- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 66
- Format
- Medium Format
I'm quite enamored with the brightness falloff, loss of clarity, and edge distortion towards the margins of 100 year old panorama shots like Henri-Lartigue's (or, more recently, Sally Mann's 8x10s).
I bought a 6x17 Kraken, and my AI assistant suggested a Schneider Super Angulon 65mm f/5.6, with an image circle of 170mm (I don't know if this is nominal or true) for the 6x17cm diagonal of 18 cm.
This just so happens to be the lens a user here bought for his 6x17, but he was looking for full coverage:
www.photrio.com
Examining the image he produced, I think the brightness falloff and distortion is fairly close to what I would like, though perhaps a little strong. The angle is also quite wide. That might mean a 75mm lens would be better for me, but upon examining the very handy spreadsheets of large format lenses for 6x(7,9,12) formats:
The smallest image circle for the 75mm lenses is 187mm, greater than the diagonal of the 6x17 negative. But I don't know if the chart is referring to nominal or true image circle. "Nominal" image circle extends to 80-50% of center brightness, while "true" extends to about 10% of image brightness?
The Kraken maker wrote me back and recommended 90mm lenses instead. He said a 65mm lens would be hard to work with. The 90mm lenses in the charts had even more coverage than the 75mm, so maybe my desired lens doesn't exist? I only have a feeling for focal lengths and angle of view on 35mm equipment. He noted a 90mm lens on 6x17 gives "a vertical FOV about the same as a 39mm lens on 35mm full frame but with the width of a 19mm." That is quite some width with just a 90mm lens. Maybe 65mm is truly overkill for me?
Does anyone know of any 6x17 galleries wherein users note their focal lengths, so I could get a sense for the field of view (and, ideally, limited coverage, if any of the users go for that?)
Thank you do much for your help.
I bought a 6x17 Kraken, and my AI assistant suggested a Schneider Super Angulon 65mm f/5.6, with an image circle of 170mm (I don't know if this is nominal or true) for the 6x17cm diagonal of 18 cm.
This just so happens to be the lens a user here bought for his 6x17, but he was looking for full coverage:
Unexpectedly Inadequate Image Circle: Schneider Angulon 65/5.6 on 6x17
Having recently come into possession of an old 6x17 rig, I set about acquiring a lens to use with it. As I wanted images to be properly panoramic, I wanted a wide-angle lens, and I tried to read up on the alternatives. One lens that seemed promising was the Schneider Angulon 65/5.6; one site...
www.photrio.com
Examining the image he produced, I think the brightness falloff and distortion is fairly close to what I would like, though perhaps a little strong. The angle is also quite wide. That might mean a 75mm lens would be better for me, but upon examining the very handy spreadsheets of large format lenses for 6x(7,9,12) formats:
The smallest image circle for the 75mm lenses is 187mm, greater than the diagonal of the 6x17 negative. But I don't know if the chart is referring to nominal or true image circle. "Nominal" image circle extends to 80-50% of center brightness, while "true" extends to about 10% of image brightness?
The Kraken maker wrote me back and recommended 90mm lenses instead. He said a 65mm lens would be hard to work with. The 90mm lenses in the charts had even more coverage than the 75mm, so maybe my desired lens doesn't exist? I only have a feeling for focal lengths and angle of view on 35mm equipment. He noted a 90mm lens on 6x17 gives "a vertical FOV about the same as a 39mm lens on 35mm full frame but with the width of a 19mm." That is quite some width with just a 90mm lens. Maybe 65mm is truly overkill for me?
Does anyone know of any 6x17 galleries wherein users note their focal lengths, so I could get a sense for the field of view (and, ideally, limited coverage, if any of the users go for that?)
Thank you do much for your help.
