Short Tele-lenses for 6x9 - which one to choose?

[piotr_stanislawski]

<p>Hello to everyone,</p>

<p>This is my first post on forum. Recently I bought Graflex Century 6x9 and want to use it mostly for b&w landscape (f/16-22) but also for close nature subjects. Now I am looking for short tele lense, wide angles are already chosen (Mamiya Press 50mm and Horseman Pro 75mm) , still can not decide which to choose for short tele. I look for sharp lens to get 70-50cm prints (or 100-70cm). There are 4 ones I consider about: Schneider Symmar-S 150/5.6 , <strong>Schneider Xenar 150/4.5</strong>, Horseman 180mm f5.6 P.T (Tokyo Kogaku) and <strong>Voigtlander Heliar 180/4.5</strong>. I know that <strong>Schneider</strong> <strong>Symmar-S</strong> is very sharp but would prefer 180 focal length… although 150mm is acceptable. The rear element diameter of the lens must be less than 49mm. <strong>Horseman 180mm f5.6 P.T</strong> looks small but could not find any info about its quality. Someone knows it?<br>

Which one would you recommend?<br>

I should add I have Heliar 105/3.5 lens.</p>

[john_cooper9]

<p>None of the lenses you mentioned are telephoto lenses. I suggest a Schneider 180 Tele-Arton f:5.5 that is a true telephoto with short bellows draw and covers 6X9 nicely.</p>

[piotr_stanislawski]

<p>You are right. May be I miss terminology but I won't true telephoto lense. Tele-Arton is huge lens, for field prefered more compact. Some recomendations brought me close to decision to buy 150mm instead 180mm. But still there are four I have to choose from:<br />1. Voigtlander Heliar 150/4.5<br />2. Schneider Xenar 150/4.5<br />3. Schneider Xenar 150/5.6<br />4. Schneider Symmar-S 150/5.6<br />I will be grateful for any advice.</p>

[john_cooper9]

<p>I guess "huge" is relative. My 150 and 180 Symmar-S both weigh more than my 180 Tele-Arton. The Tele-Arton is longer physically but quite light in weight, and it is designed for 6X9, not 4X5 and 5X7 like the Symmars. </p>

[dave_s]

<p>Piotr, hi. I use a Century for landscape and I have four lenses in the 135 - 180mm range right now. This is three too many, but I tend to accumulate lenses. One of them is a 152mm Ektar, which is a recent acquisition, and I haven't used it yet. Here are some comments on the other three.</p>

<p>(i) My 1950s 135mm f/3.8 Press-Xenar is a nice focal length on medium format-- feels like a 'long normal', and you're using only the contrasty center of the Xenar, which is of course a four-element tessar design. The #1 shutter is big for the Century, and just overhangs the periphery of the lensboard.</p>

<p>(ii) Next one up is a 150mm f/5.6 Symmar from about 1960, the convertible version, another biggish lens in a #1. I like this focal length. At this point you're using up most of the bellows draw of the Century. This means you can focus it on distant subjects, but forget about close-ups (unless you make some sort of kludgey lens extension).</p>

<p>(iii) I have a 180mm Tele-Arton, and like John says, it's not a big lens. Maybe 8 or 10cm in length and it's in a Compur 0. It needs only 11 or 12cm of bellows at infinity. which means you can get close focus. I don't think it gives quite the same image quality as the Xenar or Symmar, which I guess is the price you pay for true telephoto design.</p>

<p>YMMV, but you might consider the following. (a) If you're shooting distant subjects, look for a 135mm or 150mm late-model Xenar or similar lens, maybe an Ektar. You don't need the image circle of a plasmat (Symmar) on a Century, because you have very limited movements. (b) If you really need 180mm (or longer), you need true telephoto design, so look for the Tele-Arton or a similar lens. © If you're shooting a lot of close-up, keep your eyes open for a 80 - 105mm process or enlarging lens in shutter. They show up from time to time.</p>

[frank_bunnik]

<p>I have the Horseman Super ER 180mm, similar to the 180mm p.t.. The diameter of the rear element is 39.5 mm. It is a telephoto design. It says so in the Horseman camera manuals and it uses the same infinity stops as the 120mm on the Horseman cameras. The stops for the 150mm are thus further away than those for the 180mm.</p>

<p>I bought this lens only recently so I can not comment much on the quality. I have shot only 2 test rolls so far. It is the most modern of the lenses you list and the Super ER version is multicoated.</p>

[piotr_stanislawski]

<p>Thank you a lot for explanation. Graflex Century is my first bellows camera and there are a few completely new tissues to me, therefore excuse me please for my new questions (I want to be sure if I understood well your comments):<br />1. Does it mean that for distnce objects better are lenses which set infinity before or at infinity stop-mark (the 150mm focal lenght is the longest to achive it) ?<br />2. If I want to use longer focal lenght for close-up (f.ex. 180mm +) than it should be tru tele-photo lens only? ( these can be used as portrait lens on Century?)<br />3. If I do not want to draw bellows very far for close-up objects the best are short leneses (80-135mm)?<br />4. If I want to use regular long focal lenght lens (f.ex. 180mm +) than I will be able to use it for distance objects only? <br />5. I have read somewhere that the late Xenar f/5.6 lens is also very good for close-up? What could it mean?</p>

[piotr_stanislawski]

<p>Could someone help me with the answers? Have to know them before deciding which lens to buy.</p>

 

[dave_s]

<p>OK, here's a crack at your questions. </p>

<p><em>Does it mean that for distnce objects better are lenses which set infinity before or at infinity stop-mark (the 150mm focal lenght is the longest to achive it) ?</em><br>

<em></em><br>

I don't know what this means-- you need to clarify.</p>

<p><em>If I want to use longer focal lenght for close-up (f.ex. 180mm +) than it should be tru tele-photo lens only? ( these can be used as portrait lens on Century?)</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Yes, you can probably get to about 1:1.5 magnification, maybe a little higher, with a 180mm Tele-Arton (or similar) on a Century. You will not see really good results doing close-up with a telephoto lens. There are better choices that are better corrected for short distances. (The photo at the bottom was shot at about 1:2.5 with a 180mm Tele-Arton, just to show it can be done. It's a little soft on the edges and I wouldn't make a big enlargement from it.)</p>

<p><em>If I do not want to draw bellows very far for close-up objects the best are short leneses (80-135mm)?</em></p>

<p>Yes, you can get more magnification if you have a short lens. If you want to shoot close-up with a Century, consider an 80 - 100mm enlarging lens with or without shutter. You will get 1:1.5 or 1:1 magnification.</p>

<p><em>If I want to use regular long focal lenght lens (f.ex. 180mm +) than I will be able to use it for distance objects only?</em></p>

<p>You may be just barely able to focus a regular (non-telephoto) 180mm lens on a Century, but I won't guarantee it, and it would be tight. I would avoid anything longer than 150mm. I have a 150mm Symmar which works OK, but it is a little clumsy and uses up most of the bellows.</p>

<p><em>I have read somewhere that the late Xenar f/5.6 lens is also very good for close-up? What could it mean?</em><br>

<em></em><br>

I don't know. A Xenar is a 'tessar' design and generally corrected for distant objects. You will almost certainly get better results with an 80 - 100mm enlarging lens, which are now very cheap second-hand, although it may be hard to find one in shutter.</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/8858891-lg.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[piotr_stanislawski]

<p>Dave, many thanks!<br /><em>Does it mean that for distnce objects better are lenses which set infinity before or at infinity stop-mark (the 150mm focal lenght is the longest to achive it) ?</em><br /><em></em><br /><br />> I don't know what this means-- you need to clarify.<br /><br />Ok. I want to know if I buy 150mm lens using it for landsape/distance objects (e.g. Symmar-S, Xenar, Heliar, Horseman, etc) will I have to draw the bellows very far and all of them will put infinity at the same point/stop? Are the 150mm (regular) lenses that put infinity/draw bellows closer than other? I am just before decison which 150mm lens to buy for landsape.<br /><br />> I would avoid anything longer than 150mm. I have a 150mm Symmar which works OK, but it is a little clumsy and uses up most of the bellows.<br>

<br />You mean more than 15cm?</p>

[dave_s]

<p>Piotr, hi. If you get any ordinary 150mm lens-- Symmar, Xenar, Tessar, etc.-- you will be able to focus it on a Century. Some of them will use more or less bellows than others, depending on the lens construction and the precise focal length, but, when focused on infinity, they will all be within about 1cm of 15cm, measured from lensboard to film plane. This actual measurement is called the 'flange focal distance' and you can sometimes find what it is for a particular lens, like in the very useful 'Vintage Lens Data' section on the Schneider website.</p>

<p>FWIW, I just put the 150 Symmar (1960, convertible) on my Century, and with the bellows fully extended I can focus on a subject about 1m from the lens, which is closer than I was expecting. (I could probably get a bit closer with more bellows extension, but my focus scales get in the way.) </p>

<p> </p>

[piotr_stanislawski]

<p>Dave, thanks again for another valuable explanation that helped me undarstand a few issues and in making right decision. <br>

I am going to buy one of these lenses: <strong>Schneider Xenar 150/5.6</strong> or <strong>Voigtlander Heliar 15cm/4.5</strong>. Both are small and light, good for field work (mainly I will use Century with four lenses for mountains b&w photography). Now I have to decide: Heliar o Xenar...? According to test Xenar stoped to f/22 is very sharp, Heliar should be similar but probably with some softness... I have not found any comprisons and how much these lenses differ in picture quality and character. Any suggestion will be much appreciated.</p>

 

[jtk]

<p> Sharpness is not a question at any likely aperture with Xenar, though you may prefer something with subtle character. Some recommend against Xenar for portraits...I think their concern has been with it's high contrast. I've seen a lot of beautiful work with them...eg old Arizona Highways magazines. Old Symmars are not as sharp, but do offer more camera movement. The main concern with Xenar is likely to be the cranky Synchro Compur shutter (will probably need cleaning and adjustment)...</p>