Symmar 240/420 convertible f5.6/12

[harlequin]

Dear APUG large format community,

I just got this older lens recently in compur shutter and results so far have been pleasing on 4x5 for tabletop
And portraits, speaking of portraits, an associate has an 8x10 camera, my understanding is as follows...

A) if I use the rear element only, it becomes a 420 f12 lens.
B) this sounds like good perspective on 8x10 format
C) has anyone tried this combination for portraits?
D) what were the results, any optimum aperture?
E) would you recommend a yellow filter or polarizer to boost contrast as when I used the rear element to
View on 4x5 it looked dim (f12) and also lacked contrast.....? Looked flat....

I just hope to save 10 sheets of film or so buy asking these questions first, I realize it’s not a Cooke triplet,
But can I do nice portraits with this setup? on a budget....really appreciate your feedback on this....!

Harlequin

 

[John Koehrer]

You should check the coverage, fl may be good but I believe it's a 4x5 lens. The vignetting can be seen on the GG.

 

[removed account4]

yup some say to use a yellow filter, it will boost the contrast ..
( i use my 210/370 converted never worry about contrast boost shot at f12 )
there is focus shift if you stop down so keep that in mind ..
and .. it will require much more than 420 at infinity, ( to give you perspective, a 210/370 needs around 430mm of bellows
at infinity convereted ) ... for portrait work you will need a ton of bellows

have fun !
john

 

[ic-racer]

I just hope to save 10 sheets of film

I tried my Symmar-S 210 (non-convertible) as a convertible and it was pretty bad. I tried my Angulon 210 (not Super-Angulon) as a convertible on 8x10 and it was also pretty bad. I tried my Fujinon 300mm 8x10 lens as a convertible and it was also not suitable for enlargements. Maybe if you do 8x10 contact prints or use it as in situations were sharpness would be a detriment. I'd go ahead and use it and see. Saving the film only leaves you and the film in the dark (sorry bad pun).

 

[tedr1]

I used to own the 300mm version intending to use it for portrait work, which is probably what the rear element was designed to do, however other things got in the way and I never did use it after all.
Here is the technical information for the Symmar convertible series published by Schneider. The 240mm is an 8 x 10 lens and some remarks about the performance accompany the tables.

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

I had a Symmar 180 and a 210. I have used them converted only occasionally for few landsacapes, without filters. The results were not really impressive, and made me wonder if a picture taken with the un-converted lens and then later magnified with the enlarger could be better. At least for landscapes I second the suggestion of using a very intense yellow filter, in order to have a nearly monochromatic image to form on the groundglass/film. At least, that would suppress chromatic aberration. It would also increase contrast a bit if the air is hazy.

I never really thought to use them as portrait lenses as, when converted, they had a too long focal lenght for being a true portrait lens, they were also too dark to focus easily in interiors and, finally, when close focusing they required more bellows draw than my cameras had. I foresee you are going to get somehow soft-focused portraits (all right) but at the same time flat, muddy and unimpressive overall. I'm interested, though, and I'm looking forward to read your comments.