Looking for a 90mm lens - Things to look for?

[Colin Corneau]

Folks,

I have a Shen Hao 4x5. I bought it (in China!) with a Schneider 150mm 5.6 and, based on how and what I shoot, I think a wide(r) angle lens would be the best choice on my next purchase.

From reading here, it seems a 90mm is a good choice for me. Is there anything in particular to keep in mind when shopping for a used version of this lens?
FWIW, I shoot a few landscapes; mostly people or buildings and my needs are really simple. Not a lot of swings or tilts.

Any advice on makes or models or anything else is, as always, much appreciated.

 

[dpurdy]

My 5.6 Super Angulon can't be beat. Covers 5x7, is as sharp as a lens can be. Kind of expensive though. The f8 Super Angulon will cost less and is still a good lens. Those are Schneider lenses.

 

[Barry S]

I have a 90mm f8 Nikon Nikkor SW. It's almost supernaturally sharp, lightweight, and compact. The only downside is a slow (f/8) 90mm lens is very tough to use in dim interiors or at night. Outside is no problem, but I do find myself wishing for a faster lens at times.

 

[23mjm]

I second the Nikkor--BUT in all honesty it is the only 90mm I have used on 4X5. But I like it small, light, and sharp.

 

[Larry Bullis]

We don't know some important things. You have a Symmar, yes? Do you like it? It has the kind of quality that contemporary lenses produce. If so, maybe the SA or the Nikor would be a good choice for you. I had a Symmar for a long time, and when I sold it, hardly missed it at all.

Having said that...

I have an f/8 super angulon (47mm that I use on 6x9). I wouldn't dream of using it on people unless I wanted them to look rather severe. I prefer gentler lenses. My favorite wa is a Goerz Rectagon 75mm (f/6.7), and my next favorite is a Ross wa in a barrel, 100mm at f/12. These might be considered a bit awkward for many people but the quality they give is very loving. Sharp? The rectagon is, if you stop down. The Ross is sharp enough, but nothing like the super ang. Both have the most wonderful ability to present the juicest color I've ever seen from a lens. Yummy. Oh, yes, I should mention that I have a number of versions of the f/18 Zeiss and Zeiss B/L protars, which I absolutely adore!

My experience with the SA is a bit mixed. Wonderful for some things (I'm going to keep it), they are too damn contrasty for others. It can sometimes be a problem unless you have the center spot filter, because while the center may be manageable, the outside will be underexposed due to the cosine issue, or if you expose extra to compensate, the center gets heavy. This is mostly true in hard light, of course. Since they are on different parts of the curve, correcting center vs. edges may be problematic even if you expose enough. The lenses mentioned above don't have that problem so much, not because they are exempt from the laws of optics and free of the cosine, but simply because they have less contrast.

While I doubt that you would find either of these particular lenses without a protracted search, there are many other lenses that might serve. I had a 90mm Schneider Angulon once (not super at all) that I liked a lot. It was great, but didn't have much in the way of movements. AA liked the Ross Xpress, as I recall.

Older lenses, yes, sometimes uncoated ones, have entirely different characteristics from the new ones. It is entirely possible for one to acquire a number of them for the price of a new or even used Super Ang. Then, trying them and seeing what you get is an adventure with a bit of dimension.

I think that most people wouldn't be interested in what I'm saying here, and you may not be. I'm ok with that. I am of a very old school, in which we fossils thought more of subtle differences which may verge on the intangible. It seems to me that lenses today are evaluated on fairly limited criteria. You know. Sharp. Contrasty. Etc. Strand, Weston, etc. used lenses that many hobbyist photographers today wouldn't look at for a minute.

 

[Ian Grant]

The f6.8 90mm Grandagon is a superb lens (also badged as Caltars), not to heavy, mine's a bit smaller & lighter than my f8 90mm Super Angulon. Both lenses give the same contrast as my Sironar's & Symmar's which has never been a problem. I prefer to stick with German glass as the characteristics are similar between the focal lengths.

Ian

 

[Trevor Crone]

I would second Ian's recommendation of the f6.8 90mm Grandagon-N. I bought mine second hand a few years ago to replace my Schneider 90mm Angulon, which I still have and is a super really tiny lens compared to the modern 90 mm's. However the Grandagon offers a lot more coverage (if that's important to you) then the older Angulon and has a nice sharpness and contrast without being over the top. This sharpness holds good even at the limit of its image circle.

 

[removed account4]

the chrome barrelled super angulons ( f8 i think )
are often overlooked because of their age.
they also cover 5x7 and are a great little lens.
the schneider website offers a TON of information
about their products
you can figure out anything from hyper focal focusing,
to the age of a lens...

the age of lens chart should be here: http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/age_of_lenses/index.htm

 

[Nick Zentena]

Most of the F/8 lenses have less coverage. The Nikon F/8 is on par with the fast 90mm. The fast F/4.5 lenses are big and heavy. The Nikon F/4.5 uses 82mm filters [IIRC] But if you need the speed you need it.

If you're shooting outdoors the F/8 Nikon is hard to beat.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Thanks all. I don't see a 90mm as a portraiture lens -- just useful for landscapes or similar scenarios. I've gotten to know how to use wide angles well during 15+ years as a newspaper photographer, but I know it's a big leap to LF.

And bowzart -- if I didn't have respect for old-school methods and thinking, I wouldn't be here! 8^)

 

[NavyMoose]

I third the opinion on this lens. Mine is the Caltar II-N version. Wonderful lens and very sharp.

I would second Ian's recommendation of the f6.8 90mm Grandagon-N. I bought mine second hand a few years ago to replace my Schneider 90mm Angulon, which I still have and is a super really tiny lens compared to the modern 90 mm's. However the Grandagon offers a lot more coverage (if that's important to you) then the older Angulon and has a nice sharpness and contrast without being over the top. This sharpness holds good even at the limit of its image circle.

 

[Soren]

I myself have the Nikkor 90mm F4.5 and though it is large and heavy... it is a beautifully bright lens to compose landscapes with. Though a few times on my most recent trip to Montana I had wished for something wider like a 65mm (just got back last Sat). Though it was a very usefull focal length for a good 50% of the photo's I took. So for me at least, I am glad I got the brighter 4.5 variant.

As to the weight issue. I use a photobackpacker system the weight/bulk does not seem near as bad carrying it around hiking with it allong with my 150 5.6, 240 5.6, and 300 5.6 lenses. Though I fixed most of my wieght issues with lighter tripod/head (Fiesol/Acratech), camera body (Chamonix), and the Granite Gear backpack frame. So my only realy heavy components are the lenses themselves. It can be subjective though on what comprimises one makes for ones gear. And every photographer has to make those decisions themselves. I am happy to deal with the weight cost, to achieve a brighter view and greater coverage to compose/focus my image. As I quite often shoot in lower lighting conditions where the bright screen realy makes a difference. Others may not have such issues, so they are happier with the lighter/slower lenses.

 

[Don Dudenbostel]

I have both the 90 5.6 SA that i bought new in 1975 and a recent 90 4.5 Nikkor. Prior to the 90 SA 5.6 I owned the f8 for may years. I've never used a Grandagon but understand it's a superb lens. I personally favor the new nikkor just a little over the 5.6 SA. Both are equally sharp but the image brightness from the nikkor is really excellent and easier to focus than any 90 wide that I've used over 40+ year. Image quality from either is superb. I also own a 120 Nikkor and a 121 Super Angulon that i will be selling soon. Love the SA and really have no negative feelings about it other than I shoot a great deal of 5x7 and like the slightly greater (very slight) of the Nikkor. In addition I have a 105 f8 Fujinon SW on my 617 Fuji and a 72mm SA XL. I've also owned a couple of other SA's in 65 and 75mm. All have been super lenses. Don't overlook the Fujinons. I've used my SA in commercial work for 33 years and have a very good friend that has all Fuji glass that he bought in the mid 70's. He's shot hundreds of nature shots that have sold to countless publications including a number of planners and calenders published by Sierra Club. The Fuji lenses that I own are first rate and i would not hesitate to use Fuji, nikkor, Schneider or Rodenstock glass exclusively for my work.

I guess I'm saying they are all about equal. Pick the lens you can get the best deal on and make great pix. I'm a critical kind of photographer and can see no differences of any consequence between various brands in my B&W work. Color there is some difference even within a given companys lenses. Some are warmer and some more cool so for color it's matter of preference.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I have a 90mm f8 Nikon Nikkor SW. It's almost supernaturally sharp, lightweight, and compact. The only downside is a slow (f/8) 90mm lens is very tough to use in dim interiors or at night. Outside is no problem, but I do find myself wishing for a faster lens at times.

I agree, my current 90mm is the f8 Nikon and I like it a lot. It replaced an old version of the 90mm Super Angulon.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

My current favorite LF lens in this focal length range is my Schneider Super Symmar XL 110mm/5.6 It works great on my 4x5 and 5x7 and (stopped way down), covers 8x10.

 

[ic-racer]

Is there anything in particular to keep in mind when shopping for a used version of this lens? .

First, make sure the lens you want will actually fit on your camera. Don't know about your camera, but Horseman, for example, has a list of what fits.

Realize the XL type coverage lenses are bigger, heavier and may be overkill with a field camera's movements. Though probably not a bad investment if you can afford them.

For used lenses I always want the latest model shutter, figuring it has probably fired less times and may more likely last the rest of my life. I go for the all-black Copals, but if your on a tight budget, any shutter with a working "B" can be usable.

My opinion is the multicoated Nikkor, Schneider, Rodenstock and Fuji lenses are all equivalent in practical use. In most cases I see the Fuji lenses going for less money and they have somewhat of a cult following because of the value therein. Of course, your resale value will be less, but I presume you are not a dealer and you want to take pictures .

My personal recommendation would be the 90 F8 FUJINON SW. Check out the KEH site and you will see they are always priced a few hundred dollars less than the others.

Here is the best Fuji web site if you are skeptical : http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/fujinon.htm

 

[edtbjon]

Apart from the the obvious difference in size, there is nothing much that differs in between the f/4.5-f/5.6 and the f/8 lenses in terms of image quality. If you plan to use the lens outdoors and to move about, the f/8 lenses are much better (i.e. smaller) for backpacking etc.
Wide-angle lenses are inherently darker on the groundglass than normal and longer lenses. So don't let that make you choose an f/4.5 lens before you have the opportunity to compare it to a f/8 lens side by side. The f/4.5 lens will also be bright in the center with a steep fall-off towards the edges. What makes life easy is a fresnel lens on ground glass, not a huge sized lens.
As others have said, any of the four major brands are good (read "excellent") choices. There is no real practical difference and in real life no way of telling which brand was used for a certain shot. What is more important are things like filter size etc.

//Björn

 

[Mick Fagan]

I have a Shen Hao 4x5 and have a Schneider Angulon f6.8 90 lens mounted on a recessed board.

The recess is 10mm as far as I can work out, it is an important feature. With the recessed board, I can use the lens with the standard bellows quite well.

There is a fair amount bellows compression, movement is a bit stiff(ish) when compressed for this lens. I think if the lens was mounted on a flat board, it would certainly be a bit tighter.

Something to think about with your camera and standard bellows.

Mick.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Thanks, Mick. I don't know anything about recessed boards -- one more thing to research, but better to know ahead of time!

 

[Doug Webb]

A recessed lens board could be important for matching your camera to a wide angle lens, it offsets the lens so that the bellows are not as compressed for the focal length. That way you can actually use the bigger image circle of Super Angulon type lenses because you can move the lens up, down, etc., without being as restricted by the bellows. There is probably some info on your camera website that will tell you whether you can use a 90mm lens on a flat lens board. Although they are really essential with some cameras, recessed lens boards are a little fussy sometimes because it can be harder to work with the controls on the shutter or harder to mount a cable release. In order to make use of exentsive movements with some shorter lenses, some cameras require a bag bellows which is shorter and more flexible. I don't know how large the opening in your front lens panel is, but some of the larger 4.5 and 5.6 wide angles have very large front and rear elements, just be sure they will fit through the front opening on your camera, otherwise you will have to unscrew the rear element, mount the front element and lens board, and then reach through the back of the camera and screw the rear element in. That is very inconvenient. There is probably some information on the website for your camera that will tell you what the opening size is. I thought I would be using wide angles like a 75mm and 90mm a lot on my 4x5 because I used similar focal lengths so much on my 35mm and medium format cameras, but for some reason I end up using a 125mm more often than any other focal length, followed by a 100mm when I need a wider angle.
Good luck
Doug Webb

 

[grahamp]

I have a Caltar HR 5.6 90mm (Topcon) that works fine on my Wista using a flat board. It only just fits the lensboard aperture, and I have more coverage than the fixed bellows will let me use. I am really happy with it. It does mean I step down 77mm filters for other lenses. That may be an advantage with a slower lens.

 

[Ole]

When you consider wide angle lenses, the important criteria are:

Weight
Bulk
Coverage
max Aperture
Price.

I use a 90mm f:6.8 Angulon and a 90mm f:8 Super Angulon (as well as a half-dozen antiques, but that's a different discussion). The plain Angulon wins hands down on Weight, Bulk, Price and Aperture, but loses a little on Coverage. That's why I use both - I quite often use 5x7", and even on 4x5" I keep needing more movements.

One lens I would give serious thought (if I were looking for another 90mm lens) is the Congo WA 90mm f:6.3. As far as I can see it's a double-Gauss construction, which is capable of very good performance. The Coverage is less than the "wasp-waist" modernish lenses like the SA (and even more the SA XL), but Weight, Bulk, and Price are comparable to the old 90/6.8 Angulon. And max Aperture is a fraction better than that, too...

There's a third type of lens, too - exemplified by the Super Symmar Xl 80mm. I have never used one, nor even seen one, but it's intermediate in terms of illumination and only marginally better (IMO) in terms of overall sharpness. And the price is beyond comparison! If I knew I needed one, I would buy one. But so far I haven't missed one - even if my only LF 80mm lens is a WA Rectilinear from 1899...

 

[mealers]

I use a 4x5 Shen Hao and I also have a 90mm f/5.6 Super Angulon.
To be honest I really didnt enjoy using the 90mm with the standard bellows, it was usable and you did have movements but it was way too restrictive for my liking. I bought the bag bellows and it has made things alot easier.
My advice, buy a 90mm and try the standard bellows and then make your own mind up.

BTW I also have the same Schneider lens as you, the bag bellows also works well with that lens.

 

[coriana6jp]

I have used the both Nikons f/8 & f4.5, both Fujinons the f/8 & f/5.6 and the Schneider 90mm Super Angulon XL. For pure coverage the Schneider XL wins hands down, but I found it to be a real problem carry any distance in the field.

The nikons were okay, but I didnt really care for the color and contrast too much, though the f/8 was sharp. I ended up keeping both of the Fujinons. For me they had better flare control and I prefered the color rendition. Then again I am biased, I really like pretty much all Fuji lenses.

Gary