240mm or 270mm tele lens with limited bellows draw

[sanking]

I have a camera with limited bellows draw and am trying to figure out the longest tele lens I can use. The distance from the film plane to the lens board plane is approximately 5 3/4". I have a 270mm tele arton (in Copal S-No. 1) which will not quite focus at infinity, seems to just miss by 5-10 mm or so. Does anyone know if the 240 mm tele arton (or 240mm tele xenar) would work for me?

Sandy

[Mark Woods]

Hello Sandy,

If you take the length of the lens and divide it by 24.5 you'll get the inches equivalent. Example:

240mm/24.5mm=9.44"

I hope this helps.

Mark

[Jac@stafford.net]

Hello Sandy,

If you take the length of the lens and divide it by 24.5 you'll get the inches equivalent. Example:

Typo, but correct outcome.
1" == 25.4mm
240/25.4 == 9.44

(I do the same often.)

[Steve Goldstein]

Sandy, can you get or make an extended lensboard that'll let you focus your 270? That might be cheaper than a new lens...

[Jmarmck]

Are the if they are a "tele" design wouldn't the bellows draw be less?

This might help.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses-long.html

[Dave Wooten]

Reverse a recessed lens board

[Ken Lee]

If it's a matter of only 5 or 10mm, you could make a spacer ring the same size as the mounting flange, perhaps a bit thicker.

Ideally a machine shop could make one out of aluminum, but if it doesn't have to look fancy, cardboard or wood will do fine. You might have to get a new (longer) set of screws to pass through the extra distance to the lens board, but unless they have to be black, any hardware store should be able to provide those.

[ic-racer]

Extension lensboards in 8x8cm size (for Horseman) are available. The 8x8cm boards can be adapted to just about any of the larger lensboards out there. These have the effect of decreasing the flange-focal distance of any lens.
119764

[sanking]

Extension lensboards in 8x8cm size (for Horseman) are available. The 8x8cm boards can be adapted to just about any of the larger lensboards out there. These have the effect of decreasing the flange-focal distance of any lens.
119764

Thanks. I was focused on getting another lens. Looks like I could get one of these extensions and use the 270mmm tele lens I already have.

Sandy

[Bill_1856]

The 270 Tele-Arton sucks. Look for a 10" Tele-Raptar in Wollensak shutter (cheap, cheap, cheap!).

[sanking]

The 270 Tele-Arton sucks. Look for a 10" Tele-Raptar in Wollensak shutter (cheap, cheap, cheap!).

Did you not find the 270mm Tele Arton to be a sharp lens, or is your comment based on lack of coverage.

FWIW, I plan to use the lens for 6X9 cm, with some limited use of movements.

Sandy

[Corran]

The 270 Tele-Arton sucks.

Having used (a Linhof-Select) 270TA with a trashed rear element and still getting extremely sharp images at wider apertures, I have to disagree!!!

[EdSawyer]

270 TA will beat up on any wollensak tele. Schneider publishes the flange-focal distance for their lenses, AFAIK the Tele artons are the shortest for any teles for their focal length. 240 should be shorter than 270 but with teles it's not always as it seems.

[Kevin Crisp]

Tele-raptars are really nice. Kind of big and heavy though.

[Armin Seeholzer]

I have also a Tele Arton 270mm from the end 1960 and it is even fully open sharp in the center and it has a wonderful creamy bokeh up to f11!
Nobody gets mine!

Cheers Armin

I show you a pic of mine fully open!
119849

[Bill_1856]

270 TA will beat up on any wollensak tele.

What do you mean ANY? How many of them have you tested? Or even used?

[polyglot]

FWIW, I plan to use the lens for 6X9 cm, with some limited use of movements.

Is it possible that a Mamiya RB or Fuji GX680 lens would suit? My RZ67 250APO is incredibly sharp and (eyeballing it), looks like it might just cover 6x9. I think there is an RB equivalent which would obviously get you a mechanical shutter.

A GX680 250/5.6 would have to cover, but I suspect that arranging a shutter for it would be a hassle.

[EdSawyer]

*all* of them. ;-)

IMNSHO Nikkor Tele > Tele Arton > Tele Xenar > Wolly Telly Not sure where Fuji Teles stack up.






What do you mean ANY? How many of them have you tested? Or even used?

[Drew Wiley]

The 400T Fuji teles were considered the pick of the litter by landscape photographers with limited bellows draw. But I've never met anyone who owned a 300T.
The late Schneider 360 Apo Tele might have been optically superior; but it had a big clunky no. 3 shutter which almost defeated the whole idea. My brother often
used a Tele-Arton on his Technika. It was fine for black and white, but not properly corrected for color film, at least by today's standards. I don't think any tele
can be expected to work as well as a prime full-focal-length equivalent. And 6x9 is demanding, because you have to enlarge that little thing a lot more than 4x5.
My favorite lenses in that range for my own 6x9 backs are a 240 Fuji A and a 300 Nikkor M, both very small and ridiculously sharp and well color-corrected.

[sanking]

Back to the question, a regular lens of 240mm or 270mm would definitely not focus on this camera, thus my question about a tele. In the regular lens category a 150mm lens will only focus down to about 15 feet, anything longer won't focus at all at infinity. I have a 240mm Fujinon A and it is great lens, but there is no practical way to use it on this camera.

Sandy

[EdSawyer]

did you check the schneider data? IIRC, the 270 tele arton has the shortest flange-focal distance of all the teles, down to about 150mm @ infinity I believe.

-Ed

[Dan Fromm]

did you check the schneider data? IIRC, the 270 tele arton has the shortest flange-focal distance of all the teles, down to about 150mm @ infinity I believe.

-Ed

did you check the schneider data? IIRC, the 270 tele arton has the shortest flange-focal distance of all the teles, down to about 150mm @ infinity I believe.

-Ed

Close. 152 mm according to the 1967 catalog here: http://web.archive.org/web/20100922053809/http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/archiv.htm

Unfortunately the OP said, in the first post in this discussion, that his camera's minimum extension is 5 3/4".

The 240 Tele-Arton's flange-focal distance is 150 mm (4x5 version). You may have been thinking of it. Still too long.

[Mark Tweed]

Sandy, in regards to your question about the Schneider 240mm Tele-Xenar, I have one and use it as my long lens on a 2X3 Century Graphic. With the lens focused on infinity, I measure the flange-focal distance to be around 6 1/8" or 156mm. Which means this lens would be unsuitable for your needs, that and its intended use is really for the medium format.


Mark

[winterclock]

My 10"Wollensak TeleRaptor focuses infinity at 5 7/8". It wouldn't take much to make up the difference, stack a smaller lensboard on a larger one. It is a Wollensak though and some people find that a disadvantage (it happens to be my fourth favorite lens and covers 5x7 at head and shoulders portrait distance.)

[jnantz]

My 10"Wollensak TeleRaptor focuses infinity at 5 7/8". It wouldn't take much to make up the difference, stack a smaller lensboard on a larger one. It is a Wollensak though and some people find that a disadvantage (it happens to be my fourth favorite lens and covers 5x7 at head and shoulders portrait distance.)

i like mine too ;)

[sanking]

Sandy, in regards to your question about the Schneider 240mm Tele-Xenar, I have one and use it as my long lens on a 2X3 Century Graphic. With the lens focused on infinity, I measure the flange-focal distance to be around 6 1/8" or 156mm. Which means this lens would be unsuitable for your needs, that and its intended use is really for the medium format.


Mark

Thanks. The flange to film plane of 156 mm is longer than the flange/film distance of the 270mm tele arton that I have.


Sandy

[Mark Tweed]

I can only attribute the longer flange to film plane distance, despite the Tele-Xenar being a shorter lens (both in focal length and actual size), to a different lens construction. I know your Tele-Arton features a more complex optical design with additional glass elements compared to the Tele-Xenar, resulting in a sharper lens with better corrections.

Mark

[sanking]

Thanks again for all of the information.

My solution was to purchase a 22mm lens board extension for the 270mm Tele Arton, similar to what Ic-Racer suggested back in Post #8. The lens now focuses on the camera from infinity down to about fifteen feet.

Sandy