Rodenstock Grandagon's

GeorgesGiralt

Member

Joined

Sep 16, 2004

Messages

523

Location

Toulouse, Fr

Format

Large Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #1

Hi !
The wide angle from Rodenstock has evolved as has the Angulon from Schneider.
I was wondering what to expect from a Grandagon from the early 80's compared to the more modern designs.
Also, is there a huge difference going from the 6.8 to the 4.5 ?
Thanks for your answers !

 

Ian Grant

Subscriber

Joined

Aug 2, 2004

Messages

23,263

Location

West Midland

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #2

Well I have a early 80's Grandagon f6.8 90mm which I bought in about 1986/7 and it's a superb lens. It is an excellent design, it has plenty of room for movements on 5x4 and is extremely sharp, and remarkably flare free even when shooting into the sun.

The f4.5 versions is heavier and more expensive, and wouldn't be any advantage to me. I also own 4 Super Angulons and there is little or no difference between them.

Ian

 

Trevor Crone

Member

Joined

Nov 5, 2007

Messages

546

Location

SE.London

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #3

I also have a 90mm f6.8 Grandagon which I bought second hand a couple of years ago and its a super lens. Plenty of coverage on 5x4 and it leaves nothing to be desired in the way of sharpness.

Ian has already mentioned the 4.5's being heavier and more expensive. They do of course offer more coverage over the 6.8.

 

Ian Grant

Subscriber

Joined

Aug 2, 2004

Messages

23,263

Location

West Midland

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #4

The 90mm f6.8 Grandagon has slightly better coverage than the f8 Super Angulon, 221mm Image circle as opposed to 216mm , but less than the 236/235mm for the f4.5 Grandagon and f5.6 SA.

So far on 5x4 in 20+ years I've yet to get insufficient coverage with a wide variety of movements with the 90mmf6.8 Grandagon, and I don't expect my 90mm f8 SA to be much different.

However if I was specialising in architectural work the extra coverage would be far more useful and this is where the newer Super Angulons come into their own with evenmore coverage.

It's worth mentioning the 6.8 Grandagon has never caused me problems focussing even in relatively low light levels.

Ian

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2008

Sparky

Member

Joined

Jun 19, 2005

Messages

2,096

Location

Los Angeles

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #5

Speaking as someone who relies HEAVILY on wide angles... I've preferred the 6.8/90 gg over the 4.5. Normally I'd MUCH prefer a 4.5 - due to 'visual ergonomics' (you can see what you're doing much better). The newer SAs are WAY too contrasty for me. I don't care for them. It's far too easy to lose highlights and shadows. You have to be a fair bit more precise with your exposure placement.

 

Uhner

Member

Joined

Feb 28, 2006

Messages

1,100

Location

Oslo, Norway

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #6

With the caveat that you acquire a good example, all the 90mm lenses you mention should give you ample performance.

If I remember correctly you have both a 4x5 and a 5x7 camera so you might consider getting a 4.5 Grandagon or a 5.6 Super Angulon due to their larger coverage.

I have a 4.5 Grandagon and despite it’s relatively high weight it is one of my most used lenses.

 

Tom Hoskinson

Member

Joined

Mar 7, 2004

Messages

3,867

Location

Southern Cal

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 27, 2008

• #7

I also have a 55mm/4.5 APO-Grandagon that is my most-used lens on my 4x5.

The performance of the lens is excellent and the coverage is ample.