widest medium format lens?

M

meandihagee

Well-known
Local time
3:02 AM
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
216
Well, not THE widest, but wider than the 45mm on my GA645w. SLR or RF, doesn't matter - something in the ballpark of a 15, 18, 21mm on 135.

can you recommend something...?

thanks
 
Hasselblad SWC is very wide, Alpa can go crazy wide too. There is the 43mm on Mamiya 7, which obviously goes onto a larger frame so the "crop factor" will make it a significantly wider lens than the 45mm on the GA645.

I have a 47mm on 6x9, which is supposed to be the same as 21mm on 35mm. If you can find one, a Fotoman 69 is a sort of cheap(er) and cheerful Alpa.
 
My wife has a 35mm Apo-Grandagon on 6x9cm with her Alpa 12S/WA -- and it allows movements. That's 14-15mm on 35mm (seems wider because of the option of movements). I have a 38 Biogon on my 12WA, with 44x66mm: the exact equivalent of 21mm on full-frame 35mm.

EDIT: Insofar as different format shapes are compatible, the same 38 Biogon on the SWC is between 18 and 24 mm in 35mm terms. Crop it to 2:3 and 24mm is about right.

Cheers,

R.
 
Readily available. Dirt cheap. Very good lens.
45mm/4.0 Super Takumar for the Pentax 6x7. ~22mm on 35mm.

Wayne
 
Kowa 19mm fisheye, Kowa SIX/Super 66 system. They also had regular 35 and 40mm lenses, and a 55mm - quite a lot of wides to choose from.
 
venchka said:
Readily available. Dirt cheap. Very good lens.
45mm/4.0 Super Takumar for the Pentax 6x7. ~22mm on 35mm.

Wayne
Click to expand...

I'm tempted to get the 45/4.0 even though I already have a 55/4.0 (28 equiv.).

My MF ultrawide is a Plaubel 69W with the fixed 47/5.6 Schneider Super Augulon. Its a 21mm equiv on a 6x9. What is so cool about this rig is that it has shifts, rise and fall. The VF'er also "peroscopes" with the movements BTW.

Cal
 
Comparing can be difficult because of the differences between 645, 6x6, 6x7, & 6x9. I only handled, not used the Hassie SWC w/38/4.5 Biogon already mentioned; it's based on the classic 21/4.5 Biogon for the Zeiss Ikon Contax, but I think it may be closer to 18mm when converted to 6x6. The widest lenses I'm familiar with are the 40/4 Noritar for my Norita & the 58/5.6 Wide Omegon for my Koni-Omega, roughly analogous to 21mm & 28mm in 35mm.

meandihagee said:
Well, not THE widest, but wider than the 45mm on my GA645w. SLR or RF, doesn't matter - something in the ballpark of a 15, 18, 21mm on 135.

can you recommend something...?

thanks
Click to expand...
 
In 6x6 I have a 30mm Arsat that fills the frame. But don't expect straight lines near the edges. On the M645 there is the 24 (still kicking myself to miss one) and 35mm.
 
I'm not sure about the widest 6x12 or 6x17 lens, but the widest MF format camera may be the Noblex 150. Something like 140* diagonally.

Texsport
 
I use a Graflex XLSW with a Schneider 47mm lens. I also have a Hasselblad SW with the 38mm Biogon.
 
I framed the 24mm Nikon and SWC 38 and they're quite the same width.
The additional height makes the SWC "work" a bit wider in many situations, though.

Charlie
 
bigeye said:
I framed the 24mm Nikon and SWC 38 and they're quite the same width.
The additional height makes the SWC "work" a bit wider in many situations, though.

Charlie
Click to expand...

That should be correct. A 40mm on a 6x6 is similar to a 25mm lens.
 
raid said:
So the 38mm on a 6x6 is similar to a 28mm on a 35mm camera then? I though that it is wider. In fact, it should be similar in width to a 24mm lens.
Click to expand...

True for the angles by diagonal - the figure generally given by lens makers, as that is the coverage limit critical for optical construction. However, for perceptive purposes the diagonal is only meaningful for images framed at 45° - the angle of the horizontal is the relevant scale we ought to compare.
 
Texsport said:
I'm not sure about the widest 6x12 or 6x17 lens, but the widest MF format camera may be the Noblex 150. Something like 140* diagonally.
Click to expand...

That honor should go to the Seitz Roundshot series. With a medium format version like the 28/220, you can have negatives that are 90° vertically and 180°, 360°, 720°, or in fact any number horizontally, the maximum determined by the length of your roll of film.
 
sevo said:
True for the angles by diagonal - the figure generally given by lens makers, as that is the coverage limit critical for optical construction. However, for perceptive purposes the diagonal is only meaningful for images framed at 45° - the angle of the horizontal is the relevant scale we ought to compare.
Click to expand...


Good point on the use of diagonals and lens construction.

I don't think that horizontal is the only relevant scale all the time, though. Shots with close objects in the foreground or some interior shots using the 24mm Nikon, for example, may cover what you need across, but you would have to go to a 21mm or so to get the vertical coverage you need to compose properly, which the 38 Biogon on 6x6 has. Calling it a 21-24mm makes a bit of sense.

This is one of those spots where "numbers" and practical use diverge to me.

-Charlie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top