Looking to get into 4x5, found this kit... Is it worth it?

[richardhkirkando]

Unless you intend to shoot street with a 90mm on 4x5", you'll generally have enough time to take out the lens board (and pop in the 150mm) before packing up.

Sure, but that's one more thing to carry. I can fit a few film holders in a jacket or shorts pocket, but a big lens/lens board doesn't really fit in anything.

 

[graywolf]

Dear Tom,

True, but first, as soon as you focus closer than infinity, the circle of coverage rises surprisingly rapidly, so you can get more movement. This as why my 110 Super Symmar is fine on 8x10 for interiors, but not so much for landscapes.

Second, the circle of illumination and the circle of sharp definition can differ quite widely. With some lenses, there's only a millimetre or two where you get illumination but poor definition, while with others, the circle of good definition gets quite significantly bigger and better as you stop down, within the circle of illumination.

Cheers,

R.

True to a certain extent. But in the middle of the night I thought of another reason that Schneider reduced the claimed angle of view to 80 degrees from the old 100. Color transparencies!

I shoot only B&W film these days, so my comments tend to be based on what works OK with that. But when you are shooting trannies you need a lot better correction in the lens because you can not fix it in printing (usually). As far as I remember about the only old lenses that were considered good color lenses were the Kodak Ektars until about 1955 when everybody was coming out with fully corrected lenses.

I have said in the past that the quality of the lenses from back in the 1930's was intended for the photographic esthetic of the day in which some spherical aberrations that could be tamed by stopping down lent a misty look to B&W shots that were thought to look good. It wasn't that the optical engineers could not design razor sharp lenses, it is that that was not what most photographers wanted.

Then came WWII and the military wanted those razor sharp lenses. It was vitally important to know whether that blob in the corner of the frame was a wood pile or a machine gun nest. Lenses like Aero Ektars came out very quickly. After the war, folks found out that those kinds of lenses worked better for color transparencies than the old pictorial lenses from before the war.

It is interesting that Schneider found out all they had to do to make the Angulon into a modern lens, was to restrict the coverage a bit. Sort of like the great improvement Rodenstock made to the Sironar when they came out with the Apo Sironar by changing the lettering on the bezel and raising the price.

Oh, a question, how often have you used movements with the lens focused on infinity?

 

[graywolf]

All I meant about the lenses was that for the money, I'd rather have an MPP than a (slightly ratty) Super Tech, even if both came with the same 'cooking' lenses, i.e. it's a lot of money for not very much. I just didn't express myself very well.

Cheers,

R.

I can see where a MPP might be a better choice, and certainly for the money. Unfortunately, here in the US of A they are about like hen's teeth, so it kind of passed right over me. Strange, as I recommended one to a friend in England about a year back.

Actually, the only things I have taken exception to in this thread is the idea that those old Schneider lenses are junk. And the idea (for this forum, not in general) that someone would be better off with a view camera than a technical camera, or even a press camera. I thought those were important enough to make a bit of a case about. I also thought that I had said something to the OP about the condition of that particular outfit making it not such a bargain.

 

[Steve M.]

Before I decided that I didn't like LF, I went for an outing w/ a friend that did. He had the latest and greatest Sinar w/ an expensive Nikon lens, coupled to a spot meter. I had a Crown Graflex w/ a 127 Ektar lens and an old selenium meter. He seemed perplexed that my meter readings were exactly what he was using, and when we got the transparencies back you couldn't tell which camera took which shot. You don't need to spend a ton of money.

My advice is to spend as little as possible and just see if it's for you, as LF is slow to shoot and involves large and heavy stuff to carry. For me, it didn't work.

 

[lcpr]

I haven't posted here often, but I'm reading every post and I find it to be some fascinating discussion and I'm learning a lot. Thanks for taking the time to post in this thread everyone.

 

[sevo]

Before I decided that I didn't like LF, I went for an outing w/ a friend that did. He had the latest and greatest Sinar w/ an expensive Nikon lens,

Brand perceptions don't translate that well across formats - for the less than thirty years they made LF lenses, Nikon were the lowest priced and least well regarded among the then existing major LF lens makers. Their lenses doubtlessly have a edge over the Ektar, as Nikon did not start into LF lenses until two decades after Kodak quit investing into LF lens R&D, so that they had far more modern formulas and coatings. But provided that your subject matter and camera movements can make do with the limitations (in coverage and speed) of a 1940's designed lens, a Ektar is hard to beat - there had been times when Kodak Ektar was (along with Zeiss) one of the top names in LF lenses.

 

[sevo]

Actually, the only things I have taken exception to in this thread is the idea that those old Schneider lenses are junk.

I never said so - I merely pointed out that their coverage is not up to modern expectations regarding large format lens performance, and that I'd expect more appropriate lenses given the mentioned price.

Besides, don't forget that the OP wanted the camera as a entry into LF. The lenses in the kit allow for something like one tenth of the movements taken as granted in every modern textbook on LF, and need workarounds not explained anywhere in print to reach even that - this will make it rather hard to learn LF on them.

What is more, the fact that the Angulon only reaches the edges at f/22 makes it practically impossible to learn tilt and swing through trial-and-error on the ground glass.

 

[Roger Hicks]

True to a certain extent. But in the middle of the night I thought of another reason that Schneider reduced the claimed angle of view to 80 degrees from the old 100. Color transparencies!

Oh, a question, how often have you used movements with the lens focused on infinity?

Dear Tom,

Para 1: Almost certainly spot on (as it were).

Para 2: Very seldom, but how else do lens manufacturers make a meaningful comparaison?

Cheers,

R.

 

[graywolf]

I thought I would post a follow up on how the 135mm Optar press camera lens worked out on the 45G. No vignetting to the limits of the standard bellows. Basically, I tested it with 35mm of rise & 10 mm of shift, and with 35mm drop & about 5 degrees of swing &, accidentally, about 5 degrees of rear tilt.

My blog post with images

http://graywolfphoto.com/journal/2012/05/15/the-results-are-in-toyo-view-45g-test/

And a follow up post about the apparent softness of the cameras shot

http://graywolfphoto.com/journal/2012/05/18/soft-image/

Note this was with B&W film, I kind of figure that you could not go that far wih color film. But, I think that it also proves my point that most of the comments about these old lenses will not cover movements is based more on internet myth than on reality.

 

[DominikDUK]

The price is not too bad, for landscape or portrait photography you don't always need that much movement. A 150mm lens is fine for environmental portrait, but I advice you to get a 210mm lens which is pretty much the Standard 4x5 LF lens.

Dominik

 

[shadowfox]

I thought I would post a follow up on how the 135mm Optar press camera lens worked out on the 45G. No vignetting to the limits of the standard bellows. Basically, I tested it with 35mm of rise & 10 mm of shift, and with 35mm drop & about 5 degrees of swing &, accidentally, about 5 degrees of rear tilt.

My blog post with images

http://graywolfphoto.com/journal/2012/05/15/the-results-are-in-toyo-view-45g-test/

And a follow up post about the apparent softness of the cameras shot

http://graywolfphoto.com/journal/2012/05/18/soft-image/

Note this was with B&W film, I kind of figure that you could not go that far wih color film. But, I think that it also proves my point that most of the comments about these old lenses will not cover movements is based more on internet myth than on reality.

Good job.
First time shooting 4x5 is not bad with those results.
Fun, isn't it?

 

[graywolf]

Good job.
First time shooting 4x5 is not bad with those results.
Fun, isn't it?

Thanks for the praise, but it is not the first time. First working mono-rail camera I have had, but I have had a couple Graphics, and at one time a Super Technika. Those were just test shots to check out the new bellows I put on the camera, the repairs I made, and to see if the lens off the Crown Graphic would cover (It does better than I would have guessed).

While the Toyo 45G is a bit off topic for this forum, I thought that reporting the coverage of the Optar from the Crown was right on topic here.

 

[lcpr]

So here's a 5 year update/some closure for this thread. I passed on the Linhof kit (which eventually sold) and built up a Pentax 67 kit in the mean time since I really like the 5:4 ratio. Kept a casual eye out for any 4x5 kits that popped up in the UK. Last Summer I jumped on a deal for a black Tachihara, Rodenstock 150mm APO-Sironar-N, 10x film holders and a box of expired Portra 400NC. It isn't a rangefinder but the price was right and it had everything I needed to get started. Here are the first two sheets I exposed with that setup:

Really enjoying large format photography and it's a central part of the process of a project I'm working on at the moment. Who knows, maybe a Linhof Tech may end up making its way into my camera bag.

 

[johannielscom]

Great shots.

I love 4x5 and Portra 400 is such a brilliant film. I read online that it can overcome 11 stops from darkest to lightest area in the negative, before clipping occurs. you sure make it sing in above shots!

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I don't shoot enough with my 4x5!
I spent over a year building that kit and restoring a camera. Time for me to get out with the kit and my tripod.

Excellent exposures but if I may make a criticism, the composition is too tight and centered on one (the almost full length one) and not quite tight enough on the portrait. The first has a lot of sky above your subject's head and cuts him off at the knees. The second could really get in close or just a bit closer to fill the lower part of the frame with his upper shoulders. You can also start playing with your focus plane if you like and just getting his eyes razor sharp focus.

Depending upon how you shoot, 150mm may seem just right, too wide or too narrow, after you get used to how it draws. It's a fantastic lens, possibly too good! From there, jump up to a 240 or 300 on the long end and a 75 or 90 for wides. You'll be surprised with your Tachi that one lightweight lens, the body and a couple film holders weighs less than a serious DSLR with a prime, a zoom and two batteries.

Next thing you know you're going to be shopping for a rapid rectilinear for some century old experimentation.

What are you using to scan your negs?

It's a lot of fun stepping back into a more contemplative mode of photography.
Enjoy and keep the photos coming.

Phil Forrest

 

[lcpr]

Thanks Phil and Johan! I'll bear that in mind next time, to be honest I was more worried about whether I had remembered to switch off the preview after I pulled the darkslide during that shoot, I'm a lot more comfortable with the camera/workflow now though. I tend to shoot portraits with everything zeroed out but I'm slowly incorporating them more into my shooting.

As for scanning, I use an Epson V700 + Vuescan for my scanning, to scan in the full rebate I made a slightly oversized holder to space out the neg from the scanner's plate and a bit of masking tape to hold the neg flat.

Also the GBP/USD conversion at the start of this thread made me take pause. If only that rate still existed! I would stock up on so much Portra 400.

 

[Spanik]

I had a lot of fun reading this thread. Just got a Wista 45SP and scanned my first negatives. I had a lens around for a couple of years (bought cheap), some holders, film that I used in a pinhole... I fear I'm hooked.

Right now I just did 6 shots of Fomapan 400 but the results just make me want to run Velvia through it.