Hello

I am wondering if anyone reading has had any experience with these lenses, specifically a 90mm F6.8 Angulon (not super) and a later 90mm F8 90mm Super Angulon (serial number 8896959).

I am currently using the angulon (not super) for use with my 6 x 17 format camera (home made). As one could imagine there is quite a bit of light fall of towards the edges of the frame, and also i exclusively use the lens at F32 (minimum) to maximise sharpness at the edge of field. These two limitations I was prepared for when I purchased the lens, however my current budget will allow me to purchase a more suitable lens.

My question is would the super angulon i mention above improve on these limitations? Does a Super angulon have less light drop off than an angulon and would it be useable at larger apetures on 6x17 than my angulon?. Would it be an appreciable amount better? I know all opinions are individual but that's all I'm after

Or should i look for another lens, or perhaps save for a modern SA90 5.6 XL??

My thanks and appreciation for your reply.

-- Phil Brammer (filsta@goconnect.net), August 04, 2001

Answers

I have both lenses. Switching to the SA will definitely improve both problems.

-- Wilhelm (bmitch@home.com), August 04, 2001.

Phil, Have you considered saving for the 110XL, a great lens with the advantage of being smaller, lighter and with smaller filter thread than the 90SA. Will cover 6x17 and allow you to use it on 5x4/5x7 too. There's been plenty of advice/views and opinions on this forum re: the 110XL, they may be worth checking before making a purchase. regards Paul

-- paul owen (paulowen_2000@yahoo.com), August 04, 2001.

Phil:

You may also want to consider an older 90mm f5.6 SA (not the XL). It will cost more than the f8 SA but will give you a brighter image on the groundglass. The other thing to consider when looking for a used SA is the type of shutter. In general, Synchro-Compur's will cost less than Copals and still give you good quality. Finally, unless you prefer Schneider lenses, you could also consider comparable 90mm lenses by Nikor, Fujinon, and Rodenstock.

..................................................

-- Dave Willison (dwillisart@aol.com), August 04, 2001.

Several years ago I tested Grandagon Super Angulon and Rodenstock Grandagon 90mm f/5.6 lenses for use on my 6x17 (a V-Pan Mk III). Both needed a center weighted filter, but the illumination falloff was more gradual on the Grandagon, so that is what I bought. I use the Heliopan 0.45 CWF instead of the Rodenstock branded CWF.

I'm sure some bright soul will shortly suggest using a Photoshop generated CWF filter either as a digital alternative to buying an "expensive" CWF.. That is fine, I'm sure it works great for all ofthe 6x17 or 4x5 or 5x7 or 8x10 images you have scanned. But i see two problems with this approach. The first problem is that it will only work with the images you have decided to have scanned. The second problem is that isn't cheap in terms of labor or cash to do lots of hi rez scans of large format material. Given these two problems the more economical approach is just to buy the damn filter. For me, $300-400 spent once beats lots of hours in front of a computer but I realize that my economics does not hold true for everyone.

-- Ellis Vener Photography (evphoto@heartstone.com), August 04, 2001.