Which 65mm lenses cover 4x5?

[BradS]

Which 65mm lenses cover 4x5?

Nikon 65mm f/4 SW Nikkor
Rodenstock 65mm f/4 Grandagon-N
Schneider 65mm f/5.6 ??? and f/8 ??? Super Angulon

Fuji?

 

[Dan Fromm]

The first post in this http://www.largeformatphotography.i...to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses has a link to a list of links to, among other things, LF lens catalogs. You can look up what you want to know yourself.

 

[Mick Fagan]

My Fujinon 65mm f/5.6 covers 4x5" with a very small modicum of movement available, think around 5mm movement give or take.

I also use a Heliopan 67mm centre graqduted filter, haven't used the 65mm without that graduated filter since I got it.

This was taken with the Fujnon 65mm and centre filter; if you view the image on its own, you may get a better appreciation of what 65mm looks like. Looking through the fence, it looks as though the centre is lighter, it is, but not because of the lens or graduated centre filter; that was how the light was.

Look at the sky across the top of the image, it is virtually constant across the entire frame; this is the graduated centre filter doing its magic.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/diamantina-np-bronco-yard.56466/

Mick.

.

 

[shutterfinger]

http://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html
Diagonal of format 162.6mm; diagonal of exposure area 160.8mm
http://home.earthlink.net/~eahoo/page8/filmhold.html

 

[Ian Grant]

I've used a 65mm f8 Suer Angulon for nearly 30 years with my Wista 45DX, it only just covers 5x4 but I've made some great Exhibition images with it, and posted some here on this Forum.

Yes it's very tight coverage but works, the f5.6 version would be a touch better

I paid very little for my 65mm f8 Super Angulon, I only use it quite rarely but when I do I always get exactly what I want from the lens. I won't replace it but have added a 75mm which gets used more/

Ian

 

[jim10219]

The Super Angulon 65/8 will just barely cover 4x5 without any movements. That’s what I use. With my Anniversary Speed Graphic, the lens sits so far inside the camera, that you couldn’t really do any movements anyway. I do have to drop the front bed, though. But any 65mm lens would be the same. It will vignette pretty bad without a center filter, but sometimes that looks cool, and you can always burn it out with B/W film. A proper center filter can be difficult to find, so be warned.

I bought mine really cheap, and it had a recent CLA. The previous owner only thought it would cover 6x9, so I got it for less than I probably should have.

 

[ic-racer]

65mm Horseman (for 6x9cm format) does NOT cover but it is all I have so I use it on 4x5in anyway.

 

[shutterfinger]

https://www.schneideroptics.com/ - Info tab - Vintage Lens Data - Large Format Lenses :
65/8 155mm image circle at f/16 https://www.schneideroptics.com/inf..._format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-65mm.html
65/5.6 170mm image circle at f22 https://www.schneideroptics.com/inf...ormat_lenses/super-angulon/data/5.6-65mm.html

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

How much do you want to spend? How much movement do you need? Are you stuck on 65mm? If cost isn't a concern, what about a 58mm and/or 72mm SAXL?

 

[Huub]

Short answer: all 4 lenses mentioned will cover, as will the Fuji SWD. This link gives a good overview: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF4x5in.html

 

[mnemosyne]

65mm Horseman (for 6x9cm format) does NOT cover but it is all I have so I use it on 4x5in anyway.
View attachment 206850

There are several versions of the 65mm Horseman lens and in fact one version (the last?) is described as having an image circle of 152mm at f22, so at least in theory it should cover 4x5 barely without any movements.

Also the older Fujinon SW 65mm f8 will cover 155mm at f22, so is also an option if you do not plan to use any movements. It is quite sharp and small.

 

[Ian Grant]

The Super Angulon 65/8 will just barely cover 4x5 without any movements. That’s what I use. With my Anniversary Speed Graphic, the lens sits so far inside the camera, that you couldn’t really do any movements anyway. I do have to drop the front bed, though. But any 65mm lens would be the same. It will vignette pretty bad without a center filter, but sometimes that looks cool, and you can always burn it out with B/W film. A proper center filter can be difficult to find, so be warned.

I bought mine really cheap, and it had a recent CLA. The previous owner only thought it would cover 6x9, so I got it for less than I probably should have.

There were two for sale here yesterday, both now sold and at bargain but fair prices, not sure if that's what prompted this thread

Ian

 

[jim10219]

One more thing I forgot to mention. The 65/8 Super Angulon apparently needs to be stopped down to at least f/16 to cover 4x5. They say f/22 is even better. I've not actually ever tested this, as I usually shoot it between f/22 to f/45. I almost never shoot LF lenses wide open unless doing portraiture, and wouldn't likely ever use a lens that wide for portraiture.

Also, at f/8, it can be difficult to compose on the ground glass. This is especially true in the corners. In fact, I can't ever see anything in the corners of mine no matter what I do. The small aperture can also make interior shots or anything in low light, quite difficult. But that's kind of a consequence of any lens this wide. Even a 5.6 won't be that much brighter (though it would certainly be better). And with a good dark cloth, a loupe, and plenty of time spent under the dark cloth to let your eyes adjust, you can make do. If you need to know what's in the corners, you can rotate the camera on the tripod to bring the edges closer to the middle to get a feel for what's out there. It's a pain, but what isn't with a LF camera? The upside to a lens this wide is it's got a pretty wide DOF, so you can often set it to infinity focus (or better yet, hyper focus), stop down to f/22 or so, and get most anything in focus that's further than a few feet in front of you.

 

[Ian Grant]

I think I've always used my 65mm f8 SA at f22, I bought a 75mm f8 SA about 12 years ago for my 6x17 camera and tried it on my Wista liking the FL but never used it, it's permanently fitted to the 6x17 camera where it's my standard lens (I don't shoot in wide open places very often).

A couple of years ago I picked up a 75mm f5.6 Super Angulon it's much easier to use as it has more room for movements, it's also easier to focus with my Wista. The 65mm is getting less use but still has a place in my backpack when shooting in very tight situations.

I'd agree the 65mm isn't the easiest lens to focus, it's a bit of a miss-match with my Wista's combination fresnel screen, but it's always been worth the effort and of course has a lot of DOF at f22 which helps enormously..

Ian

 

[BradS]

Thanks everybody. I've had two 75mm lenses, an older Super Angulon in Synchro Compur and a much newer Grandagon. Both were fantastic. The Grandagon was clearly superior but it was part of a Fotoman PS45 outfit which I sold long ago and I foolishly sold he 75mm Super Angulon too. Anyway, I guess they never felt "wide enough" and I always wanted to try a 65mm but they were always prohibitively expensive. Now prices for pretty much all LF gear seem to have dropped to ridiculously low levels....so, I dream...

Thank you for the example photos, I think this is mostly what I wanted to see (even though I didn't know it at the time).

 

[Dan Fromm]

Brad, if and when you buy a 65, to amplify Mick's comment in post #3 above, remember than on 4x5 a 65 badly needs a center filter. You don't have to buy a CF made by y'r new lens' maker, and Fuji and Nikon never offered any. Here's a link to an article that explains, among other things, substitution possibilities: http://www.galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html

 

[BradS]

Thanks Dan. I did kinda brush over that fact.

 

[Ian Grant]

My experience with a 65mm is you can get away without a ND Centre filter with 5x4 B&W film as long as your negatives aren't underexposed, yes you need to do a little dodging of the corners. With E6 it would be very different. It's far less an issue with a 75mm.

The problem is no-one makes ND Centre filters any longer and they are hard to find. I've looked at how Gelatin gradated filters are made, actually Denise Ross (a member here) has made a yellow one and posted how on her Light Farm website. It's an old concept glass gradated filters were available before 1910 (that's the first advert I have) and I have one in a pre-WWI filter set. Of course these glass filters are two glass flats with a gelatin layer in the middle, that;s how Wratten were making safe-light filters until they went out of production. So there's possibilities

Ian

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

The problem is no-one makes ND Centre filters any longer and they are hard to find.

Rodenstock has them on their on-line catalogue:
http://www.rodenstock-photo.com/Archiv/Objektive_digitiale_Fotografie_d_10469.pdf
(page 26)

 

[Ai Print]

Rodenstock 65mm f/4 Grandagon-N

I had this lens and barely used it because it only just covered 4x5 and I found if any lens needed some rise or fall it was a 65mm. It also needed a center filter, I'm not a fan of it's vignetting effects even with negative film.

I sold it and got a Nikon SW 75mm and it made a big diffidence, just wide enough and just enough image circle to become what I considered usable.

 

[BradS]

I had this lens and barely used it because it only just covered 4x5 and I found if any lens needed some rise or fall it was a 65mm. It also needed a center filter, I'm not a fan of it's vignetting effects even with negative film.

I sold it and got a Nikon SW 75mm and it made a big diffidence, just wide enough and just enough image circle to become what I considered usable.

Thanks. The necessity of a center filter is an important point that I had not originally considered. In hind sight, I really should have held on to that old 75mm Super-Angulon I had. Oh well.

 

[Mick Fagan]

I had this lens and barely used it because it only just covered 4x5 and I found if any lens needed some rise or fall it was a 65mm. It also needed a center filter, I'm not a fan of it's vignetting effects even with negative film.

I sold it and got a Nikon SW 75mm and it made a big diffidence, just wide enough and just enough image circle to become what I considered usable.

Earlier this year I was on a farm photographing some of their sheds. One shed in particular grabbed my attention, but moving away to enable me to use my 90mm wasn’t an option, so I used the 65mm, which as you mention has virtually no movements.

By using the 65mm I had the entire building just in, the negative has the edge of the building finishing either side with about 3mm of image area, it was tight.

As for requiring rise and/or fall, well there is a limit to things and the wideness that my 65mm lens has, enables me to get subjects in that I would never get in any other way; they are either in or they are not in.

I fail to understand how using a 75mm lens, which, as you say, has more usable movement over the 65mm; could be a better option. I understand that one could shift to the left or right, to get either side of the building; but this means I can only get one side of the building on the negative.

I don’t have a 75mm lens so I cannot compare it with my 65mm lens, but as I understand it, I need to be further away from anything I am photographing with a 75mm lens over a 65mm lens to effectively get the object I am wishing to record.

I have been rather successful with my 65mm lens and consider it to be a very useful lens, if and when I happen upon a 75mm and I have the money spare, I may acquire a 75mm lens, but I doubt I would ever let my 65mm lens go, it is really terrific.

The below image is my 65mm lens using a graduated centre filter, the tripod is literally leaning into a steep sand dune, there is no way to get further away. The picture is slightly cropped on the left to remove the last trestle which was only half in the frame.

For those in Australia, it is the Kilcunda Trestle Bridge.

Mick.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

I just bought a Fuji Fujinon SWD 65mm f/5.6 lens (waiting for it to arrive yet), for use on a Toyo 45AII. I have a 12mm recessed board, and I see I can get a 17mm recessed board (110x110 Copal 0) - I didn't see an equivalent 30mm deep (110x110mm Copal 0) recessed board anywhere. I expected when I purchased the lens that movements would be quite limited, but I expect to be able to use it as well as a wider lens since the 45AII does have drop front bed and supports wide lenses without a bag bellows.

I am a bit confused as to the 35mm equivalency of a 65mm lens on a 4x5 - some web sites say the 65mm lens is the equivalent of a 21.5mm, but others say its the equivalent to 17mm on a 35mm camera which is it?

Mike

 

[Besk]

To calculate the HORIZONAL field of view in comparison to 35mm film: 65mm divided by 122mm (4x5's horizontal dimension) = .53
Multiply .53 times 36mm (35mm's horizontal dimension) = 19mm equivalent in 35mm format terms.

You can do the same if you want to compare the diagonals and will get somewhat different results. I prefer the horizontal comparisons in most cases.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

To calculate the HORIZONAL field of view in comparison to 35mm film: 65mm divided by 122mm (4x5's horizontal dimension) = .53
Multiply .53 times 36mm (35mm's horizontal dimension) = 19mm equivalent in 35mm format terms.

You can do the same if you want to compare the diagonals and will get somewhat different results. I prefer the horizontal comparisons in most cases.

Thanks!

Mike