits but maybe make architecture more problematic. Also depends on how you travel with the camera - makes a difference whether you back-pack a lot or are traveling by car and stopping just to set up the camera.

My "light" traveling kit has two lenses, a Fujinon W 125mm f/5.6 and a Nikon Nikkor W 180mm f/5.6. I just added a light 240mm lens to have a three lens set-up (125 - 180 - 240), which is ideal in LF and covers all my needs and most situations, from portrait to landscape to urban environment.

If I had to pick just one, I would probably would go for a 150mm - I rarely use the 50mm on my 35mm camera, but, as I said, totally different experience on the 4x5.

The 125mm would be my second option for first lens, mostly because it's light and has a decent image circle. There are some very good 120mm, but they are big. I wouldn't go larger - I briefly had a 90mm super angulon, but rarely took it out as it is huge and heavy. It was the first lens I bought, as many people told me it was "sort of" the equivalent of 28mm - 35mm.

As I said, both weight, usage and image circle were important in my choices. Kerry Thalmann's page on lightweight lenses really helped me making them.

Another thing that helped me was looking at threads on the Large Format Photography Forum in which people put down the info on which lens was used for the picture they posted.

Last thing: Nikon, Schneider, Rodenstock and Fuji's Fujinon lenses are all of excellent and equivalent quality.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

What subjects do you photograph mainly?

 

[BrianShaw]

My recommendation would be something a bit longer in a 135mm to 150mm range. It will be easier to fit to most any camera platform.

Ditto. Historically (and it really is true in practice) the 135 was the “wider normal” used by press photography. In practice, though, I’m one of the many who find LF more satisfying when using slightly longer lenses, like the ubiquitous 210. If architecture is your thing, then a 90 becomes more desirable... but not so much as “the only lens”.

You won’t be able to match your desired wide 35mm aperture in a LF lens... easily or affordably.

And, honestly, you might be hobbling yourself with the assumption that you need to “waste a lot of film” to succeed/learn and that you can buy an old lens without having the shutter overhauled. Maybe, but maybe not.

 

[PerTulip]

I also shoot almost exclusively with a 35mm lens on my 35mm cameras..... things that I would shoot close with a 35mm lens I prefer shooting from far with a 180mm or a 210mm.....Just one lens is a tough one. Really depends on what you want to do - very wide, you can do architecture but no portraits, a longer lens will help with the portraits but maybe make architecture more problematic. Also depends on how you travel with the camera - makes a difference whether you back-pack a lot or are traveling by car and stopping just to set up the camera.

My "light" traveling kit has two lenses, a Fujinon W 125mm f/5.6 and a Nikon Nikkor W 180mm f/5.6. I just added a light 240mm lens to have a three lens set-up (125 - 180 - 240), which is ideal in LF and covers all my needs and most situations, from portrait to landscape to urban environment.

If I had to pick just one, I would probably would go for a 150mm ....
Last thing: Nikon, Schneider, Rodenstock and Fuji's Fujinon lenses are all of excellent and equivalent quality.

Thanks!

Interesting that several point out with LF a longer focal length than the 35mm equivalent would be better.

As for "just one is tough": I know. And I am pretty sure more lenses will follow. I just don't want to buy 3-4 lenses while learning how to handle a LF camera. While in theory I understand movements/longer exposures/focusing/handling, I am sure I will utterly fail many times. That's why I want to start with one.
"Back-pack or car": I am a back-packer.
Usage/subjects: I think I can rule out portraits, at least unless i master a view camera. I will focus on architecture/landscapes and any test subject I come across.

 

[grat]

Note that at the wider end, you tend to either get large aperture (f/5.6) or good image circle-- getting both is difficult without winding up with a massive hunk of lens that weighs half what your camera does. I bought a Fuji NW 105mm f/5.6, and discovered it's image circle is 162mm-- exactly the bare minimum for 4x5. So I have a nice wide angle lens, with zero movements. No wonder I got a bargain.

The Super Angulon f/5.6 in particular may actually have a rear element larger than the hole in your front standard.

Fujinon lenses tend to be more affordable, but they're also from Japan as a rule, so caution is advised-- read the fine print, make sure returns are allowed, and avoid anything with "haze" or "fungus". They're also easily researched, thanks to http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm

 

[PerTulip]

.... I bought a Fuji NW 105mm f/5.6, and discovered it's image circle is 162mm-- exactly the bare minimum for 4x5. ...
The Super Angulon f/5.6 in particular may actually have a rear element larger than the hole in your front standard. ...

Thanks! That's the stuff that's confusing when coming from 135/120.

 

[removed account4]

you might look for a 127mm tominon in a prontor press shutter. they are usually inexpensive and will work every time …. ( and sometimes come stock on press cameras ). I've double timed it on a view camera and it has OK coverage, not a super angulon but ... works great I’ve had + used mine since 1988 and love it…. If you want wider. Look for a wollensak 90mm raptar they have great coverage, are TINY work great. general rule of thumb is take your favorite 35,, lens and x3 and its close .. a 4x5 approximate .. so if you like a 50mm on your 35 .. you want a 150 &c
Have fun

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I bought a 150 when I started 4x5, as recommended. I subsequently bought a 75mm 90mm and 300mm. I tend to be using the 75 and 90mm more for my landscape shots.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Another thing to consider when thinking of the difference in approach from one format (35mm) to the other (4x5) is that, at least in my experience, while you use "landscape orientation" 90% of the time in 35mm, especially with a 35mm lens, in 4x5, because of the difference of ration between the long and short side, you might be using "portrait orientation" 40%, if not 50% of the time, even when doing landscape or architecture.

Again, this is my experience. Other LF photographers may chime in differently.

"I just don't want to buy 3-4 lenses while learning how to handle a LF camera." - If you want to learn the basics in different situations (landscape, portrait, architecture), maybe a 135mm would be a good start. You're sort of half-way between the 35mm and 50mm, if you really want to think about it in terms of 35mm. There are some very good lightweight ones out there that aren't expensive.

Later on, depending on what you like to photograph, you can either go to 90mm or the other way, with a 210mm.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

You can do a lot with a (Nikkor)150mm lens. That was the lens I learnt LF on. 125mm Fujinon is another if you prefer slightly wider.

 

[Dennis-B]

...
My recommendation would be something a bit longer in a 135mm to 150mm range. It will be easier to fit to most any camera platform. The larger image will make it easier to see the effects of movements for correcting perspective.

In that light, I'd recommend a Kodak Optar, 135mm, f/4.5. It's usually found in a Rapax shutter, and is in the "slightly wide" category. It's sharp, and they're relatively plentiful in the large format market.

 

[jeffreyg]

You can find some good information at this website https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses-primer/ I use a field camera and have 120, 210 and 300 tele plus an ancient 135 that a friend gave me. For what I do, I use the 210 the most and the 300 the least. But it boils down to personal preference. I would think about the subjects you plan to use it for most and remember that you also need a sturdy tripod and if printing your own an enlarger that handles 4x5 and all the etcs. 4x5 photography is much different than 35mm. I approach it even differently than medium format and print many of the 4x5 as contact platinum/palladium prints.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://sculptureand photography.com/

 

[Dan Fromm]

In that light, I'd recommend a Kodak Optar, 135mm, f/4.5. It's usually found in a Rapax shutter, and is in the "slightly wide" category. It's sharp, and they're relatively plentiful in the large format market.

Kodak Optar? Kodak? Optar was a Wollensak trade name. And the lens doesn't have much coverage, therefore won't be good for architecture as the OP mentioned in post #15 above.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

I am considering going into 4x5 photography. I have enough experience with 135/120 and am aware of film/developer/etc. I also informed myself on shutters (Copal,...), movements and other technicalities.

What I am struggling with is: what lens should I buy? I will waste many exposures, learn along the way, so I am not going to buy more than 1 lens to start.

With 35mm the 50mm is considered the lens you should buy if only having one. I found I prefer a 35mm as an "allround lens". Pricewise, I found the 35/1.8 acceptable enough, even when 35/1.4ies on paper have better performance. Just to give some perspective what I mean with "allrounder".

So my question: what would be a good lens to hunt for? What would be a good "35/1.8" for 4x5? (slight wide angle, doesn't break the bank, good enough for my first LF experiments).

I have a 150 and 300. The 150 comes out to roughly a 40mm angle of view in 35mm full frame terms, the 300 is more like an 80-100mm angle of view. The 300 is good for portraits, the 150 is a good all rounder. Not particularly wide, not particularly tight.