Is it safe to use a 300mm Symmar-S on a 4x5 field camera?

[alkman]

I am in the market for my first field camera, probably a Shen Hao, but was curious if the front standard would be able to bear the weight of a 300mm Symmar-S that I use on my rail camera.

Is there a different field camer more suited to such a large lens or should I look around for a 300mm Nikor f9 or 305mm G-Claron lens instead?

TIA

[Bob Salomon]

If it can mount it you would not be able to use most of the coverage of that lens on that camera. And that lens will be almost, if not as much, the weight of the camera.

[alkman]

Thank you, that's actually very helpful. If I'm reading you correctly it would front weight the camera enough to cause problems.

And I realize that the image circle far exceeds the film plane/ground glass, but in my somewhat limited wanderings this is the sharpest lens I've used.

[Oren Grad]

I wouldn't hang that heavy a lens on the front standard of a lightweight wooden field camera. Bear in mind that it's not just the strength of the front standard that's at issue, but also the fact that for that long a focal length, the bed will be at substantial extension and thus that much more rickety. There's just too much risk of something breaking if it gets whacked the wrong way. I don't think I'd do it on a metal technical camera either. Although the front standard may be more robust, the bed structure is still going to be vulnerable with that much weight loaded on to that degree of extension.

If I wanted that long a FL on a lightweight field camera, I'd reach for something in Copal 1 rather than Copal 3 - 305 G-Claron, 300 Nikkor M, 300 Geronar, 300 Fujinon-C come to mind.

[Alan Gales]

I used to own a Tachihara 4x5. It had 13" or 330mm of bellows draw. I could focus a 300mm Nikkor M down to somewhere around 15'. A 240mm or 210mm really made more sense on that camera. I mounted a Fujinon 250mm f/6.7 lens on the camera and it felt too heavy for the front standard.

I know that the Shen Hao's have several models with various amounts of bellows extension. They are also said to be a little heavier duty than the Tachi but I would imagine a 300mm Symmar-S to be too heavy. I own a Caltar W 300mm f/5.6 lens in a Copal 3 and it weighs a ton!

The 300mm Nikkor M is a great lens and lightweight. Very sharp and contrasty.

[lfpf]

While considering a field camera for a 300mm Symmar-S, a two-and-a-half pound 300mm works well on a Technika IV with no weight or size issues. The two 300mm lenses are weight- and size-comparable. I have no Shen Hao opinion. Good luck.

[lfpf]

Supplement:
When your selected field camera(s) has adequate movements for your photo applications, then you have another contender. Weight is of no consequence when camera/lens weights are balanced.

[Alan Gales]

I own a Caltar W 300mm f/5.6 lens in a Copal 3 and it weighs a ton!

Correction! That's a Caltar HR 300mm F/5.6 lens that I own. I must have been thinking of Fujinon when I said "W". The HR stands for Horseman. It was actually made by Topcon who made Horseman's lenses.

[Drew Bedo]

I have tried a 15"/5.6 Wollensak Tele Optar on on my little Wista made Zone VI. It will mount, and the telephoto design allows for infinity and some closer focusing . . .but it weighs as much as the rest of the camera. That much weight at the end with the tripod mounting socket so close to the rear makes a wobbly and fragile package. I just don't use it.

[andy]

I use a 240mm nikor copal 3 lens on my chamonix 4x5 from time to time--the lens barely fits on the board, and is quite heavy (typically it stays on my 810) but it has never been a problem, and I wouldn't hesitate to stick a larger lens on if I had a need for it. It really isn't that big of an issue, especially if you're using a reasonably decent tripod.