Corran
Well-known
Super Angulon CL
Small correction - x-ray means Super Angulon XL, and XL series. Just to clarify. Great lenses, I have them in 47/58/72/90.
Super Angulon CL
IMO don't overly complicate it. Tape measures and exact bellows compensation calculations aren't really needed for most images. ....
Even then, work to the nearest half stop, erring on the side of over-exposure as necessary: with B+W LF the penalties in bigger grain and loss of sharpness are trivial.Correct, don't over complicate things. You need to deal with bellows compensation if you do closeup work, but not for landscape. As a rule of thumb, ignore the issue if the point if best focus is at a distance equal to at least 10x the focal length. . . .
......Remember that even ancient lenses, more or less damaged, will often give good or even excellent results on LF. Increase development for more contrast: scratches and fungus reduce sharpness less than most people imagine......
Dear Mike,One final recommendation from my side -- stay away from wide-angle lenses. We're so used to them from smaller formats to get better depth-of-field, but you don't need that for 4x5 -- you need coverage (i.e. image circle) .
The "standard" lens for a 4x5 is around 200mm (about 55mm in 135-land, but due to the different aspect ratio, it's about "normal" angle of view). Any old 200mm lens will have great coverage to truly learn movements (even just shift...). I have both an old f7.7/203 Ektar and a modern f5.6/210 APO Sironar-S, and either one is just wonderful to work with...
Dear Rob,. . . I am not generally too wound up about the technical part of this hobby . . .
D...
Also, the standard lens for 4x5 inch is generally reckoned to be 150mm, not 8" (203mm)/210mm: that's "standard" for 5x7 inch/half plate/13x18cm. ...
R.
...
Lenses like the Angulon (not Super Angulon) and wide angle Raptar were designed for press cameras as were the 127 Raptar, Ektar, xenar, Tessa's and others and do not have much if any covering power. The image circles just cover 4x5.
...
An American usage, perhaps. I had not encountered the distinction before, in over 40 years of using and writing about LF, or in talking to lens manufacturers, though it's arguably quite useful. Of course the "standard" lens for press photography was 127mm (5 inch) or 135mm...Terminology get abused here. The "standard" lens has changed over the decades whereas "normal" has a fixed meaning, at least when the terms are used correctly.
"Normal" is a focal length somewhat near the diagonal measure of the image. For 4x5, that would be in the 120-135mm range. This is what was almost always bundled with the old press cameras. The "standard" beginner's lens for a student of studio photography, from the mid-1960s and onward, would be a 200-210mm lens.
Back when I shot landscape/rocks-and-trees stuff with 4x5, my kit was a very late vintage 90mm Angulon (not the "Super" version) and a 180mm Nikkor-W. They made a nice set.
@OP: As was already mentioned: when you are starting out, don't fuss with lens recommendations. Use the lens you have. It will work fine, and you can learn a lot with it. You may find that you want to boost the development, both time and agitation, a bit to compensate for the older glass & coatings, but that's simple to do. My old Angulon (vintage very late 1950s) didn't need help, but the 90mm WA-Raptar that I used earlier and several other of my other oldies did need ~10-15% more development to yield negs that I liked.