benefits/drawbacks of tele lenses

abruzzi · May 9, 2020

I was wanting a longer-than-normal lens for my 4x5s. Right now I have a 90, 150, and 210. I was thinking in the 300-360 range. I see the options include some normal, long lenses, and some include tele lenses. I know the main benefit of tele lenses is I don't need as much bellows to focus the lens. Are there other benefits to the tele lenses? What are their drawbacks?

thx.

Alan Gales · May 9, 2020

A drawback is the smaller image circle so not as much room for movements. They are quite popular as portrait lenses for field cameras where bellows is short and you don't need a lot of movements.

Dan Fromm · May 9, 2020

Tilts and swings are more difficult to think about/manage with tele lenses. They can be very heavy. They aren't all particularly sharp, if that matters. Modern LF teles -- Fuji, Nikon, Tele-Arton -- are said to be sharper than older ones.

They're useful mainly when one has a short camera and wants more reach. I now have two teles, a 12"/4 TTH that is the longest lens I know of that's a comfortable fit on a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic and a 270/6.6 Rotelar that came to me as part of a bundle. When I offered to give the Rotelar cells to Mr. Galli he declined, said it was a terrible lens. I never found a reason to try the Rotelar out. I wasn't very happy with the images I got from my long-departed 250/5.6 Tele-Optar (= Tele-Raptar). I haven't been able to find it, but I've seen ancient Rodenstock propaganda that insisted that Apo-Ronars were sharper than the equivalent tele lenses.

abruzzi · May 9, 2020

Alan Gales said:
A drawback is the smaller image circle so not as much room for movements.

thanks. Is that fairly universal, or is it down to the individual lens design?

EDIT: My two 4x5 cameras are a Shen Hao HZX45-IIA with 360mm of bellows, and a Linhof Master Technika with 430mm of bellows.

Dan Fromm · May 9, 2020

abruzzi said:
thanks. Is that fairly universal, or is it down to the individual lens design?

EDIT: My two 4x5 cameras are a Shen Hao HZX45-IIA with 360mm of bellows, and a Linhof Master Technika with 430mm of bellows.

Universal.

Alan Gales · May 9, 2020

abruzzi said:
thanks. Is that fairly universal, or is it down to the individual lens design?

Like Dan says, it's universal due to the tele design itself limiting image circle size.

abruzzi · May 9, 2020

thanks for that. I'm not (so far) a huge user of movements, but I've generally found front rise extremely useful, and occasionally, front tilt, so thats helpful to know.

DREW WILEY · May 9, 2020

Teles are heavier, longer (more stress on front standard), smaller image circle, have an odd node position, and are generally not quite up to par optically with the best conventional lenses of comparable focal length. But if you don't have a long enough bellows, that's what you use.

RalphLambrecht · May 9, 2020

abruzzi said:
I was wanting a longer-than-normal lens for my 4x5s. Right now I have a 90, 150, and 210. I was thinking in the 300-360 range. I see the options include some normal, long lenses, and some include tele lenses. I know the main benefit of tele lenses is I don't need as much bellows to focus the lens. Are there other benefits to the tele lenses? What are their drawbacks?

thx.

One disadvantage of long lenses is that they are heavy and constantly trying to pull the front standard down in the fall by five format the 300 mm lens however is good for Porter to work..

Mick Fagan · May 10, 2020

I have the Shen Hao HZX45-IIA as well, my favourite camera, I also have a Toyo 45G monorail. The Toyo has a bit over 400mm in bellows so I can get quite close for portrait with a telephoto lens.

I have a Komura f/6.3 400 telephoto lens, it weighs 898g Within reason it works well on the Shen Hao, but it is a big bit of metal and glass hanging off an extended front lens. It's best point is to be able to draw subjects closer to you out in the field if using the Shen Hao. For portraiture it is clumsy if you are trying to close focus, when in the Shen Hao. If it is on the Toyo, it works quite well for portraiture.

I also have a Schneider Kreuznach Linhof Tele-Arton f/5.6 250mm lens, I picked this lens up to replace the Komura as it was much smaller and therefore better for the Shen Hao. Well it was better being smaller and lighter, but it was limiting with movements; frustrating would probably be a better word. Great for close up portraiture, but not brilliant.

Eventually I picked up a Fujinon f/6.3 250mm lens, this is outstanding, really outstanding. It has a wide coverage so anything I can do on the Shen Hao or Toyo as far as movements go, it handles with ease. It is pin sharp and it is short enough to allow me to extend the Shen Hao bellows for close portrait work. Handles landscape, architecture and portrait work admirably. Effectively, I have retired my Fujinon f/5.6 210mm lens as it is just that little bit too short.

I just pulled out the three lenses and weighed them on the kitchen scales.
Fujinon f/6.3 250mm 653g
Schneider Kreuznach Tele-Arton f/5.6 250mm 692g
Komura f/6.3 400mm telephoto 898g

I looked at getting a compact 300mm lens, but I couldn't find any that were in my price range. I tried a compact 300mm lens from a friend, it is probably the best all round, but the price and availability for me didn't happen.

Mick.

Huub · May 10, 2020

I have and use both a f5.5 360mm Tele-Xenar and a 360/500mm Nikon Tele ED-set. For use on my 4x5 the image circles of both lenses are more then adequate, with 210mm for the Nikon set and 230mm for the Tele-Xenar. Also i find both plenty of sharp enough, with the Tele-Xenar having a little less contrast then the Nikon set. Focal flange distance for the Tele-Xenar is a bit over 21cm and ideal for camera's with shorter bellow, the Nikon in 360mm configuration needs about 26cm. Main advantage of the Tele-Xenar is it's very short focal flange distance making it perfect for portraits especailly when used wide open, at the other hand the Nikon van be made into a 500mm and even a 720mm if the need arises. In these two configurations you will need a tophat lensboard when using a camera with around 30cm of bellows draw.

Main disadvantage is front swing and tilt, because the front nodal point is not in the centre of the lens, but way in front of it. Rear tilts and swings work as with any lens, as do front shifts. And yes: they are heavy lenses, but carrying a full Nikon set in the field weighs less then seperate 360 - 500 - 720 mm lenses, especially when they are those big modern plasmats.

Ian Grant · May 10, 2020

I use a 360mm f5.5 Tele Xenar, it has good image circle as i's designed for use on 7x5/13x18 cameras, it's far more practical than my 300mm f9 Nikkor M on my Wista or Super Graphic. The issue with a normal 300mm is needing a lot of bellows extension at closer distances and that can make some cameras less stable, I can't use my 300mm Nikon on my Wista 35DX if there's any wind it would be better on one of my MPP Micro Technical cameras, or in the OP's case the Linhof.

A disadvantage of the 360mm Tele Xenar and similar telephoto lenses is the size #3 shutters and their lowish top speed, it's 1/100 on my Compound, a Copal #3 is 1/125, but then most 300mm f5.6 standard lenses are in similar shutters, only the slower 300mm Nikkor M and Fuji equivalent, or process lenses are in smaller #1 sized shutters with higher top speeds a Copal #1 is 1/400.

My second Telephoto an un-named coated 17" (420mm) f5.6 British Military lens (almost certainly a Dallmeyer) has no shutter so is used with a pre-Anniversary Speed Graphic, this gives me the ability to shoot up to 1/1000. Of course I could use the Tele Xenar on a Speed Graphic for faster shutter speeds, I've found it to give excellent sharp images but then despite the coverage they were also sold for use on 35mm cameras.

Ian

138S · May 10, 2020

Dan Fromm said:
They aren't all particularly sharp, if that matters. Modern LF teles -- Fuji, Nikon, Tele-Arton -- are said to be sharper than older ones.

Alan Gales said:
A drawback is the smaller image circle so not as much room for movements. They are quite popular as portrait lenses for field cameras where bellows is short and you don't need a lot of movements.

As always, there are some exceptions.

The SK APO-Tele-Xenar 800 f/12... it is insanely sharp and it covers 11x14". An scarce/expensive glass, but right now one is at ebay.

Dan Fromm · May 10, 2020

138S said:
As always, there are some exceptions.

The SK APO-Tele-Xenar 800 f/12... it is insanely sharp and it covers 11x14". An scarce/expensive glass, but right now one is at ebay.

You have been taken in by marketing fluff. That lens is an good double Gauss type long focus lens, not a telephoto design. All of the elements are meniscii concave to the diaphragm.

I should add that double Gauss types are often somewhat telephoto. That's why early fast "normal" lenses for 35 mm SLRs had 58 mm focal lengths. Shorter wouldn't have cleared the mirrors. Newer designs solved that problem.

138S · May 10, 2020

Dan Fromm said:
You have been taken in by marketing fluff. That lens is an good double Gauss type long focus lens, not a telephoto design. All of the elements are meniscii concave to the diaphragm.

I should add that double Gauss types are often somewhat telephoto.

Dan, catalog says this:

"The short flange focal distance (the distance from the lens board to the focusing screen) resulting from the telephoto (barlow) design of the lens makes possible a focal length which is 30 % to 40 % longer than the maximum camera extension normally allows."

http://www.rodklukas.com/resources/Schneider_large-format-lenses.pdf

FFL of the ATX 800 is 628.2mm.

Nokton48 · May 10, 2020

Fuji GX680 Prism fitted custom to Makis by Nokton48, on Flickr

Hill Rd Statue Makiflex Auto 360mm f6.8 TeleXenar by Nokton48, on Flickr

Makiflex Test #8 by Nokton48, on Flickr

Infinity focus test of the 360mm F5.5 Tele-Arton on the Makiflex. A lazy Saturday morning at the local park, my wife and her birding friends were waiting for something to swoop in.

Agfa APX100, Microdol-X straight 24 minutes at 18C Jobo Multitank 5 on a Unicolor Uniroller.

I have a number of Tele-Xenars and Tele-Artons. As Fred Picker used to say "TRY IT"

Dan Fromm · May 10, 2020

138S said:
Dan, catalog says this:

"The short flange focal distance (the distance from the lens board to the focusing screen) resulting from the telephoto (barlow) design of the lens makes possible a focal length which is 30 % to 40 % longer than the maximum camera extension normally allows."

View attachment 245904

http://www.rodklukas.com/resources/Schneider_large-format-lenses.pdf

FFL of the ATX 800 is 628.2mm.

I saw that too, also the cross section. Five meniscii, all concave to the diaphragm. Three in front, two behind. The Apo claim is also fluff.

removed account4 · May 10, 2020

abruzzi said:
I was wanting a longer-than-normal lens for my 4x5s. Right now I have a 90, 150, and 210. I was thinking in the 300-360 range. I see the options include some normal, long lenses, and some include tele lenses. I know the main benefit of tele lenses is I don't need as much bellows to focus the lens. Are there other benefits to the tele lenses? What are their drawbacks?

thx.

You might also look into a 15" tele optar and have used it on a 4x5 camera for ages, its a nice coated lens not to be overlooked. usually they come in a barrel, but once in a while you will find one in a shutter.
Good Luck !
John

138S · May 11, 2020

Dan Fromm said:
I saw that too, also the cross section. Five meniscii, all concave to the diaphragm. Three in front, two behind. The Apo claim is also fluff.

Well, I'm a bit lost about what's a double gauss design nowadays

Anyway if we see the APO Tele Xenar design vs old Xenar:

What I feel is that APX it's based in the xenar but with a modified rear group to incorporate the Barlow design without adding an additional diverging glass assembly in the rear. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I cannot say if design is more close to the predating Xenars or to the Tele-Xennars, but it provides 30%-40% longer focal than bellows requirement, it is not a mild Tele "effect", but a significative one.

What it's clear it's that the ATX is an extremly fine lens, with no performance sacrifice traded for the shortened FFD.

There is no cementation, and no need of that thanks to MC, allowing the designer to play with 10 air-glass surfaces with no restriction in the spacings. Well, a smart piece of glass. Sadly it falls well outside of my budgetary policy, and probably it would not improve my photography, but if I was given one I never would sell it.

DREW WILEY · May 11, 2020

There was a demand for something portable in the 360 range when the Fuji A 360's started becoming very scarce (which is a lens I happen to use a lot). The Schneider 360 Apo Tele Xenar is just barely classifiable as a tele design, unlike their older 360 tele-arton and tele-xenar, and has itself become quite difficult to find. It seems to be much better color-corrected than the old Schneiders.

138S · May 12, 2020

DREW WILEY said:
The Schneider 360 Apo Tele Xenar is just barely classifiable as a tele design,

Why ? Rudolf Kingslake says that a telephoto lens is one having Front Vertex to Focal ("film") Plane distance shorter than Focal Length. So the Apo Tele Xenars are clearly telephoto.

For the moment we have a ATX 800 Focal that's 30% longer than the Focal Flange Distance. It is true that the typical implementation has a divergent group in the rear, but typical is not the general case.

Manufacturer's catalog says that it's a Barlow tele design, but I don't see the "barlow lens" in the rear, my understanding is that the design abandons the quasi-symetry rule to embrace a "less convergent" or "more divergent" rear section, this is incorporating the divergent effect of the Barlow section in the rear convergent section. The thick Front Element of the Rear Section (4rth element) looks divergent, perhaps it can be considered the "Barlow". It would be nice if an optician could clarify that.

If the rear section was clearly divergent then the thing would be more clear, the rear could be the barlow lens of the self-corrected front triplet, but Kingslake definition of telephoto does not involve a particular design, instead it's about front vertex position related to focal length.

Dan Fromm · May 12, 2020

138S, you are right and I was mistaken. I just checked in S. F. Ray's Applied Photographic Optics. He shows the Apo-Tele-Xenar with reversed nodes.

138S · May 12, 2020

Dan Fromm said:
138S, you are right and I was mistaken.

Dan, this is an exception, 99% of the times it's the counter: I learn from you.

Alan Gales · May 14, 2020

138S said:
Dan, this is an exception, 99% of the times it's the counter: I learn from you.

Dan is extremely knowledgeable but he doesn't know everything. I once asked him the meaning of life and he said that he wasn't sure but it had to have something to do with great lenses.

Dan Fromm · May 14, 2020

Alan Gales said:
Dan is extremely knowledgeable but he doesn't know everything. I once asked him the meaning of life and he said that he wasn't sure but it had to have something to do with great lenses.

Sigh. Misquoted again. I said I didn't know the meaning of life -- still don't, am not sure that life has a meaning -- but doubted that if life has a meaning it is 42.

138S · May 14, 2020

Alan Gales said:
it had to have something to do with great lenses.

Well, at least we enjoy life when playing with lenses being joy proportional to the weirdness sported by the lens

benefits/drawbacks of tele lenses

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency