Schneider 150mm f/4.5 Xenar.

[Keith Tapscott.]

Are these lenses capable of producing high quality enlargements on 16"x 20" papers from 4x5 B/W negatives?
The one I have is in a Synchro-Compur shutter and the serial number is 9012777.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Yes.

 

[Ian Grant]

Yes but if you want overall critical sharpness only when stopped down to at least f16 preferably f22. Coverage/Image circle isn't as good as a Symmar or Sironar so you need to use movements more carefully.

You've seen images I've shot in Turkey made with a 1950's 150mm f4.5 Tessar and also a late production 150mm f5.6 Xenar and the earlier f4.5 Xenar I used to have in the 70's/80's was just as good.

Ian

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Yes but if you want overall critical sharpness only when stopped down to at least f16 preferably f22. Coverage/Image circle isn't as good as a Symmar or Sironar so you need to use movements more carefully.

You've seen images I've shot in Turkey made with a 1950's 150mm f4.5 Tessar and also a late production 150mm f5.6 Xenar and the earlier f4.5 Xenar I used to have in the 70's/80's was just as good.

Ian

Hi Ian,

I use a 180mm Symmar-S and a 90mm f/8 Super-Angulon with my 4x5 Titan XL, but my MPP has a 150mm f/4.5 Xenar fitted which folds up with the lens still attached.

That should make it useful when I want to travel with minimal equipment, hence my question about the capability of this lens.

Keith.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have one on my Tech V, and it's not a bad lens, but movements are a bit limited.

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

I have one on my Tech V, and it's not a bad lens, but movements are a bit limited.

Thanks David. As long as it is capable of producing sharp negatives with good resolution which will enlarge well onto 16"x 20" papers, then I'm happy.

 

[John Austin]

Why the question? - You already have the lens so just make a neg' with it with care, enlarge it to 16x20" and see if you are happy with it - That is providing your enlarging lens is up to the work

I hold that a photographer's most important lens is the one on the enlarger, as that is the lens through which the quality of all your other lenses (for any given format) is filtered

Now get that film exposed, processed and printed and you tell us

 

[Ian Grant]

My 150mm Tesssar or Xenar often get used hand-held intially with a Crown Graphic but now mostly with a Super graphic and shooting 1/100th or 1/200th & f22 the restults are comparable to my 135mm Symmar or 150mm Sironar with the camera on a tripod.

Ian

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Why the question?

Mainly to get feedback from others here who own and use a 150mm Xenar and read their opinions of it's performance.

I hold that a photographer's most important lens is the one on the enlarger, as that is the lens through which the quality of all your other lenses (for any given format) is filtered

Of course, the enlarging lens must be good too.

Now get that film exposed, processed and printed and you tell us

I shall use it soon and see how it compares with my 180mm Symmar-S.
Are there any other 150mm Xenar users apart from Ian?

 

[gorbas]

I used 150mm Xenar on 4x5" Durst enlarger mainly for head shots and business portraits in professional portrait studio. It was OK lens for it but for everything else (like copy negatives) i was using Rodenstock Rodagon lens from another enlarger. Usually it was stopped down around f8 or 11 and corners were soft. Great lens for portraits!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I used 150mm Xenar on 4x5" Durst enlarger mainly for head shots and business portraits in professional portrait studio. It was OK lens for it but for everything else (like copy negatives) i was using Rodenstock Rodagon lens from another enlarger. Usually it was stopped down around f8 or 11 and corners were soft. Great lens for portraits!

You used a Xenar as an enlarging lens? No wonder it was crappy.

 

[Roger Cole]

16x20 from 4x5 is not very demanding. Much depends on how picky you are but that's only a 4x enlargement, barring significant cropping. As folks said, not much excess coverage but the results should be fine, especially stopped down. Even wide open it might meet your standards, depending. For the most part I no longer insist on razor sharpness in large prints viewed with your nose on them. Who does that besides photographers looking for sharpness? Stand back at a normal distance for a print that size and see the image, and it doesn't take cutting edge glass or anything very special at 4x.

 

[gorbas]

Dear E. von Hoegh, I was working in somebody else photography studio. It was his choice, not mine! We had all kinds of enlarging lenses there, but his preference was Xenar! Did I had to quit job because of it?! Whole 4 years gig was interesting experience!
And OP asked how good Xenar is as enlarging lens!!!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Dear E. von Hoegh, I was working in somebody else photography studio. It was his choice, not mine! We had all kinds of enlarging lenses there, but his preference was Xenar! Did I had to quit job because of it?! Whole 4 years gig was interesting experience!
And OP asked how good Xenar is as enlarging lens!!!

I'm pretty sure the OP wanted to know if the lens would produce negatives sharp enough to enlarge to 16x20.

 

[Roger Cole]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure he was asking about using it on the camera to make negatives that would make good 16x20 enlargements, but after re-reading it I can see where the confusion would come in.

A camera lens can work "ok" as an enlarging lens but given how inexpensive decent used enlarging lenses (except APOs which still command a premium) have become I see little reason to do it, at least for very long. To get started, sure, but pick up a real enlarging lens soon as you can. But I'm pretty sure that's not what he was asking about.

 

[gorbas]

Thank you Roger! I read it as "enlarging lens" question!
I have Xenar 3.5/100mm with 32.5mm thread and f numbers are oriented as it's enlarging lens. I think it was the same case with Xenar 150mm I used in the studio.

 

[John Austin]

Mainly to get feedback from others here who own and use a 150mm Xenar and read their opinions of it's performance.



Of course, the enlarging lens must be good too.

I shall use it soon and see how it compares with my 180mm Symmar-S.
Are there any other 150mm Xenar users apart from Ian?

Hello Keith,

I have a 210mm Xenar which I use in preference to my 210mm Symmar S, which is about to be offered here on APUG as it never gets used - I prefer the rendering of the Xenar and it is very sharp in the centre - I am using a 210mm f4.5 Xenar, which has plenty of coverage as it is designed for 1/2pt or 5x7"

In terms of 4 elephant lenses in general I have a 135mm Ysarex and a 135mm Skopar, both of which cover 5x4" at infinity very well without movement, are very sharp and are superb for LS photography - The Voigtlandr Skopar is a c1930 uncoated lens in a dial-set Compur shutter - It gives a very beautiful tonail rendering

Oddly, the lens without good coverage is the 5 elephant 150 Apo-Lanthar which came with my Linhof kit, almost no movement at all - I am not convinced the legendary ApoLanthar is any better than the contemporary Schneider and Rodenstock 4 element lenses - (How many people will I piss-off with that little heresy)

Back to the first line - I am (we are?) still interested in the results of your tests with your lens in your darkroom

John

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Having reread my OP, I should have made it much more clear that the 150mm Xenar will be used only as a camera lens. Sorry for the confusion to gorbas and also thanks to everyone who replied.
I only meant to ask if this camera lens will provide sharp negatives that will enlarge well onto 16"x 20" papers.

 

[John Austin]

Keith,

Stop worrying and use the lens, 4 times enlargement is easy work for a Xenar

Schneider would have not sold such numbers of Xenars for so many years in FLs from 35ish for Robot to 480m for ULF if they had not been good

John

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Keith,

Stop worrying and use the lens, 4 times enlargement is easy work for a Xenar

Schneider would have not sold such numbers of Xenars for so many years in FLs from 35ish for Robot to 480m for ULF if they had not been good

John

Thanks John.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Thank you Roger! I read it as "enlarging lens" question!
I have Xenar 3.5/100mm with 32.5mm thread and f numbers are oriented as it's enlarging lens. I think it was the same case with Xenar 150mm I used in the studio.

The Schneider Comparons were a Tessar type enlarging lens, and are very good. I used one for enlarging 4x5. The Xenars were and are always taking lenses.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Of course there was a time when photographers might use a Graflarger back on a camera (Linhof made enlarger backs as well) and enlarge through the taking lens (not that they couldn't also mount an enlarging lens on a lensboard, which I've done).

I use the 150/4.5 Xenar mostly when I'm planning to shoot rangefinder-style without movements and when I need to be compact and can't use the 135/3.5 Planar, which doesn't fold in the camera (Linhof offerred one that did, with a special shutter and recessed lensboard, but mine is a later version). The Xenar is a relatively fast lens for 4x5", and the falloff pattern is pleasant at f:8 or f:11. It's nice for portraits, and no problem enlarging to 16x20". A more modern plasmat type will be sharper corner to corner and has a larger image circle.

 

[gorbas]

Hi E. von Hoegh, I'm totally with you on this, taking lenses for taking pictures and proper enlarging lenses for enlarging. My former boss preferred different approach because it was better for his purpose - to "hide" retouching pencil marks on 3.5x5"portrait negatives. With proper Rodagon or Componon lens it will be just to hard and time consuming to retouch prints and it worked well for him.
But can you explain me original purpose of this 100mm Xenar?

 

[Dan Fromm]

gorbas, pmfji.

Schneider sold taking lenses in barrel. Likely applications were cameras with focal plane shutters. Not Schneider, but if you look for them on ebay.de you should find longish post-WW II Tessars in barrel that were made to go on Mentor cameras, which have behind the lens shutters.

Lenses in barrel often trip up buyers and sellers on eBay. I got my 135/5.6 Symmar (convertible, also known as jes' plain Symmar) in barrel from an eBay seller who offered it as an enlarging lens for $32 delivered. Its cells are now in shutter and I still have the barrel.

Schneider has always made a very sharp distinction between their enlarging lenses (Componar, a triplet; Comparon, a tessar; Componon, all plasmats) and the corresponding taking lenses (Radionar, Xenar, plasmat type Symmar).

 

[gorbas]

Thank you Dan Fromm! You are welcome! On eBay, years ago I bought this 100mm Xenar to be used on Hasselblad 2000FCW. It's mount was easy to adapt and price was right too, around $30.