[LargeFormat] Large Format Lenses

Sun Feb 4 13:34:08 2001

Oh, I'm pretty nutty about lenses, too; but I'm not in a huge hurry,
am willing to wait until I find the right lens for the right price
(cheap). For example, I picked a couple of candidates for a 150 more
or less, Fuji or Rodenstock Sironar S, then started the search. It
took a month or so elapsed time, but I did find a great 5.6 Fuji 150 W
for $205 + shipping. Same with a super wide, really wanted something
between a 47 XL and 72 XL; but there was no way I would buy a new one
(just bought a new old house and lost a huge pile in the stock market,
even so almost convinced myself to get the 58 XL for around $800),
found a 58 mm Grandagon for $250, it's wonderful, and it's unlikely
I'll lose money when/if I resell it.

My 8x10 is coming along very nicely. It's going to take another few
days to get my new old woodworking shop fully functional; but I've now
got all the tools and most of the wood I need to make the cameras,
it's completely designed down to materials and exact measurements,
should start the actual building in a week or two at most, might even
have something to use in a couple of months.

Pam

rlb wrote:
> 
> Thanks for another response Pam.  How's your 8x10 project coming?
> 
> I would certain agree with your comment about not spending so much money on
> a lens.  However, I am nutty as a fruitcake when it comes to lenses.  I have
> a very good friend that uses a Linhof and the 40 year old lenses that came
> with the system when he purchased it.   I have another acquaintance that
> uses the new Rodenstock Apo Sironar-S lenses and side-by-side photos there
> is a dramatic quality difference in favor of the Sironar.  The are crisper,
> more contrast, more detail in the shadows and have more life.   I could
> purchase two Sironars for the price of the Super Symmar, which is something
> to strongly consider.  I want to love LF and I know the things that will
> discourage my interest....weight and lens quality are two of the major ones.
> 
> I agree with you about Badger.  I called to verify that their web page
> prices were correct.
> 
> Thanks again for your comments Pam.
> 
> Bob
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pam Niedermayer" <pam_pine@cape.com>
> To: <largeformat@f32.net>
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 9:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Large Format Lenses
> 
> > I think one could make a good case for getting a single lens when new
> > to a format, learning its limits vis a vis the format, before getting
> > bogged down trying to find additional lenses. At least you get out
> > there right away. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't get such an expensive
> > first lens, though, may want to save some pennies for next month when
> > ready to buy the next lens. And if it turns out you don't like LF....
> > However, big caveat, I'm a bottom feeder. Badger has some of the best
> > prices in the world on high quality new lenses.
> >
> > Pam
> >
> > Karl Wolz wrote:
> > >
> > > Agreed, however, my feelings are that convergence and the use of rear
> tilt,
> > > etc. are not nearly as critical if you are not shooting subjects with
> > > straight, vertical lines, such as buildings or soda pop cans, as in
> > > architectural or product photography.  When shooting natural subjects,
> there
> > > is much more leeway in how to "skin you cat".
> > >
> > > I, too, will commonly max out the movements of my lenses when shooting
> into
> > > canyons, Scheimplugging (betcha you didn't know that could be used as a
> > > verb!), etc., but especially for someone just getting his feet wet in
> > > large-format, a two or three lens selection would seem to be more
> advisable
> > > than one lens with awesome coverage.
> > >
> > > Just my opinion, others have at least equal merit.
> > >
> > > Karl Wolz
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Verna Knapp" <vernak@wvi.com>
> > > To: <largeformat@f32.net>
> > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 9:44 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Large Format Lenses
> > >
> > > > That depends on what kind of landscape work you do and where. I make
> > > > a lot of use of movements, going to the limit regularly with my
> > > > Canham. I'm working in Oregon, and when I get up in the mountains,
> > > > the movements are very useful. The ground can be very rough, and I
> > > > cannot always stand where I would wish. Also, the trees here can be
> > > > very tall (several hundred feet, sometimes), and that leads to more
> > > > uses for movements. Also, making sure both foreground and distance
> > > > are in focus can require using the movements. The land here is far
> > > > from flat! I like my lenses to have plenty of coverage. I have to
> > > > be careful to check lens coverage when in the field.
> > > >
> > > > Verna
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Karl Wolz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If you're primarily doing landscape work, you're not going to be
> making
> > > very
> > > > > much use of the lenses movements and don't need nearly as much
> coverage
> > > as
> > > > > that provided by the Super Symmar.
> >
> > --
> > Pamela G. Niedermayer
> > Pinehill Softworks Inc.
> > 600 W. 28th St., Suite 103
> > Austin, TX 78705
> > 512-236-1677
> > http://www.pinehill.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LargeFormat mailing list
> > LargeFormat@f32.net
> > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/largeformat
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LargeFormat mailing list
> LargeFormat@f32.net
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/largeformat

-- 
Pamela G. Niedermayer
Pinehill Softworks Inc.
600 W. 28th St., Suite 103
Austin, TX 78705
512-236-1677
http://www.pinehill.com