Scheider's Tele-Xenar 250mm/5.5 ?

[Alexz]

I'm considering a long lens for my 4x5 (Shen), something in the range of 240-250mm but yet one with no larger then #1 shutter and brighter then f/9.
Fujinon 250mm/6.3 comes to mind (and there is one at KEH) but a bit over my budget right now (after spending almost 200$ just few minutes ago ordering Shen bag bellows with few accessories from Badger).
What people think about Scheider's Tele-Xenar 250mm/5.5 in Linhof Synchro-Compur shutter ? Is it good for long applications (mainly landscape on transparancies), perhaps also some minor portraiture in the future.
I guess the lens is an old (probably even a real legacy) design, apparently not coated (or single coated at most), but aside of this fact, is it a worthy consideration to compete with Fujinon 250mm/6.3 in Copal #1 ?
How reliable are Synchro-Compus shutters ? Are they compatable with Copal #1 in terms of board mounting ? (Hole size, etc..) Is it fully usable onf regular field 4x5 like Shen-Hao ?

Thanks in advance, Alex

 

[jovo]

Fujinon 250mm/6.3 comes to mind (and there is one at KEH) but a bit over my budget right now...

Having just puchased and received the 'other' 250mm/6.3 that KEH was offering, I can tell you it's worth even if you have to take out a loan. The lens retails for $950 new at Badger....KEH's price was less than half that and it's indistinguishable from new to my eyes (it was Ex+). Of the several lenses I own it's the most 'solid' with a silky smooth diaphragm and aperture control. I was lucky that it fits in a Copal 1, because I had that size lensboard to spare. It's a real beauty!! Live large...go for it!

 

[naturephoto1]

Hi Alex,


Firstly, I do not know the Tele Xenar lenses, others can provide you info about them. In general terms however, the Tele lenses are designed for use when the large format camera has insufficient bellows for a non telephoto design. Your Shen Hao should have sufficient bellows for a 240 or 250mm non telephoto design. Usually, non telephoto lenses will perform better with better sharpness and contrast than their telephoto counterparts. Additionally, the telephoto designs do add to the weight of the lens.

If you can consider using an f9 lens you have many options available. And if you find that the slower lenses are a problem, you can replace the ground glass with one such as those offered from Dave Parker- the Satin Snow Ground Glass. These are inexpensive and will yield about 1 stop of added brightness to your viewing.

If you consider the f9 lenses, they will be smaller and lighter than the Tele Xenar or the Fuji 250 f 6.3 lens. Options include the Fuji A240 f9.0 (coated or multicoated), the Schneider 240mm f9.0 Apo Artar (uncoated or coated), the Schneider 240mm f9.0 G Claron (coated), or the Rodenstock Apo Ronar (uncoated, coated, or multicoated).

All of the f9 lenses perform exremely well. I opted for the Apo Ronar 240mm multicoated version. I went this route to try to match (or be as close to) the color and contrast of my other Rodenstock and Schneider lenses.

Rich

 

[Alexz]

Thanks Rich.
I have Dave's SatinSnow GG in my Shen, no compliants . But f/9 still appears to be quite dim. I foudn I rarely happen to shoot LF in open fields lit by sun, mostly do in forest or alike where there is no much light even at midday.
I'm familair with f/9 240mm options, but I would still prefer a bit brighter image on GG.
Thanks anyway, Alex

 

[Ole]

The 250 Tele-Xenar was made for 9x12cm. The 270mm was made for 4x5", and the 360mm for 5x7".

As with all tele lenses, coverage is limited and movements confusing. They're great when you don't have the bellows to use a "normal" lens, but that's about it.

If you're willing to move down to 210mm, there are several options up to and including the Schneider 210mm f:6.1 Xenar which recently replaced my old 210/4.5 Xenar as favorite in that focal length. I believe the 210mm f:5.6 Symmar is also in a #1 shutter. I know that the 240/5.6 Symmar will come in either a #2 or a #3 depending on age - mine's a #2.

 

[Alexz]

Thanks, understood.
I think I'll stick with 240/250mm focal length. I thought to round up my lens lineup by three lenses: 90mm, 150mm and 240/250mm (two shorter I have already). Gaining more glass doesn't seem to me a rational way to proceed bearing my basic so far LF experience, to that by those three I spread the most of the reach that can be attained by my camera (Shen 4x5).

BTW, Ole, I did not realize there was #2 shutter size...

 

[Ole]

BTW, Ole, I did not realize there was #2 shutter size...

There was one for a very long time. I think it finally got "rationalised away" around 1970. I have three very fine lenses in #2 shutter: 165/6.8 Angulon, 180/4.5 Xenar, and 240/5.6 Symmar convertible. All good enough to be worth the extra cost of having custom-made lens boards for the #2 shutter. Even when one camera is a Gandolfi and the other a Carbon Infinity...

 

[Alexz]

Thanks Ole, once again I learnt something new about LF world..

 

[r-brian]

I was waiting for someone with more experience with a Tele-Xenar to respond but no one has.

I have a 240mm f5.5 Tele-Xenar in a dial set shutter. The serial number dates the glass to 1949 and I have no idea about the shutter. If it's a Compur, they were last made somewhere around 1932, but it works perfectly. I bought this lens off of Adorama Ebay for a measely $110.

I've only used it a couple of times but it seems sharp enough. Covers 4x5 with room for movements. I use it on my Tachihara, it takes about 150mm of extension to focus to infinite and I've run the focus out to the point that I could focus on something a foot away. Nice tight close-up.

Don't know if this helps but I'm happy with mine. But, then again, I'm a wide angle shooter so it rarely gets used.

Brian

 

[Alexz]

Thank you Brian, note is taken...

 

[nalle52]

I have a 270/5,5 Tele-Xenar that I now use with a Century Graphic 2x3, I need the tele construction since the bellow is very short, 190mm. In short distance this lens is very sharp, but on longer distance not so sharp, I think distance haze is my problem. I have also used this lens on my Arca 4x5 and it works fine, but not much movments.