Which 65mm for 4x5?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread |
Anyone have any experience with the various 65mm out there? Any ones I should avoid? Any thoughts on differences between Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor, Caltar, ect.?
-- Erik Biss (biss.gr@tenforward.com), April 21, 1999
I've got the older Schneider 65 f8 Super Angulon. If there is a drawback with this lens, it is the very small image circle. The lens covers 4X5 but without a lot of room, and movements, to spare. But when I look at the image circle with the more modern 65s or even 75s I'm not seeing all that larger an image circle anyway. I guess if I had a bag of money I'd look very hard at the new 72mm SA, just for the image circle.The advantages of my 65 are that it's cheap, sharp and very very small.
-- David Grandy (dgrandy@accesscable.net), April 21, 1999.
My 65 Nikor SW covers very well..I very seldom bother using a center filter; it's an f4(5.6??). I paid $550 for it used, in a Copal 0..and I've seen similiar lenses @ around the same price. Check with B&H
-- C MAtter (cmatter@riag.com), April 21, 1999.
I use a 65mm f/4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon that is one generation back from the current version and am very happy with the sharpness and coverage. I am still debating about whether or not to get the center filter. The Caltar II wide angles are Grandagons in all but name. My testing of the Caltar II 90mm f/4.5 against the Rodenstock version showed no difference. Only when necessary do I use the 0.45 Heliopan CWF with this lens Jack Dykinga until recently shot with the Nikkor 65mm and in a phone conversation last year he told me he really liked it.
-- Ellis Vener (evphoto@insync.net), April 21, 1999.