portable 90mm lens for 4x5

[joby]

long time listener, first time caller.

making the dip into 4x5, recently came into a stripped to the mahogany crown graphic with a 127/4.7.

my preferred focal length is 28mm on 135, from what i've read, 90mm on 4x5 is the way to go. conveniently, 90mm is the shortest focal length as i understand works with the crown without dropping the bed.

i'm looking to shoot mostly handheld (400asa f/22, 1/200 sunny 16 style), and am definitely looking for something that will collapse inside of the crown for ease of transport (coming from shooting 35mm for years).

options i've found include Schneider angulon 90mm 6.8, and the wollensak optar/raptar 90mm 6.8. i realize these don't have much room for movements, which i am fine with.

anyone have any personal experience with these variations of lenses and recommend i go one way or another? there are a handful on the auction site for <$100, which is very appealing. i've read that the wire frame sports finder works reasonably well on lenses down to 90mm. can anyone confirm this?

also- any experience with grafmatic backs? i have a friend who works at a camera shop and they have a bunch up for grabs. should i stick to double holders to start?

thanks,

joe

 

[Ian Grant]

A late 90mm f6.8 Angulon, not much room for movements but great little lenses, I use mine with my potable/hand held Super Graphic or Crown kit. I also have a 90mm WA Raptar but haven't used it much yet.

The tip is look for Angulon with a Serial Number higher than 5,000,000, there were issues with some earlier ones but all sorted by then.

Ian

 

[joby]

A late 90mm f6.8 Angulon, not much room for movements but great little lenses, I use mine with my potable/hand held Super Graphic or Crown kit. I also have a 90mm WA Raptar but haven't used it much yet.

The tip is look for Angulon with a Serial Number higher than 5,000,000, there were issues with some earlier ones but all sorted by then.

Ian

have you not used the raptar because it was obviously inferior to the angulon? i was hesitant of the angulons because of quality control issues i've read of, but good to know about the 5,000,000+ serial number info.

 

[Ian Grant]

have you not used the raptar because it was obviously inferior to the angulon? i was hesitant of the angulons because of quality control issues i've read of, but good to know about the 5,000,000+ serial number info.

Someone in Australia (Razzledog) found that the issues with the 90mm Angulons was cell spacing due to variations in the Compur #0 shutter tube length. As he was a repair technician he actually corrected some tube lengths and found the previously unsharp Anulon was then sharp as it should be. Schneider must have had Compur resolve the issue once they'd realised it was there.

I haven't tested my WA Raptar yet, there was a shutter issue it had no aperture blades, I've changed the shutter now. I also have a much earlier 90mm f6.8 Angulon it has slightly more coverage but is uncoated, so another lens to test

My first 90mm Angulon just wasn't very sharp I quickly sold it, I borrowed another and it was the same, so bought a 90mm Grandagon. However I saw my current 90mm Angulon at a bargain price and it's a good sharp lens.

Ian

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you can find a Linhof engraved 90/6.8 Angulon, those went through additional quality control at Linhof, so they are in theory more consistent. Of course one never knows what's happened to a 50-year-old lens that's been bought and sold who knows how many times.

A nice portable combination for 4x5" is a 90/6.8 Angulon and a 150/4.5 Xenar, because they are both very compact and use the same filter size, though neither has a very large image circle.

 

[Ian Grant]

If you can find a Linhof engraved 90/6.8 Angulon, those went through additional quality control at Linhof, so they are in theory more consistent. Of course one never knows what's happened to a 50-year-old lens that's been bought and sold who knows how many times.

A nice portable combination for 4x5" is a 90/6.8 Angulon and a 150/4.5 Xenar, because they are both very compact and use the same filter size, though neither has a very large image circle.

I agree the early Linhof select versions should be OK, at that point Linhof and Compur had strong links through one common shareholder/investor

My 3 compact lens choice that I regularly use is a 90mm f6.8 Angulon, a CZJ 150mm f4.5 T coated Tessar, (or a very late 150mm f5.6 Xenar), and a 203mm f7.7 Ektar. The 203mm Ektars are very under rated lenses and are superb, extremely sharp.

Ian

 

[joby]

thanks, all. any experience with the sports finder using a 90mm? i've read one account of the finder just touching the body with a 90 focused at infinity. in theory, I'd think it would give a relative idea of frame inclusion, as a shorter lens would be at infinity closer to the film plane, therefore moving the frame lines, which are on the same plane as the lens board, closer to the eyepiece, which is stationary. this is on a crown graphic with the floppy slinky-esque pop-up sports finder.

 

[shutterfinger]

Grafmatics are very good for daily use. Make sure all 6 spetums are there and they are straight.
The factory service manual is available here: http://www.southbristolviews.com/pics/Graphic/manual-pdf/grafmatic45service.pdf
It has operating instructions as well.

 

[joby]

1. Grafmatics are very good for daily use. Make sure all 6 spetums are there and they are straight.
   The factory service manual is available here: http://www.southbristolviews.com/pics/Graphic/manual-pdf/grafmatic45service.pdf
   It has operating instructions as well.

   
   thank you. they seem to make the most sense as far as handheld shooting goes- less fiddling with switching out holders. will go over the manual. how they physically/internally work is a mystery to me, maybe that will clear it up.

 

[shutterfinger]

The 90mm f6.8 Angulon has an 81° angle of view at f16, https://www.schneideroptics.com/inf...arge_format_lenses/angulon/data/6,8-90mm.html . Center a 80° at the peep site and extend the sides out to the wire frame to see how much is covered/left out.
One can easily approximate the image when composing by placing the main subject or an object in the scene at a position within the wire frame.

 

[adelorenzo]

If you haven't seen them yet Kerry Thalman has a really good write-up on lightweight wide lenses for 4x5 and the large format site has a detailed comparison chart.

Rodenstock Sironar 100 or Schneider Symmar 100 might be lightweight options to consider, they barely won't cover 4x5 at infinity but it might be an option if you are doing portraits or street stuff.

 

[joby]

The 90mm f6.8 Angulon has an 81° angle of view at f16, https://www.schneideroptics.com/inf...arge_format_lenses/angulon/data/6,8-90mm.html . Center a 80° at the peep site and extend the sides out to the wire frame to see how much is covered/left out.
One can easily approximate the image when composing by placing the main subject or an object in the scene at a position within the wire frame.

thank you much, that's a great idea. off to the woodshop to grab the bevel gauge.

 

[joby]

If you haven't seen them yet Kerry Thalman has a really good write-up on lightweight wide lenses for 4x5 and the large format site has a detailed comparison chart.

Rodenstock Sironar 100 or Schneider Symmar 100 might be lightweight options to consider, they barely won't cover 4x5 at infinity but it might be an option if you are doing portraits or street stuff.

i have seen those, but thank you!

i'm in a paycheck to paycheck nikon F body/lens situation, so i'm looking to get my feet wet with something in the "budget" range to see if it will stick. sure seems like there are a lot of amazing (while still relatively affordable at around $300) LF wide angle lenses. thanks for your help!

 

[darinwc]

The 100mm f6.3 wide field ektar is also very good.

 

[removed account4]

OP you are a few days late !
just recently there was a 3 1/2" wollensak exwa wideangle lens for sale here!
ive had both the exwa and the raptar and never had troubles with them
never issues with running out of room on my negative or sharpness problems.
but maybe i was lucky ?

 

[Ian Grant]

The 90mm f6.8 Angulon has an 81° angle of view at f16, https://www.schneideroptics.com/inf...arge_format_lenses/angulon/data/6,8-90mm.html . Center a 80° at the peep site and extend the sides out to the wire frame to see how much is covered/left out.
One can easily approximate the image when composing by placing the main subject or an object in the scene at a position within the wire frame.

I find the rear sight and wire frame finder work extremely well with the 90mm Angulon. I compose on the GG screen which is easy with a focus hood (as long as you have a fresnel), then stop down, cock the shutter, load the film and final framing is with the wire finder and I can compose tighter than might first be expected, I pay particular attention to what's at the edges of the frame, it actually becomes instinctive in next to no time.

Ian

 

[hsandler]

I have a grafmatic. It's great for shooting with the rangefinder. Like having a "roll" of 6 shots. The back and forth slide mechanism to "advance" the film is ingenious and, well, just cool. Loading the septums is only slightly more fiddly than loading standard film holders.

That said, I don't think the grafmatic is really needed for landscape shooting where you are going to compose and focus with the ground glass. First, if you want to insert the grafmatic under the springs of the ground glass graflock viewfinder back, you have to pull pretty hard on the springs due to the thickness of the grafmatic, so you risk moving the camera if it's not locked down really tight on the tripod. Second, pulling the slide mechanism back and forth to shuffle the septums can dislodge the grafmatic from the camera laterally, which can fog the film sheet on top. To avoid these issues, it's better to remove the ground glass back after focus and compose and lock the grafmatic against the camera back using the slide locks. But this adds an extra step each time you want to mount or dismount the back for focusing with the ground glass. Finally, you really want to expose all 6 sheets in the grafmatic before unloading. It's possible to do a partial unload, but it's fiddly and error prone. So, if you are like me and want to develop soon after shooting, you need patience to wait until you've done 6 shots.

 

[Ian Grant]

I have 3 Wray Grafmatic backs, but they need to be in excellent condition to work properly. My first had slight issues and was too unreliable to use, to repair it I'd ideally need one new septum. I have two more one was NIB, the box was quite damaged but inside was OK MINT, the other's very good condition.

You could ask why I haven't used them, it's simple I can carry all the film I need in DDS (double dark slide film holders) and know easily which shots need different development. It come down to a work ethic in terms of shooting LF, being extremely confident in what you are shooting, knowing before you press the shutter what's a poor image (in your own terms) or just walking away.

Ian

 

[joby]

truly appreciate your input all, thank you.

i went ahead and bought a very clean Wollensak Rapax 90mm f/6.8 from a local shop and shot 4 sheets in two double holders around the neighborhood this morning. used the ground glass to focus, then recomposed with the sports finder as Ian had suggested.

I plan to readjust the infinity stops and have a crack at recalibrating the distance scale still.

interested to see how it comes out, will report back. the film is fresh arista (foma) 400.

 

[shutterfinger]

I plan to readjust the infinity stops and have a crack at recalibrating the distance scale still.

Graflex standard for infinity is to use a target at least 5000 feet away (farther is better) with the lens wide open. The front standard will twist a little giving swing to one side or the other when the standard lock is set so measure from the end of the rails to the edge of the front standard on both sides ensuring they are the same before locking the infinity stops in place. Speed Graphics from introduction in 1912 through the end of the Anniversary Speed in 1946 set the rails fully retracted into the body for infinity. Speed, Crown (1947-1973), and Super Graphics (1958-1973) had the rails set .040 ± .01 inch forward from fully retracted for infinity allowing one to focus past infinity or find the sharpest point. Your choice.
Focus scales were cut for specific focal lengths. A 90mm lens from any manufacturer may be 88mm to 92mm in actual focal length. A focus scale cut for a 89.5mm lens will be off at 10 feet or less if used with a 90.1mm lens. A focus scale for a 127mm lens used with a 90mm lens will be off between 100 feet and 50 feet and closer. Its easier to measure from the film plane and make a new scale from scratch. A 90mm should focus down to 3 feet.

 

[joby]

Graflex standard for infinity is to use a target at least 5000 feet away (farther is better) with the lens wide open. The front standard will twist a little giving swing to one side or the other when the standard lock is set so measure from the end of the rails to the edge of the front standard on both sides ensuring they are the same before locking the infinity stops in place. Speed Graphics from introduction in 1912 through the end of the Anniversary Speed in 1946 set the rails fully retracted into the body for infinity. Speed, Crown (1947-1973), and Super Graphics (1958-1973) had the rails set .040 ± .01 inch forward from fully retracted for infinity allowing one to focus past infinity or find the sharpest point. Your choice.
Focus scales were cut for specific focal lengths. A 90mm lens from any manufacturer may be 88mm to 92mm in actual focal length. A focus scale cut for a 89.5mm lens will be off at 10 feet or less if used with a 90.1mm lens. A focus scale for a 127mm lens used with a 90mm lens will be off between 100 feet and 50 feet and closer. Its easier to measure from the film plane and make a new scale from scratch. A 90mm should focus down to 3 feet.

thanks, shutterfinger. looks as though it might not be as easy as i'd imagined

in other news, the lens seems just fine. adequately sharp corner to corner.

now i just need to find the handle in regards to which processing method is going to work the best for me. did those 4 sheets in a unicolor print daylight tube i have, rolled by hand. two of the sheets had some slight streaking along the short side, which leads me to believe i used too much dev solution. also, the gasket on the lid is pretty messed up and leaks a bit. open to recommendations...

 

[shutterfinger]

If you set up the focus scale for the 127 at infinity then it will be accurate to about 75 feet, good enough if doing landscape work.

did those 4 sheets in a unicolor print daylight tube i have, rolled by hand. two of the sheets had some slight streaking along the short side, which leads me to believe i used too much dev solution.

The chemicals should be about 1/3 the diameter of the tube when laying on its side for rotation.
Rotary processing requires an equal number of turns in each direction to prevent streaking. I use JOBO tanks and a manual roller base. I rotate in one direction (finger tip to base of palm) for 1 minute then switch direction (base of palm to finger tip) switching hands to keep a continuous rotation of about 50 rpm. Rotation speed is not that important, smooth and steady reduces/eliminates foaming which can cause air bells.
JOBO 25xx tanks are for 4x5, 2509n reels are for 4x5 sheet film, 2502 are for 120 and 35mm film in a 25xx tank.
The roller base will adjust to all JOBO tanks, 15xx and 25xx. The older 28xx tanks are for prints and will not work for film. The 28xx lid is different, a 25xx lid and center column will fit in a 28xx tank of the same length.

 

[joby]

streaking can be seen in the attached neg.

thanks for the JOBO recommendations. i have more inclination to attempt tray processing before going the JOBO route, mainly because of the price of admission.

going tomorrow to look at a good deal on a very complete omega 4x5 enlarger with all the carriers, lenses, filters etc. to replace my durst m601 which is 35mm up to 6x6. fingers crossed!

 

[shutterfinger]

streaking can be seen in the attached neg.

Looks like more development in areas due to the tube sitting stationary for 15 to 30 seconds.
Stationary like inversion processing must cover the film completely.
P.S. could be uneven wetting with developer. a 1 to 3 minute prewash will help prevent uneven wetting.

Watch ebay for Jobo tanks, occasionally a non profiteer list them.