Tele lens decision

[fred_braakman]

I am looking at buying a longer lens for my Ebony 45S. I would like

a lens in the 300 to 400 mm range. I notice that the Schneider APO-

Tele Xenar, 400mm f5.6 is on a Copal 3 shutter. Is this too heavy a

lens to handle comfortably for landscape photography?

 

Should I stick to a copal 0 or 1 shutter for the 4x5?

 

I think 400 mm weighs about 900 grams. I understand that I will also

need to purchase a 452 back extender as well. Are the back extenders

easy to insert? Thanks.

 

Fred B

[ole_tjugen]

You might also consider an older 360/5.5 Tele-Xenar or Tele-Arton. They have flange focal distances of about 210mm, so you won't need the back extender.

 

They both come in #3 shutters. The Tele-arton weighs 960g, the Tele-Xenar is almost 300g lighter.

 

I don't have the same camera as you, but I use a 360 Tele-Xenar in #3 Compound shutter on Technika board all the time.

[sam_crater]

Consider the Nikkor 360T, a very highly regarded lens and also apochromatic.

[brian_ellis16]

I owned a Fuji 400T lens for several years. It was an excellent lens plus it was small and light (as 400mm telephotos go) and came in a Copal 1 shutter. I think it took 67mm filters or something in that range. If the price doesn't bother you I'd suggest you give it serious consideration.

[avid]

Fred, I am glad you asked that question as I am ready to choose a tele for my Ebony 45S also. I was looking into the Nikkor T 360mm (flange back distance 261mm which agree comfortably with the 270mm bellows draw limit) and Fujinon Tele 400mm (whose flange back distance I could not find out). If the flange back distance on the fuji lens is less than 270mm, I will go for it since it is longer of the two. Also, I have the 452 Extender Back for my camera that I use with my Fuji A 240mm lens. My thought on the Extender is that it is not hard to swap out but a mess to carry in the field. It's light but the bulk of the stuff that makes it a little inconvenient. A reason why I will sprint for the Ebony 45SU at some point (which has a longer bellows extension and won't require the Extender). Anyway, I would like to know which lens you finally settle for and how you like it, in terms of weight and quality of images. Good luck.

[eric_leppanen]

Ebony provides flange back distance on their web site at http://www.ebonycamera.com/cam/lenses.html. The Fuji 400T has a flange back distance of 252.4mm, so this lens will work on the base 45S for infinity focus.

[fred_braakman]

Thanks for all your input. I am considering the Fuji 400T. It is in my price range, Copal #1 shouldn't be too heavy, and doesn't need the back extender. How does it match other brands like Schneider as far as sharpness?

 

Fred Braakman

[brian_ellis16]

I haven't owned any Schneider tele lenses so I can't compare the Fuji400T to them but in general the Fuji was plenty sharp for me. I doubt that I could look at my photographs made during the years I owned it and tell on the basis of "sharpness" alone which were made with the Fuji and which were made with my other lenses owned at the time (Schneider APO Symmar, Rodenstock APO Sironar S, et al).

[scott_walton2]

I have a Xenar 360mm on my Tec III and it is in a compound shutter. It does barely fit but works perfectly and is a very nice focal length for 4x5. Heavy, yes! To heavy, no but do make sure you have the tripod clamped down. You will save some money buying the older lens but bare in mind that it is single coated... I have never had ANY problems but always use a long shade. I have the extender and the bellows draw isn't to large and have used it without too without it being unmanagable. The nice part of the "Teles" are that they are designed to lessen the bellows draw vs using a regular 360mm (8x10 format). The extender usually just screws in... very easy.

[stephen_hall]

I also use a 360 tele-xenar mounted in a copal 3. It is heavy (but then again so is my Wista camera) but not too heavy. Instead of a back extender I have a Wista extension lens board which also stops the front element interfering with the shutter. Just like a recessed lens board in reverse.