which WA lens

mitch brown

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
352
Location
Boston Georgia
Format
Multi Format
happy new year
well santa was verry good and i have the $$$ to buy a new lens, but which one ? the options are a Schneider 110mm f/5.6 Super-Symmar XL or the 90mm one. i see that they both have 110 angle of view , the 110 is much lighter and smaller . the question is what do i lose going with the 110.
please help me decide !
mitch
 

Pinholemaster

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
1,566
Location
Westminster,
Format
8x10 Format
Which is your nearest lens to the 110 or 90?

I step from a 150mm to a 120mm to a 90mm, as an example.

It all depends on what you shoot, and how this lens will fit in to the way you see. Not knowing your subject matter, we could suggest one and be completely wrong for what you are after.

Can you try out both lenses on your camera to see how they look on the ground glass? That's always the best test.

Sorry not to have an exact answer, but I hope my observations help.
 
OP
OP

mitch brown

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
352
Location
Boston Georgia
Format
Multi Format
thanks alittle more info, i use a wisner 4x5 and right now have a 90 sa , 150 , 210 and 300 i mostly shoot landscapes and abstracts.
mitch
 

Ole

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2002
Messages
9,245
Location
Bergen, Norway
Format
Large Format
First of all, it's the angle of coverage that is the same, not the angle of view. The 90mm is a lot wider than the 110mm, and gives more of a "wide-angle look".

Second, the reason the 90mm Super Angulon XL is heavier than the 110mm super Symmar XL is that the 90mm has a large rear cell which evens out the illumination. I shoot an old 90mm f:9 Super Angulon on 5x7" without bothering with a center filter; with a Super Symmar I would have considered shelling out for one.

Then again some cameras are very difficult to use with the 90mm, just because the rear cell is so large. Having to remove the rear cell, put the lensboard on, and then remove the ground glass to very carefully screw the rear cell on again can be a nerve-wracking experience in the field...
 

Ole

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2002
Messages
9,245
Location
Bergen, Norway
Format
Large Format
I type too slowly.

If i were you, I would rather get an even shorter lens. 90mm on 4x5" isn't wide enough for me - most of the time I use that focal length on 5x7". I would get a 75/72mm or even a 65mm...
 

jeroldharter

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
1,955
Location
Wisconsin
Format
4x5 Format
I had the same focal lengths as you until I added a 75 mm Caltar lens. Seems significantly wider than my 90 mm Caltar.

Don't know the Wisner but without a bag bellows you will have little ability for movements and even so the image circles are not too generous. I think that is the appeal of the 80 mm Super Symmar, the large image circle.
 

Trevor Crone

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
546
Location
SE.London
Format
Multi Format

Depends on your personal vision. I tend to gravitate more towards the wider view.

I have both the 110 SS XL and the 80 SS XL. The 80 is used more because I simply favour the wider view. When I need that little bit extra coverage and don't want something quite as wide I turn to the 110 which is a stunning lens, perhaps the sharpest in my box. Although for me sharpness is not the No.1 reason for choosing a lens.

If you decide on the 110 you will not be dissapointed.
 

jbbooks

Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
173
Format
Multi Format
Based on my experience, if I were you I would forget the 110 and get a 90mm f5.6 Super-Angulon XL.

I use a Wisner 4x5 with the same range of lenses as yours plus a 450 and a 600mm telephoto. Instead of the 90mm SA, I use the f5.6 Super-Angulon XL. That lens is about as short as you can use on a 4x5 Wisner and, using a bag bellows, still allow a lot of movement. Fortunately, the Wisner is large enough to make it unnecessary to remove the the 90mm S-A XL's very large rear element when you are mounting the lens board in the standard.

90, 150 and 210 is a good combination and I rarely want anything between them. I have wanted something shorter than the 90 but, as I said, that is not practical with the Wisner 4x5 camera. I use a different camera to get as short as a 47mm. Even then, however, I still like the 90 and end up with 47, 90, 135 and 180mm lenses for it. That camera does not have the movements of the Wisner and won't accommodate a 90mm S-A XL, so I use a 90mm Grandagon for it.
 

PHOTOTONE

Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
2,412
Location
Van Buren, A
Format
Large Format

I can't think of what cameras wouldn't accept a 90mm f8 Super-Angulon. I have one mounted on a Crown Graphic board, as well as the 120 f8 Super-Angulon, and they both mount with no issues, and no removal of rear elements. This lensboard is about as small as they get, unless you are talking about early wooden cameras.
 

jbbooks

Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
173
Format
Multi Format

It is not the 90mm f8 Super-Angulon that is the problem. It is the 90mm f5.6 Super-Angulon XL that is much larger with a rear element that will not go through a Technika or smaller standard without having to remove it, insert the lens board and, then, thread it back in starting from the back of the bellows.

The advantages of the XL--faster with a larger image circle and normally not needing a graduated ND filter, even with transparencies, make it much more capable than the 90mm f8 S-A.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…