What is a 300mm Schneider Xenar?

[Duane Polcou]

Greetings. I am looking for a 300mm lens for 4x5 Black and White landscape and backpacking that isn't too heavy (like a 12 in. Ektar) or too, too expensive (like a 300 M Nikkor). What exactly is a 300mm Schneider Xenar lens? When googling this I often see references to Tele-Xenar, as well. Are Xenars and Tele Xenars two different things? Also, I'm assuming it's coverage is more than adequate for 4x5. Does anyone have any experience using these - are they decently sharp, coated, etc? Thank you LF brain trust, as always.

[Nick_3536]

It's a Xenar with a focal length of 300mm. -)

Tessar design. Yes more then enough for 4x5.

Tele will need less bellows.

I've got shorter ones but Xenars are fairly common having been around for quite a while.

[Gene McCluney]

Xenars are "Tessar" formula lenses (in general) that are sharp, but have limited coverage. Tele-Xenars are telephoto lenses designed to focus infinity with less bellows extension than their non-telephoto focal length equivalents. Telephoto lenses do not have wide circles of definition, thus less movements. If you want a long focal length lens for a field camera with a short bellows, you should consider a telephoto style lens. "Xenars" in general are very sharp lenses, but have less room for movements than say, Symmars.

[Oren Grad]

A 300 Xenar will have ample room for movement on 4x5. But it may not meet your size/weight criterion.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Are Xenars and Tele Xenars

No, the 300 mm Xenar is a standard lens made by Schnedier Kreuznach, it is a classical tessar-type, 4-elements, covering about 60°f/22, used in the past for the 18x24cm and the 8"x10" format
A tele xenar is a 300mm telephoto with a much smaller bellows drag than 300mm when focused at infinity. A xenar requries about 300mm of bellows drag at infinity.
All specs can be found in the Scheider Kreuznach archive as scanned .pdf brochures. Most in German.
http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/archiv.htm

look for : Aufnahme-Objektive
für Mittel- und Großformat

All German lenses fabricated after ~ 1950 are coated. Not multicoated, but with an anti-reflection coating ; but not necessarily "single coated" as can be read sometimes. This pre-1970 coating is more than adequate for many photographic situations.

Xenars can deliver excellent images. They were superseded by 6-element lenses because LF professional photoraphers demanded a wider image circle to use camera movements.
To get an idea of the limitations of a 60° angle of view, if you wish to frame a landscape picture with 1/3 of ground and 2/3 of sky only by shifting the back from a position where the horizon is in the middle, you reach the limits of a tessar design = image circle = focal length +15%.
In a modern 70-75° 6-element standard lens you get a circle = focal length +40%.

tele xenars cover much less than 60°. So a 300 tele xenar is for 4x5" with movemnets or 5"x7 with limited movements.

[Mark Sampson]

So a 300mm Schneider Xenar will be *about* the same size and weight as the 12" Ektar (that's too heavy for you). If you can't afford a new 300mm Nikkor-M, look for a used one. I think the Nikkor is one of the great bargain lenses when you look at the price-performance ratio.

[Gene McCluney]

So a 300mm Schneider Xenar will be *about* the same size and weight as the 12" Ektar (that's too heavy for you).


After all, an Ektar is a high quality Tessar design, as is a Xenar. Tessars in general are smaller and lighter than the 6 element designs typified by the Symmar and Sironar lines of lenses.

[Ernest Purdum]

If you are looking for small and light, look for a smaller maximum aperture. f4.5 gives a nice bright groundglass image but, by letting your eyes accommodate to the lower light level, use of a much smaller aperture is perfectly feasible.

[Michael Gudzinowicz]

Duane, The 300 Xenar will cover 8x10. If the one you are considering is an older lens (pre-1940-50), it is likely that performance (sharpness) will just be adequate for 4x5. In any case, it is a large lens. If you do not want to use a modern f/5.6 plasmat design, you might want to consider one of the following lenses:

300 mm f/9 Nikkor M
305 mm f/9 Schneider G Claron
300 mm f/9 Fujinon AS
300 mm f/8.5 Fujinon C
305 mm f/9 Schneider APO Artar
300 mm f/9 Rodenstock Apo Ronar
300 mm f/9 Sinar APO Sinaron
300 mm f/9 Docter Apo-Germinar
300 mm f/8 Fujinon T (telephoto)

The G Claron is fairly common and barrel mounted lenses drop into a Copal 1 shutter.

[Frank Petronio]

There are older 300mm Xenars that are in larger, older compound shutters that have a larger maximum aperture, f/4.5 I think. Later ones fit into Copal 3 size shutters, which are smaller and choke the aperture. I had a 1970s era 300mm/5.6 in a Copal 3 that easily covered 8x10 and was sharp and pleasing over the entire frame. It was 67mm front filter size and not very large or heavy. It had a smooth bokeh, was at least a stop faster than those f/9 lenses, and cost less than $300.

Kind of a perfect lens actually ;)

It was smaller than a 12-inch Ektar in a big Acme, but it was the shutter that accounts for the size.

[Nick_3536]

That sounds like my big Fuji 300mm. I guess it's an L. Mounted with a lensboard I don't think I paid much more then $300 from MPEX for it.

[Ole Tjugen]

I had a 300mm f:4.5 Xenar in use until a while ago. It was in a massive Compound #5 shutter, and weighed so much that I sold it along with the 5x7" Technika I used it on. That's the beast I'm holding in my avatar picture...

[Buffalonian]

I had a 300mm f:4.5 Xenar in use until a while ago. It was in a massive Compound #5 shutter, and weighed so much that I sold it along with the 5x7" Technika I used it on. That's the beast I'm holding in my avatar picture...

If you don't mind me asking how much you sold the combo for? I picked up one of the 300mm lenses not to long ago and considering it for a much smaller lens for 8x10 on my newly purchased Kodak 2D.

[Len Middleton]

If you don't mind me asking how much you sold the combo for? I picked up one of the 300mm lenses not to long ago and considering it for a much smaller lens for 8x10 on my newly purchased Kodak 2D.

Not certain a transaction that occurred over six years ago is going to be relevant to your current interests...

The date of the reply is given in the left hand side of the header.

[Bernice Loui]

This is simply not completely true (depends on the specific lens in question) based on my collection of Schneider Xenars from 105mm to 480mm.

Stopped down to f16 / f22, they will equal the majority of modern lenses and they have better tonality than a modern Plasmat, better out of focus rendition at full aperture.

Xenars are very fine lenses and are often neglected due to their wide availability and perceived problem of small image circle. Excessively large image circle for a given format will result in more stray light inside the bellows causing flare and lower image contrast.

The modern plasmat came into being due to optics manufactures need to consolidate their offerings and giving LF image makers a different look (hard edged, high contrast, less than pleasant out of focus rendition, less than pleasant overall tonality IMO ) that was fashionable at that time. They are no worst or better than vintage optics, they are just a different set of trade offs driven by marketing and technology. And no, newer is not always better.

The 300mm Xenar appeared in f4.5 and f5.6 in a Copal shutter. Image circle is 360mm at f22. 8x10 requires a definition specified image circle of 312mm.

I'll post an image circle chart from the Linhoff LF book which list this Xenar and a number of other lenses from that time in a separate post.


Bernice




Duane, The 300 Xenar will cover 8x10. If the one you are considering is an older lens (pre-1940-50), it is likely that performance (sharpness) will just be adequate for 4x5.

[Buffalonian]

Not certain a transaction that occurred over six years ago is going to be relevant to your current interests...

The date of the reply is given in the left hand side of the header.

Well, its more of a reference. I can deduce cost from it, in modern US monopoly money from it :)

What I'd really like to know, is what shutter I should be looking for, for this beast. Packard is a bit sloppy on timing since I can't shoot at like f128 on this guy for >5s exposures that can be like T/B modes with the shutter. Any help on both points would be greatly appreciated.

[Ole Tjugen]

If you don't mind me asking how much you sold the combo for? I picked up one of the 300mm lenses not to long ago and considering it for a much smaller lens for 8x10 on my newly purchased Kodak 2D.

If I could remember, I could tell you. But I can't, so I can't!

On the other hand I do remember that I sold it more or less locally - so the transaction was in norwegian Kroner. The official exchange rate is correct, but the real value of money is a different matter.

[pasiasty]

There are older 300mm Xenars that are in larger, older compound shutters that have a larger maximum aperture, f/4.5 I think.
There were even faster Xenars before WWII: f/2.9 (35 - 105mm) and f/3.5 (35 - 300mm, I've got 240mm).

[cdholden]

Buffalonian,
These lenses were also found residing in the older style Ilex #5 shutters (black with chrome ring).

[rjmeyer314]

I have a Schneider 270mm Xenar in a compound shutter. It's ancient, probably dating back to the 30's. I believe it's designed to cover 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 (i.e., full plate). I use it on an 8x10 and it covers well in that it doesn't vignette. It does show signs of softness in focus in the corners sometimes. I like it because it gives the same proportion as a 135mm Optar that I have on my Super Graphic 4x5. I've used these two cameras more than any other large format cameras I own. It's gotten so I naturaly see the world in that perspective for most of my photography.