REALLY wide-angle lenses that dont cost a firstborn?

[darinwc]

Are there any REALLY wide-angle lenses out there for 6x9 or 6x7 that I wont have to sign over my firstborn for? seems like all the names I can think of are very expensive.. biogon, grandagon, etc.

 

[Nick Zentena]

6x6 Kiev fisheye. Some thing less then $300 brand new. Even if you add the cost of a Kiev 60 I doubt you can get any cheaper. I bet anything in 6x7 or larger will cost at least 2X.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Are there any REALLY wide-angle lenses out there for 6x9 or 6x7 that I wont have to sign over my firstborn for? seems like all the names I can think of are very expensive.. biogon, grandagon, etc.

65/6.8 Angulon (not Super) is the last real cheapie. Forget the 53 Biogon (plenty of wider lenses, cheaper, though not necessarily as good). Then comes the 47/8 SA IF you can find a good one -- the 47/5.6 is a much more consistent but much more expensive lens. After 47 it starts to get expensive. The widest I know for 6x9 is the 35/5.6 Apo-Grandagon.

Cheers,

R.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Older 65/8 Super-Angulons aren't too pricey--under $500 in the 00 shutter.

For 6x6 one of the best deals out there is the Nikkor 40/4.0 for the Bronica S and EC series cameras. It's a fantastic lens and very inexpensive now (around $500, I suspect), even if you have to buy a camera body to go with it. The early Bronicas were designed with a falling mirror (S2a and earlier) or split mirror (EC and EC-TL) to accommodate lenses that protrude into the mirror box, so they don't have as much distance to overcome as Hassy or Rolleiflex lenses to clear the mirror. The Bronica wides are still retrofocus, but not as much as a comparable Distagon.

 

[MikeK]

65/6.8 Angulon (not Super) is the last real cheapie. Forget the 53 Biogon (plenty of wider lenses, cheaper, though not necessarily as good). Then comes the 47/8 SA IF you can find a good one -- the 47/5.6 is a much more consistent but much more expensive lens. After 47 it starts to get expensive. The widest I know for 6x9 is the 35/5.6 Apo-Grandagon.

Cheers,

R.

I picked up a 65mm in a Compur OO shutter for $250.00. While it does cover 4x5 I use it on my Speed Graphic with 6x7, 6x9 and 6x12 backs. The nice thing about the SG is the fact you can drop the bed and completely remove it from the field of view.

All in all this turned out to be quite an inexpensive wide angle and panoramic camera for me.

Mike

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

Get a Kiev60 or Pentacon SixTL and a 50mm CZJ Flektogon. That may be the cheapest option. I have heard of an adapter for Mamiya 645 too. It is a lage and heavy beast but an excellent one.
You may adapt any LF barrel lens to a Rolleiflex SL66. There are quite some options ot there along with the original 4/50 Distagon which was made for this camera of cause (which is not that expensive anyway, compared to the same lens made for Hasselblad).
For my Crown Grafic 23 I got a 8/65 SA for less than 300€ lately.

Ulrich

Oops, I didn't get the 6x9 part. Forget about the Kiev and SL66

 

[Tom Stanworth]

I picked up a 65mm in a Compur OO shutter for $250.00. While it does cover 4x5 I use it on my Speed Graphic with 6x7, 6x9 and 6x12 backs. The nice thing about the SG is the fact you can drop the bed and completely remove it from the field of view.

All in all this turned out to be quite an inexpensive wide angle and panoramic camera for me.

Mike

Yes,

I have seen a few go at this price too. A very good lens for the money and mine just covered 5x4 but had no room for movement. Plenty sharp enough and tiny. I mainly used mine for 6x9, but a fair few frames of 5x4 too (incl one of my favourite shots: Demise of the Harvest Capella.

Rgds

 

[Struan Gray]

Kowa made a 35 mm rectilinear lens for their 6 and Super 66 cameras. They tend to be relatively pricey when sold individually in eBay, but I've seen kits which happen to include the 35 mm lens go for very low prices.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Are there any REALLY wide-angle lenses out there for 6x9 or 6x7 that I wont have to sign over my firstborn for? seems like all the names I can think of are very expensive.. biogon, grandagon, etc.

Darin, haven't we been here before? Don't you have a 65 mm Ilex? Or am I confusing you with someone else?

Define inexpensive, I don't know the going rate for first-born children.

FYI, the shortest Biogon that will cover 6x9 is the 53/4.5. There's an uncommon -- my Zeiss guru tells me than only 100 were made -- 45/4.5 that covers 6x7.

No one has mentioned the 50/6.3 Mamiya (for the Mamiya Press system) yet. Not a Biogon but a fine lens. And there's a 47/8 Ilex too.

In 58 mm, there's the 58/5.6 Grandagon, but beware of separations. Most of the ones I've seen offered had bad separations and mine does too. And there's the 58/5.6 (I think it f/5.6, could be mistaken) Konica Hexanon for the Koni Omega system that covers at least 6x7.

Patience and continued search are your best bets. That and an open mind. If you want it bad and you want it now you'll have to pay.


Good luck, happy hunting,

Dan

 

[Trond]

For 6x6 one of the best deals out there is the Nikkor 40/4.0 for the Bronica S and EC series cameras. It's a fantastic lens and very inexpensive now (around $500, I suspect), even if you have to buy a camera body to go with it.

I agree, I've recently replaced my 40mm Zenzanon with the Nikkor, and it certainly is an improvement, although a lot bigger. Very reasonably priced too.

Trond

 

[darinwc]

Dan, I think you are right.. I'm pretty sure I have asked a similar question before, maybee on lf.info or photo.net. Yes I do have a 65mm ilex, but its in a lensboard for my 4x5.

A 65mm on 2x3 is equivalent to a 28mm lens in 35mm format. But a 65mm on 4x5 is close to a 17mm in 35mm format. So to get closer to a 90degree angle of view in medium format, you need a focal length of 40mm or less.

There were some good suggestions, but i think the reality is for wide-angles you get more bang for your buck with 4x5 than 2x3.

 

[Roger Hicks]

There were some good suggestions, but i think the reality is for wide-angles you get more bang for your buck with 4x5 than 2x3.

Absolutely no question.

Cheers,

R.

 

[keithwms]

For ultrawide in 6x7 / 6x8 format I use a fisheye, a 50mm and a 65mm on my rb67. These are all economical now, especially on the used market. I use a nikkor 65mm on 6x9 and 6x12 and it's "plenty wide" but not superduper wide! On 4x5 the 65mm is lots of fun, and without movements it can cover a bit beyond 4x5, I mean, acceptable ~617 might be doable under some circumstances.

 

[Abbazz]

Mamiya made a 50mm lens covering 6x9 for its Universal/Press camera series but it is relatively expensive. Like Struan said, you could get lucky and buy a whole set including the 50mm for a good price.

And there is the fabled Fujinon SW S 50/5.6 for the Fujica G690 rangefinder cameras, but it is very rare and highly sought after.

Cheers,

Abbazz

 

[Maris]

I use a $59 fisheye conversion lens screwed onto the taking lens of my Seagull TLR. The darn thing sees 140 degrees from one blurry edge to the other and makes a round picture on the 6x6 frame. Actually, stopped all the way down (about f.27) the Seagull prime lens pulls some sharpness out of the fish-eye and the pictures are interesting (?) and acceptable (?).

Just so no one complains about the distortion the fish-eye-ness is highlighted by making final images masked to round in the middle of an 8x10 sheet.

 

[ondebanks]

Are there any REALLY wide-angle lenses out there for 6x9 or 6x7 that I wont have to sign over my firstborn for? seems like all the names I can think of are very expensive.. biogon, grandagon, etc.

Another vote here for the Mamiya Press 50mm f6.3.

Lots of respondents didn't pick up on the "REALLY wide-angle" emphasis in the question. Few people would regard a 28mm lens on 35mm film as a REALLY wide angle...so out go the 50mm on 6x6 and 55mm or 58mm on 6x7 suggestions.

For me, REALLY wide begins at about 90 degrees...equivalent to a 21mm or 22mm lens on 35mm film. For that, you need one of the following:
* 35mm lens on 645 [Mamiya, Pentax]
* 40mm lens on 6x6 [Hasselblad, Rollei, Bronica, Kowa]
* 45mm lens on 6x7 [Pentax, Mamiya 7 (43mm is of course a little wider)]
* 50mm lens on 6x9 [Mamiya Press]
These are all remarkably close [89-90 degrees] in diagonal coverage. The Zeiss, Schneider and Mamiya 7 lenses are pricey, but none of the others is in the "sign over my firstborn" category...assuming you value your firstborn at something over €400/$500 .

I use both a 35mm on a Mamiya 645 and a 50mm on a Mamiya Press Universal; the 645 lens has better contrast (multicoating) and speed but the Press lens renders finer detail overall.

One advantage of the Mamiya Press 50mm f6.3 is that it has both its own mechanical shutter and its own focusing helical mount; so it can be readily adapted to other cameras (except SLRs because of the mirror clearance problem).

One other thing you can easily do with a 50mm f6.3 lens on a Mamiya Press Universal: turn it into a rectilinear superwide lens with 100 degrees coverage! (18mm on 35mm film equivalent) How? Just use it with a $50 Polaroid back. Scan the 73x95mm prints at 900-1200dpi [9-15 megapixels] for further reproduction. No medium format SLR or TLR can match that superwide feat. Oh, except for the new Mamiya 645AF 28mm lens, just now coming into dealers' stores at $5000 a pop. Your firstborn won't be enough for that, but I hear that they are taking trade-ins on families of four .

Ray

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ray, 47/8 and even 47/5.6 Super Angulons aren't that expensive and there's the unfindable 47/8 Ilex. Wider than that gets very expensive in a great hurry.

If Darin were really serious about shooting wide, he'd do well to stop squandering money on whatever he squanders it on until he's accumulated the price of, say, a used 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon. $1k or so should get one. But he knows this already. He just doesn't want one badly enough. Neither, alas, do I.

 

[darinwc]

If Darin were really serious about shooting wide, he'd do well to stop squandering money on whatever he squanders it on until he's accumulated the price of, say, a used 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon.

Squander money!? I dont squander money! In fact I just bought a 55mm micro nikkor, a 210mm dagor-type claron with a pin-sized chip in the rear, and a used 10" band saw.

AW CRAP! DAN'S RIGHT!