My first 5X7 and LF experiences

[Matt5791]

I have now just printed my first 4 5X7 (and first LF) negatives - I contact printed them and enlarged one to about 9X12.

First thing is: I hadn't realised how much getting used to the camera would take! That image on the ground glass is really quite dim and I have made focusing errors on all the negatives so far.

What I find I am really missing is lens markings I have taken for granted for years on smaller formats: focus distance markings and DOF scales. Other than stopping the lens down to the working aperture (which of course makes the image very difficult to see) do you know what is going to be in focus?

Maybe I just have to get used to the ground glass more!

The other irrating thing is that of course the image on the GG is very directional - what I mean is that you can only see a small area of the image on the ground glass at any one time and have to move around a lot to see the edges and corners. Again I guess experience will take care of this.

My lens is a Schneider Super Angulon 120mm f8 and camera Agfa Ansco.

What I am really pleased with is my choice of format - I think it is a really nice aspect ratio and, of course, makes useable sized contact prints.

If the weather was not so awful at the moment in the UK (totally grey, dark and wet all day for days) I would be able to get out and try some more today.

Matt

 

[Ole]

...
The other irrating thing is that of course the image on the GG is very directional - what I mean is that you can only see a small area of the image on the ground glass at any one time and have to move around a lot to see the edges and corners. Again I guess experience will take care of this.

My lens is a Schneider Super Angulon 120mm f8 and camera Agfa Ansco.
...

"Dim and directional" are concequences of the lens you use: A 120/8 Super Angulon is quite dim, and wide-angle lenses make the image on the GG very directional.

I would suggest that you get a "normal" lens - 180 to 240mm - to start with. f:5.6 or better makes it easier to focus and to see what really happens.

Then with a little practice you will find the 120 much easier to use, and everything is easy until you need even wider: I struggle every time I use my 90mm f:8 Super Angulon on 5x7", but it's still one of my most used lenses. I just love that ridiculously wide view.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'll second Ole: slow wide angles are bar stewards to focus, so you need to go longer or faster or both -- believe it or not, a 300/9 is astonishingly easy and bright. In fact, the only lens I have that's harder to focus than a 120/8 SA (I used to have the 121) is my 7-1/8 inch f/16 Ross.

Try focusing by contrast (maximum contrast = maximum focus) and remember also the trick of 'see-sawing' across the point of sharpest focus. Go in oe direction 'til it's clearly out of focus; go in the other 'til it's clearly out of focus; and focus in the middle.

Cheers,

R. (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[Matt5791]

Thanks Roger and Ole - really interesting, I hadn't realised that I am trying to use a particularly tricky lens to focus!

Roger - what is the difference between the 120 and 121 SA? (apart from 1mm).

I am on the hunt for a faster longer lens.

Matt

 

[StreetShooter]

Matt,

Hang in there... the 5x7 format is great!

If you can beg, borrow, or steal a 90 f4.5... that'll help immensely. Even a 6.8 will be an improvement. An SK 110XL f5.6 would even be nicer but it's worth an arm and leg!

Secondly, you might also consider getting a brighter ground glass. I use one made by SatinSnow and find it makes ALL the difference in the world. I'm just about to order one for my 4x5 reducing back from them. The best thing about their ground glass is that it's dirt cheap!

Cheers

 

[Ole]

Roger - what is the difference between the 120 and 121 SA? (apart from 1mm).

The difference is one of vintage rather than focal length. At some point they renamed the 121mm to 120mm, but I don't know of any actual change beyond that name change. My 121mm is a great lens. Between that and the 90/8 I have all the wide-wide-angle I need for 5x7". I supplement this with a 165mm f:6.8 Angulon for a less wide view, and 180, 210, 240, 300 and 355mm lenses for the narrower views.

I suggest you look for a 180 or 210mm f:5.6 Symmar or similar. These have adequate coverage for any sensible amount of movements, decent sharpness, and a good cost/quality ratio. Many people seem to believe that only modern lenses with multicoating and lots of capital letters (APO, XL/HM, ED/IF or whatever) are usable. That allows the rest of use to get lots of really great lenses for very little money.

 

[Terence]

A cheap way to help with the directionality is to use a fresnel screen, which helps direct all the light perpendicular to the GG. You can go for a purpose-made one for big bucks, or just use one of the "reading magnifiers" you can pick up cheap and cut to size. I use mine to see the entire screen at once and compose, but remove it to focus. Unless it's in front of the GG, and properly spaced, it will throw the focus off. But it sure makes things a lot easier, very cheaply.

 

[Nick Zentena]

I thought the 121 had more coverage then the 120? More then the 1mm would provide -)

 

[Ole]

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info...format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-121mm.html - 288.4mm
http://www.schneideroptics.com/info...format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-120mm.html - 288mm

Nope. Focal lengths are 121.4 and 121.6mm, so the difference really is minimal.

 

[Ian Grant]

Peter Walnes, who addvertises here in the text ads, has a 180mm f5.6 Symmar for sale at an excellent price.

Ian

 

[photobum]

I guess you really like wide angle lenses and their point of view. As you have found they are hard to focus. The standard "normal" lens for a 5x7 is around 210mm. (180 to 240) I like the longer view so I use a 240 f/9 lens as my standard lens. It's quite easy to focus because of the longer view. For a bright slightly wide "normal" lens try a Wollensak 190 f/4.5. Cheap to buy. It's more of a 4x5 lens so watch out for coverage. The Wolly, like a lot of lenses, throw a lot more light than they have sharp coverage. Is the out of focus area in your prints all in the corners? You may be running past the coverage of the lens. Also using tilt to get greater depth of field can be a problem if there is, say a tree, in the middle ground. The bottom will be sharp but the top will be out of focus. Pick up a Kodak professional photoguide. The depth of field scale will help you out.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The difference is one of vintage rather than focal length. At some point they renamed the 121mm to 120mm, but I don't know of any actual change beyond that name change.

I honestly didn't know that. I had always assumed it was recomputed. Actually it may have been (possibly with a glass that was easier to get, or newer, or cheaper): the 0,2mm change suggests this to me, as do the other data (nodal point separation, back focus). The nominal f.l. change is then justified: after all, the convention is that >120.5 = 121 and <120.5 = 120.

Great bottle: covers 8x10 (just, at infinity). I replaced mine with a 110/5.6 Super Symmar Aspheric; same coverage, a bit brighter, and a lot smaller.

Cheers,

R.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

For something else in that range, keep your eye out for a Goerz Am.Opt. 4 3/8" f8 W.A. Dagor (approx 110mm) - it will cover 5x7 with movements, even at infinity, wide open. They don't show up too often, but people often think they're lesser lenses, and they can go pretty cheap. A few years back, I picked mine up for a smidge over $100 in mint condition. The shutter needed a CLA, but that was it. That lens throws a very bright image so is fairly easy to focus in daylight - it does get tricky in low light without a fresnel, something I consider now to be an absolute requirement for any LF camera I shoot.

 

[Ole]

Yes...

I've finally given in, and replaced my old 120mm f:6.8 Angulon which I sold. The tiny little lens is just too nice and bright, and covers 5x7" without any problems. My "temporary replacement", the 121mm f:6.3 Leitmeyr Weitwinkel-Anastigmat has the same formula as the Angulon, but falls just shy of covering due to a difference in the mounting.

And that brings me up to - all four LF Angulons: 90, 120, 165 and 210mm. All of them are nice lenses if you get a good one.

 

[Neanderman]

Ohhh... "Angulon," not "Super Angulon." Your problem may well have not been your inability to focus, but rather the 'focus shift' that the Angulon (and Dagor, from which it derived) design suffered from. The trick is to focus wide open and then re-check it after stopping down.

 

[mjs]

I have to second the recommendation for a Satin Snow ground glass. My 5x7 camera is of a similar vintage to your Ansco - A Burke & James. Replacing the original ground glass with a Satin Snow was completely amazing and delightful.

mjs

 

[Ole]

Ohhh... "Angulon," not "Super Angulon." Your problem may well have not been your inability to focus, but rather the 'focus shift' that the Angulon (and Dagor, from which it derived) design suffered from. The trick is to focus wide open and then re-check it after stopping down.

That is an entirely different question, and not relevant to the original poster who uses a Super Angulon.

No, I've never noticed focus shift with Angulons. And I use them a lot - all of them.

 

[John Bartley]

A bit of a different tack on this answer, but from personal experience ... when I first started, I had no loupe - pictures were ok, but not really "sharply" focussed. I bought a loupe and all of a sudden the pictures were out of focus - yup, hard to believe, but when I checked, the focus point on the loupe was waayyy off the front of the ground glass (the ground side). Being a bit P.O.'d I made my own from a 35mm slide projection lens and focussed it by setting it up on a piece of glass and viewing an image that the glass was resting on. I've had no loupe problems since ... lots of other self-inflicted problems, but no trouble with focus.

 

[ragc]

For a bright slightly wide "normal" lens try a Wollensak 190 f/4.5. Cheap to buy. It's more of a 4x5 lens so watch out for coverage. The Wolly, like a lot of lenses, throw a lot more light than they have sharp coverage. Is the out of focus area in your prints all in the corners? You may be running past the coverage of the lens. Also using tilt to get greater depth of field can be a problem if there is, say a tree, in the middle ground. The bottom will be sharp but the top will be out of focus. Pick up a Kodak professional photoguide. The depth of field scale will help you out.

I use the 190 Wollensak on my 5x7 Korona View and have not had any problems with coverage using extreme movements. It has always been sharp as can be. I agree, it is also very bright.

5x7 is great. Welcome to the format.