pixelatedscraps
Well-known
Am eagerly awaiting the delivery of my first 4x5 camera: a Busch Pressman D (thanks, Creagerj!). The current lens on the Pressman is a 135/4.5 Steinheil-Munchen Culminar.
However, in terms of focal length terms, I find my two most used lenses to be in the 35mm / 90mm range. For that reason, I am beginning to look around for 105mm / 270mm lens that would fit onto the Pressman but at the same time have some longevity.
Any recommendations? My budget appears to be about $500 for both lenses.
However, in terms of focal length terms, I find my two most used lenses to be in the 35mm / 90mm range. For that reason, I am beginning to look around for 105mm / 270mm lens that would fit onto the Pressman but at the same time have some longevity.
Any recommendations? My budget appears to be about $500 for both lenses.
mtargz
Established
With 4x5 being so deliciously huge, a slight crop is no longer that much of an issue. As such, I think, you can easily pick a 90mm lens, which is a focal length that appears to be more common. I found pretty much just one 105mm - a Fujinon f/8 - while 90mms are plentiful, from f/8 to f/4.5, in Copal #0s.
210mm lenses are readily available in Copal #1, but from what I see, 270-300mm lenses mostly come in heavy Copal #3 shutters. I even found reference of a Fujinon-W 210mm in Copal #0.
With the Busch Pressman, I'd say size and weight are of paramount importance if you want to be able to fold the beast back down. I also don't know if the Pressman has the bellows draw to focus the 270mm as closely as you'd like - no idea, really, but I know a few other folding 4x5s are limited to ~300mm bellows extension.
210mm lenses are readily available in Copal #1, but from what I see, 270-300mm lenses mostly come in heavy Copal #3 shutters. I even found reference of a Fujinon-W 210mm in Copal #0.
With the Busch Pressman, I'd say size and weight are of paramount importance if you want to be able to fold the beast back down. I also don't know if the Pressman has the bellows draw to focus the 270mm as closely as you'd like - no idea, really, but I know a few other folding 4x5s are limited to ~300mm bellows extension.
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
Thanks for the info mtargz. I am a total LF noob and know next to nothing. Does this mean the Pressman D can only accept Copal #0 shuttered lenses?
bigeye
Well-known
It might be sacrilege, but I would consider the graphlex Ektar Kodaks. Have you checked Thalmann/Perez site?
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Not scarilege at all
Not scarilege at all
The Kodak Ektars are very good lenses. A 127mm/f:4.5 Ektar in a Supermatic shutter should be an easy-to-afford option for a LF newbie (and it was my first lens on my first LF camera, a Speed Graphic). The shutters are relatively easy to maintain/repair and, as a general matter, are more accurate at slow speeds than at their fastest (1/200 on the one I am looking at right now). The newer ones are coated and cover 4x5 with ease. Flash-synch is the older bi-post style. The lens will easily fold up inside a Speed/Crown Graphic without having to be removed from the camera; not sure of the Pressman's clearances.
The main limiting issues with your Busch Pressman are bellows extension and compression. Your ability to focus long lenses is limited by the maximum distance between the lens standard and film plane. I wouldn't want to try a 300 mm lens of non-telephoto design. Your ability to use the press camera's limited movements will be limited for short lenses (90mm and shorter) by the constraints of the camera's box.
In relative terms, LF glass has never been less expensive than it is today, and the trajectory is downwards. But I take from your question you are looking for "least expensive way to get started" rather than "best value for the dollar" (which might be a 1980's multicoated lens in a copal shutter for several hundred dollars rather than a 1950's lens). Ektars give moderate-to-low contrast compared to modern glass, but are very sharp and were the bread-and-butter lenses for the US press corps in the post-War years.
Not scarilege at all
The Kodak Ektars are very good lenses. A 127mm/f:4.5 Ektar in a Supermatic shutter should be an easy-to-afford option for a LF newbie (and it was my first lens on my first LF camera, a Speed Graphic). The shutters are relatively easy to maintain/repair and, as a general matter, are more accurate at slow speeds than at their fastest (1/200 on the one I am looking at right now). The newer ones are coated and cover 4x5 with ease. Flash-synch is the older bi-post style. The lens will easily fold up inside a Speed/Crown Graphic without having to be removed from the camera; not sure of the Pressman's clearances.
The main limiting issues with your Busch Pressman are bellows extension and compression. Your ability to focus long lenses is limited by the maximum distance between the lens standard and film plane. I wouldn't want to try a 300 mm lens of non-telephoto design. Your ability to use the press camera's limited movements will be limited for short lenses (90mm and shorter) by the constraints of the camera's box.
In relative terms, LF glass has never been less expensive than it is today, and the trajectory is downwards. But I take from your question you are looking for "least expensive way to get started" rather than "best value for the dollar" (which might be a 1980's multicoated lens in a copal shutter for several hundred dollars rather than a 1950's lens). Ektars give moderate-to-low contrast compared to modern glass, but are very sharp and were the bread-and-butter lenses for the US press corps in the post-War years.
Last edited:
Matus
Well-known
Fujinon 105/5.6 W should not cost you much and should cover the format with little movements. The 90 mm lenses are mostly not cheap. There are also Fujinon 125/5.6 and 135/5.6 lenses. I have the latest version of the 125 (the CM-W) and it is a stellar lens.
For the long focal length consider G-Clarons (240, 270, 300) or Fujinon 250/6.3 (or 250/6.7) - the latter has more coverage but for 4x5 that is not relevant. There are compact and light lenses like Fujinon A 240/9, Nikkor 300/9, Fujinon C 300/8.5, but these are not cheap. Some Commercial Ektar could do the job too (those should be excellent lenses).
Should a bit shorter be enough that the plasmats (Nikkor, Schneider, Fujinon, Rodenstock,) are of acceptable size at 210/5.6. Above that the size and weight explodes.
In general - if you are a beginner - do not bind yourself to focal length you just covered from small format (BTW a more correct conversion factor would be 3.2). Keep in mind that you will probably shoot different subjects that you do with 35mm (at least partially)
I would strongly suggest you to get something like 125/5.6 or 135/5.6 lens - this will give you more space for movements and accomplis it a 210 or 240 (or thereabouts) lens. 270 may be a bit too long for your camera - both for bellows and weight.
125/210 were lenses I used for a long time. There is 210/6.3 Caltar which is actually Rodenstock Geronar E and it is a very nice, small and cheap lens (I used to have one until I got Fujinon A 240/9). You should be able to find one for about $200. Advantage is - it is a rather recent lens and it comes in modern Copal shutter and the chance that the shutter will need a CLA is small.
Little hint for the Fujinon W lenses. There are two different models - the older ones have lettering inside the lens filter (you see them when you look at the lens from the front such tat you see the glass) and the newer have the lettering from outside the lens barrel. The older ones have larger coverage by a few degrees. Both offer very good performance.
All Caltar II-N lenses are Rodenstock Apo Sironar N - very good perfomers for reasonable price.
Good luck and be sure to check out the LFF
For the long focal length consider G-Clarons (240, 270, 300) or Fujinon 250/6.3 (or 250/6.7) - the latter has more coverage but for 4x5 that is not relevant. There are compact and light lenses like Fujinon A 240/9, Nikkor 300/9, Fujinon C 300/8.5, but these are not cheap. Some Commercial Ektar could do the job too (those should be excellent lenses).
Should a bit shorter be enough that the plasmats (Nikkor, Schneider, Fujinon, Rodenstock,) are of acceptable size at 210/5.6. Above that the size and weight explodes.
In general - if you are a beginner - do not bind yourself to focal length you just covered from small format (BTW a more correct conversion factor would be 3.2). Keep in mind that you will probably shoot different subjects that you do with 35mm (at least partially)
I would strongly suggest you to get something like 125/5.6 or 135/5.6 lens - this will give you more space for movements and accomplis it a 210 or 240 (or thereabouts) lens. 270 may be a bit too long for your camera - both for bellows and weight.
125/210 were lenses I used for a long time. There is 210/6.3 Caltar which is actually Rodenstock Geronar E and it is a very nice, small and cheap lens (I used to have one until I got Fujinon A 240/9). You should be able to find one for about $200. Advantage is - it is a rather recent lens and it comes in modern Copal shutter and the chance that the shutter will need a CLA is small.
Little hint for the Fujinon W lenses. There are two different models - the older ones have lettering inside the lens filter (you see them when you look at the lens from the front such tat you see the glass) and the newer have the lettering from outside the lens barrel. The older ones have larger coverage by a few degrees. Both offer very good performance.
All Caltar II-N lenses are Rodenstock Apo Sironar N - very good perfomers for reasonable price.
Good luck and be sure to check out the LFF
FPjohn
Well-known
You have already been given much good advice. I would add that the Nikkor W 105mm f5.6 is a fine lens for not so much and will give full coverage for 4x5 as well, no movements.
yours
FPJ
yours
FPJ
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
Thanks for the advice and recommendations guys. I signed up with LFP a month or so ago and have been reading new posts almost daily since then. I suppose I need to start reading more of the elementary ones about setting up the camera to shoot before I actually start looking into the best kind of loupes or slide sheet films to buy.
I'm on the hunt for the Caltar II-N, G-Clarons and the 105 Fujinon as we speak, I saw KEH has a 90mm F/6.8 CALTAR-II N MC COPAL PRESS B for $286 and a 210 F5.6 NIKKOR-W WITH SINAR DB MOUNT, WITH BOARD for $144. Only thing is, I don't know if either of these two lenses would fit on a Pressman. Right now, it's a case of keeping an eye out, while waiting for the Busch to arrive and once it's arrived, testing it out to see if it is the kind of camera system for me. Or not.
Two issues I am having are:
I have yet to grasp exactly which kind of Copal shuttered lens the Pressman accepts: #0 / #1 / #2 / #3 etc. I do know I would need to build or buy a custom lens board to fit though.
Another issue is trying to get my head round the use of movements - at this moment, I don't understand them at all apart from the tilt / shift ones used in architecture and landscapes to minimize distortion (?) and enhance certain effects.
I'm on the hunt for the Caltar II-N, G-Clarons and the 105 Fujinon as we speak, I saw KEH has a 90mm F/6.8 CALTAR-II N MC COPAL PRESS B for $286 and a 210 F5.6 NIKKOR-W WITH SINAR DB MOUNT, WITH BOARD for $144. Only thing is, I don't know if either of these two lenses would fit on a Pressman. Right now, it's a case of keeping an eye out, while waiting for the Busch to arrive and once it's arrived, testing it out to see if it is the kind of camera system for me. Or not.
Two issues I am having are:
I have yet to grasp exactly which kind of Copal shuttered lens the Pressman accepts: #0 / #1 / #2 / #3 etc. I do know I would need to build or buy a custom lens board to fit though.
Another issue is trying to get my head round the use of movements - at this moment, I don't understand them at all apart from the tilt / shift ones used in architecture and landscapes to minimize distortion (?) and enhance certain effects.
graywolf
Well-known
Your 135mm lens is the equivalent of a 35mm on 135 if you crop to 8x10. The equivalent of a 90mm lens would be a 360mm telephoto. How ever, the large negative allows lots of room for cropping.
The classic lens set for 4x5 is a 90mm wide angle (roughly the eqiv of an 21mm lens), a 135-150 wide field normal (eqiv of 35-45mm) , and 250-360 telephoto; normally something around 250 (65mm) is considered a portrait lens, and the 360 (90mm) a sports lens. Usually the longest lens used was a 500mm (135mm), unless you had a Graflex Reflex camera and then you could go to 3000mm (800mm) or so.
Dividing by 4 gives you a pretty close approximation.
BTW 4x5 was pretty much the professional standard from 1920 to 1965, or 45 years, so it was the longest lived. 35mm was replaced by digital after only 35 years. I am talking about the format that was used by the majority of professional photographers, both and others have been used a lot longer than that. I believe 120 film is the oldest format continuously available, it came out for the Kodak Box Brownie about 1901, making it 110 years old.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Shutter sizes are simply a question of the size of the hole in the lens panel.
As others have said, if you go for 90mm instead of 100-105mm, and either 210mm or 300mm instead of 270mm, you'll find VASTLY more choice at all price levels.
Movements are surprisingly easy to understand if (a) the person who's writing about them doesn't try to fill a whole book with something that needs at most a few pages and (b) they're not saying "Gosh, aren't I clever, I understand all this stuff, unlike you ignorant peasants." Try http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/camera movements.html, from which this is extracted:
1 Rise (or fall). It is usually very easy to see whether you need this. If you would otherwise have to point the camera up (or down) to get everything in, but want to retain verticals as parallel, you need rise (or fall). Apply this first. If you can't muster enough rise (or fall), then move a little further away from the subject; or change lenses; or (if your lens and camera allow it) try indirect rise/fall as described above.
2 Cross. If you can't get the viewpoint you want, you may need cross. Apply this second. As with rise, bear in mind the possibility of indirect cross.
3 Tilt. If you want to hold a receding horizontal plane in focus, you'll need this. Visualize the subject plane. Unless you're photographing a flat road or something similar, the subject plane will normally slope upwards and away from you. If it sloped downwards and away from you, you would not be able to see it. Use front tilt for preference, unless you want to change the image shape.
4 Swing. Apply this last of all, according to the same criteria as tilt, to hold a receding vertical plane in focus.
Cheers,
R.
As others have said, if you go for 90mm instead of 100-105mm, and either 210mm or 300mm instead of 270mm, you'll find VASTLY more choice at all price levels.
Movements are surprisingly easy to understand if (a) the person who's writing about them doesn't try to fill a whole book with something that needs at most a few pages and (b) they're not saying "Gosh, aren't I clever, I understand all this stuff, unlike you ignorant peasants." Try http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/camera movements.html, from which this is extracted:
1 Rise (or fall). It is usually very easy to see whether you need this. If you would otherwise have to point the camera up (or down) to get everything in, but want to retain verticals as parallel, you need rise (or fall). Apply this first. If you can't muster enough rise (or fall), then move a little further away from the subject; or change lenses; or (if your lens and camera allow it) try indirect rise/fall as described above.
2 Cross. If you can't get the viewpoint you want, you may need cross. Apply this second. As with rise, bear in mind the possibility of indirect cross.
3 Tilt. If you want to hold a receding horizontal plane in focus, you'll need this. Visualize the subject plane. Unless you're photographing a flat road or something similar, the subject plane will normally slope upwards and away from you. If it sloped downwards and away from you, you would not be able to see it. Use front tilt for preference, unless you want to change the image shape.
4 Swing. Apply this last of all, according to the same criteria as tilt, to hold a receding vertical plane in focus.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
venchka
Veteran
127mm Ektar. Stunning tiny lens. Based on my study, it approximates a 35mm on 135 film.
Wait until you have the camera in hand before shopping for a long lens. 270mm is quite long and your camera may not have the bellows for it.
I own Fujinon-W lenses: 125mm/5.6 and 250mm/6.3. You can spend more. You may not get better. I think I paid $450 for the pair. Stunning lenses.
Wait until you have the camera in hand before shopping for a long lens. 270mm is quite long and your camera may not have the bellows for it.
I own Fujinon-W lenses: 125mm/5.6 and 250mm/6.3. You can spend more. You may not get better. I think I paid $450 for the pair. Stunning lenses.
Last edited:
venchka
Veteran
So I found some photos online of your new camera. It looks remarkably similar to my Pacemaker Speed Graphic. Some thoughts:
1. I stand by original post re: 127mm Kodak Ektar lens. If you don't like the 135mm the camera has now, the 127mm Ektar would be fine for your camera.
2. Wide anlgle lenses & press cameras: Be careful. Try before you buy. These cameras have difficulty with short lenses. The front standard ends up hitting the camera body. Movements are difficult. You have to drop the front bed to avoid having it in the photo. You may need a recessed lens board which may or may not be available for the Busch camera. Work arounds at best. 125mm-127mm (I own both & use them on all 3 of my 4x5 cameras) are a nice compromise between angle of view and ease of use.
3. Long lenses. The bellows is 12" long. Even a 200mm lens (I have one of those also) will be hard pressed to focus closely with that bellows length. You don't want to extend the bellows all way out tight because you may damage them. With the 200mm lens on my Pacemaker, I can focus comfortably to a few feet. I have run the bellows all the way out and got close to 1:1. I didn't use any movements for fear of damaging the bellows.
4. Kodak 203mm Ektar. Another tiny lens from Kodak that compliments the 127mm Ektar perfectly. They are similar in size. Take up very little space. Weigh next to nothing. sharp enough to make your eyes bleed. Under $200 each. Way under if you get lucky.
5. Copal shutters. Looking at the Busch lensboards, you will have no trouble mounting Copal #0 shutters. The older Kodak shutters are a silly mm or 2 larger than the Copal #0 standard hole. No worries. You can easily expand the hole. In fact, the original Busch lensboards may already be oversized relative to the Copal #0 shutters. That is not a problem either. I mount both shutters on my Graphic boards. Copal #1 shutters will fit on the Busch board. Finding boards with the correct size hole may be difficult. I have one Graphic board that somebody did a very bad job of enlarging the hole to #1 size. I can still use it, but it looks awful.
6. 105mm budget idea: Polaroid sold a zillion 105mm Tominon lenses in Copal #1 press shutters as part of their copy camera system. They sell cheap cheap on ebay all the time. They work famously from infinity to 1:1. I have one that I use on 3 different cameras. Limited image circle. Flat field. Small. Sharp. Cheap. What's not to like? If you find that 105mm works for you, then go get a "real" lens.
7. Start a fund for a field camera. Wood. Linhof Technika. Lots of them around. They will overcome most the limitations of the press camera. Use the press camera for the purpose it was designed for: On the street. Hand held. A few Grafmatic backs. f/8.0. Be there.
Good luck.
1. I stand by original post re: 127mm Kodak Ektar lens. If you don't like the 135mm the camera has now, the 127mm Ektar would be fine for your camera.
2. Wide anlgle lenses & press cameras: Be careful. Try before you buy. These cameras have difficulty with short lenses. The front standard ends up hitting the camera body. Movements are difficult. You have to drop the front bed to avoid having it in the photo. You may need a recessed lens board which may or may not be available for the Busch camera. Work arounds at best. 125mm-127mm (I own both & use them on all 3 of my 4x5 cameras) are a nice compromise between angle of view and ease of use.
3. Long lenses. The bellows is 12" long. Even a 200mm lens (I have one of those also) will be hard pressed to focus closely with that bellows length. You don't want to extend the bellows all way out tight because you may damage them. With the 200mm lens on my Pacemaker, I can focus comfortably to a few feet. I have run the bellows all the way out and got close to 1:1. I didn't use any movements for fear of damaging the bellows.
4. Kodak 203mm Ektar. Another tiny lens from Kodak that compliments the 127mm Ektar perfectly. They are similar in size. Take up very little space. Weigh next to nothing. sharp enough to make your eyes bleed. Under $200 each. Way under if you get lucky.
5. Copal shutters. Looking at the Busch lensboards, you will have no trouble mounting Copal #0 shutters. The older Kodak shutters are a silly mm or 2 larger than the Copal #0 standard hole. No worries. You can easily expand the hole. In fact, the original Busch lensboards may already be oversized relative to the Copal #0 shutters. That is not a problem either. I mount both shutters on my Graphic boards. Copal #1 shutters will fit on the Busch board. Finding boards with the correct size hole may be difficult. I have one Graphic board that somebody did a very bad job of enlarging the hole to #1 size. I can still use it, but it looks awful.
6. 105mm budget idea: Polaroid sold a zillion 105mm Tominon lenses in Copal #1 press shutters as part of their copy camera system. They sell cheap cheap on ebay all the time. They work famously from infinity to 1:1. I have one that I use on 3 different cameras. Limited image circle. Flat field. Small. Sharp. Cheap. What's not to like? If you find that 105mm works for you, then go get a "real" lens.
7. Start a fund for a field camera. Wood. Linhof Technika. Lots of them around. They will overcome most the limitations of the press camera. Use the press camera for the purpose it was designed for: On the street. Hand held. A few Grafmatic backs. f/8.0. Be there.
Good luck.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Wayne,
Seconded. For years I've been preaching that press cameras are a really bad introduction to LF unless you want to shoot hand-held (and then, a Super Technika or MPP is a far better buy). Press cameras' bellows too short, there are not enough movements and often the back is fixed.
Oh: and I completely agree about 203 Ektars.
Cheers,
R.
venchka
Veteran
Thank you Roger! Confirmation of one's ideas is always reassuring.
dazarooney
Newbie
I couldn't agree more, I've been looking at that too.
Jamie123
Veteran
Agreed, although I would add that an even better introduction to LF than a foldable field camera is a nice monorail camera (if one can bear the weight). Sinar F2 or P cameras can be had for a pittance these days.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I was lucky to get a Technika IV for small $$$ last autumn and also had to make up my mind about choice of first lens(es).
After some reading here and there and studying the local market, I went for a Fujinon-W 180/5.6 as my first lens (~ $190 w/ lens board) and later added a 90/6.8 (Schneider Angulon, early Linhof version in Compur shutter and complete with recessed Linhof board for ~ $215). Albeit the Fujinon-W being the technical superior lens, I preferred the look of the 90mm Angulon but did not like the absolutely limited coverage.
The Compur shutter soon broke and I replaced the 90mm Angulon with a 90mm Grandagon. A larger and heavier lens but much larger image-circle and newer design. That lens came with a Copal 0 shutter and therefore could not be mounted into the Linhof board so I had to buy a non-recessed Linhof board for that lens. First photos looked promising and I was keen to use the lens more until March 11 came and I had to do other things ...
Enjoy your new camera, I think there are not really bad modern LF lenses out so pick something and soon start taking photos.
After some reading here and there and studying the local market, I went for a Fujinon-W 180/5.6 as my first lens (~ $190 w/ lens board) and later added a 90/6.8 (Schneider Angulon, early Linhof version in Compur shutter and complete with recessed Linhof board for ~ $215). Albeit the Fujinon-W being the technical superior lens, I preferred the look of the 90mm Angulon but did not like the absolutely limited coverage.
The Compur shutter soon broke and I replaced the 90mm Angulon with a 90mm Grandagon. A larger and heavier lens but much larger image-circle and newer design. That lens came with a Copal 0 shutter and therefore could not be mounted into the Linhof board so I had to buy a non-recessed Linhof board for that lens. First photos looked promising and I was keen to use the lens more until March 11 came and I had to do other things ...
Enjoy your new camera, I think there are not really bad modern LF lenses out so pick something and soon start taking photos.