Help with Ebony camera/lens decision

[trhull]

I am trading in an Ebony 23S and wista vx to acquire either an ebony 45S, or a 45SU. My question is whether the $1300 additional cost for an SU would be better spent on a higher cost lens and buy the Ebony 45S? I mainly shoot landscapes, and some commercial landscapes. Is the improved ease of focus on the more expense camera really that useful?

Thanks

 

[Frank Petronio]

If your heart is set on upgrading from a perfectly fine camera like the Wista VX, then you should probably get the camera with all the bells and whistles. You are also almost required to get the Schneider 110XL and at least two more $1500+ lenses. Otherwise you'll always have this nagging sense of inadequacy.

Having seen and played with a couple of Ebonies recently, I don't understand the fuss. If I want a full range of asymetrical movements (like the SU) I think a light monorail like the Arca-Swiss F Metric is really a much more usable type of camera, as extreme movements with an Ebony are far more fiddle-some. And Ebonies aren't exactly the lightest nor most durable (the Wista VX is probably stronger with it's metal body). But I do agree that they are beautiful cameras with clever design features.

I had the Wista SP and never found it's range of movements or lens handling to be a shortcoming for landscape work. My advice is to commit to a good camera and use a few of the best modern lenses. Then spend the savings on actually shooting.

 

[John Kasaian]

I don't know a bloody thing about ebonys, but what 4x5 lenses are you using? Are you shooting B&W or color? IMHO. some vintage glass is as good as the new stuff---but it depends on the lens, how you're using it and the "look" you're after. OTOH if you have truly bad glass, a more expensive camera isn't going to help things. Since I doubt if your negatives have any knowlege about who made the camera they were exposed in, its a safe bet that if you like your lens' performance on your Wista, it will give you good service aboard your new ebony---which ever model you choose. OTOH if your prints go to the worms when you enlarge them and you've pinned the problem on your lens, new glass could very well be in order.

I think ease of use versus lens quality are two seperate considerations once you're satisfied that your camera can be locked into focus and your darkroom technique is consistent.

My 2-cents, Good luck!

 

[trhull]

Frank. I like the non- folding cameras better, hence the decision to sell the VX. I did think of buying an Arca F line, but was very pleased with the Ebony 23S, so felt the move to Ebony 4X5 makes sense.

 

[trhull]

I am now using siro 150 and rodenstock 90 MM f6.8. But I can't get used to the Wista VX. I shoot only B&W. Thanks

 

[Baxter Bradford]

I bought the 45SU and have found it a stunning camera. The asymmetric movements are superb and a joy to use. The extra bellows extension comes in handy too for longer lenses. Although since recently buying bag bellows, I leave these on as I can use a 210mm for distant subjects.

I too had difficulty deciding between the 45S and the 45SU, mainly justifying the extra expense for what seems very little on paper - but it is a huge advantage in the field where it matters most.

I have still not managed to find the money to buy XL lenses, but doubt that you will see the difference unless the print is huge, or you were doing massive movements for subjects close to camera. That said, everyone I know who has bought XL feels they are brilliant. For B+W I think you will find with decent developer/film combo that most LF lenses are far more than adequate for large prints.

Buy the camera, I wouldn't want to change it at all, whereas with the 45S, I suspect that you might - and that would be an expensive exhange.

Non-folding is definitely the way to go. So quick to set up.
Good luck

 

[Frank Petronio]

I always used the 90/6.8 Grandagon believing it was as sharp and good as more expensive, heavier lenses. But after I tried a 90/4.5 I swore I'd never go back, weight and size be damned. The larger coverage wide angles (Schneider XLs, the fast Grandagons) aren't any degree sharper BUT they are much more even. Skies finally look like how they should - not vignetted. Plus focusing is easier and the extra coverage never hurts.

It's hard to fault the 150 Rodenstocks, provided you have a good example.

If you are investing that much, it seems like you should be looking at a third, longer lens. Perhaps a nice 240-300mm if the Ebony can handle it?

Frankly, with base tilts (Wistas and others), I fail to see why someone needs assymetrical tilts for horizon line landscapes or fauna shots. For product shots (pointing down with a vertical back) they are nice to have, as well as some architectural swings, but otherwise WTF?

 

[Alexz]

So, Frank, is Grandagon-N 90mm/4.5 indeed noticeably sharper then its smaller, f/6.8 brother ? Perhasp hard to believe until having the chance to see myself (ans especially bearing in mind that I just recently acquired 90mm/6.8... )

 

[Frank Petronio]

No it is not sharper at all - both lenses are sharp. It is more EVEN - no vignetting (darkening) at the edges.

 

[vet173]

No it is not sharper at all - both lenses are sharp. It is more EVEN - no vignetting (darkening) at the edges.

That made me go hhhmmmmmm

 

[Donsta]

Atcually Frank, I have tested a f4.5 Nikkor 90mm and a f8 Nikkor 90mm - both have the same size image circle (235mm) - they were exactly the same in fall off (used a densitometer on test transparencies), so the "faster" lens does not in fact always result in a more even skies etc. Fall-off is a complicated subject and really has a lot to do with lens design rather than speed - some of the most modern wide angle optics actually have more fall off than some of the older designs (for example the Schneider Super Symmar XL series which has more fall off than the older super angulons).

I actually sold my Schneider 90mm XL and replaced it with a Nikkor 90mm F8 (after trying just about every 90mm made) - there was simply very little difference in quality between the Scheider and the Nikkor and the huge filter size of the Schneider made filtration a real pain (especially for indoor architectural shooting, where you are always using at least some color correction). 235mm of image circle is really a lot on 4X5 for a 90mm lens - have a look at how much shift and rise you need to run out of coverage... Although I also have an 80mm, 90mm seems to be a very natural perspective for indoor shooting on 4X5.

 

[Frank Petronio]

I don't argue your experience, only that mine was very obvious with late model Rodenstock Grandagons. The point about filter size being a concern is also a good one, but in my case I don't use more than a CC30M or a Polarizer with color neg these days.

 

[Peter De Smidt]

<snip>
Non-folding is definitely the way to go. So quick to set up.
Good luck

That's true, but you give up lots of extension over the folding version. I like to use my 420mm and 600mm non-telephoto lenses on my 4x5. With the non-folding Ebony, you'd be limited to using a 300mm or so. While I don't own an Ebony, I have used one and enjoyed it. Asymmetric tilts really are great.

 

[Helen B]

Frank wrote "No it is not sharper at all - both lenses are sharp. It is more EVEN - no vignetting (darkening) at the edges."

I agree. I've just swapped from the f/6.8 90 mm Grandagon-N to the f/4.5 because of the reduction in falloff thanks to pupil distortion.

Regards,
Helen