Re: [Largeformat] LENS -- WHICH ONE?

[Richard Fish <dfish@javanet.com>]

From: Richard Fish <dfish@javanet.com>

Pete Groh wrote:
> 
> From: Pete Groh <pjgroh@cros.net>
> 
> Hi group:
> 
> Now you're in trouble. Fifty questions to follow (not really).
> 
> Bought a 5x7 with a 4x5 back LF (sorta of a no-namer)
> off EBAY the other day. Arrived today. Good shape; new bellows.
> 
> Now I need a lens.
> 
> Since LF is rather new to me (although I did shoot lots
> of news pixs with Crown Graphics when I was young),
> I've been thinking about getting 210 mm to start with
> since I'll probably be shooting 4x5 for a while -- at
> least until I get a little experience. It should also cover
> 5x7, judging from what I've been reading.
> 
> Does that make any since?
> 
> Another question: Nikon or Schneider glass? Nikon is about
> $300 or so cheaper; does that make Schneider that much better?
> Alway liked Nikon glass, but thought I would ask the question
> before I placed an order -- or started hunting around on EBAY.
> 
> At least now I can feel more a part of this group since I
> acquired a LF camera.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your comments.
> 
> Pete Groh
> Ohio
> 
> 

Pete -
Actually, Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon and Fuji, are all about the same.
Certainly I can't see ANY difference in performance when viewing either
4x5 or 8x10 trans. Interchangeable seems like just the right word to
explain their performance.
The length of your start-up glass ought to be determined by subject
matter and how you like to present your material. And yes, the 210 will
cover 5x7. It's not a bad portrait lens unless you want the head to fill
the 4x5. I feel that it's a tad long for landscapes, however it is nice
for product shot distances.