Tele-Arton 5.5/270mm - image circle

[Ed Richards]

Just got a mint Tele-Arton 5.5/270mm, Linhof pick on the original Linhof IV board, from Igor. Tested it on my Sinar, and found that even with more than the 12.8/10.5mm shift that the Schneider vintage lens page says are the limits, there was no visible fall off or vignetting. Amazingly sharp.

Think about those calculators (people were called that before there machines) working away on the lens design and getting such great lenses.

[Frank Petronio]

They probably had those bigger, more accurate slide rules over in Germany. While our engineers got by with the belt hangers (remember!?) they had meter-long ones.

[Ed Richards]

> remember!?

I still have one.:-)

[Nathan Potter]

Circular slide rules about a foot in diameter, three foot rulings at the perimeter. Clear plastic radius indexes. Highly collectible now.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Ed Richards]

Just scanned the images from the Tele-Arton - a little corner darkening, so maybe the lens circle data is not so conservative. Still impressive performance from such an old design tele. My plan is to cam it to my Tech IV for portraits.

[Dan Fromm]

Guys, there were several 270/5.5 Tele Arton designs, and they had different coverages.

http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/pdf/tele_obj_56.pdf shows a six element Tele Arton, claims 152 mm @ f/5.5, 170 mm @ f/32

http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/pdf/tele_obj_67.pdf shows a five element Tele Arton, claims 178 mm @ f/16

[Ed Richards]

I think this is one more, and I think it is the one I have:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/tele-arton/data/5.5-270mm.htm

[Dan Fromm]

Ed, that's the second one.

[Ed Richards]

Dan,

Does not look even a little bit like the second one. Looks more like the first, but hard to tell from the picture if it is exactly the same - it is on its way to Marflex, so I cannot put my hands on it. Judging from the shutter, the second one is older than the first.

[Dan Fromm]

Ed, mountings vary. The specs in your link and my second one are identical.

Cheers,

Dan

[Ed Richards]

Dan,

You are right, those are the specs for the second lens. Physically, the geometry is clearly the first lens. Fortunately, since I plan to use it for portraits with my Tech IV, the image circle does not matter. It is fun to have a 270 that I can use with the bag bellows on the Sinar.:-)

[Frank Petronio]

I'll be interested to see how successful you are at focusing a 270mm at portrait distances with the Technika rangefinder.

[Ed Richards]

Frank,

Me too.:-) The 150 is really accurate in that range so I am willing to invest a little to see what I can do.

[EH21]

Kind of an old thread, but I just bought a tech IV with a 270mm tele arton lens and took some portraits using the rangefinder. Seemed to have worked great. Negs are sharp! Haven't scanned them yet.

[E. von Hoegh]

I'll be interested to see how successful you are at focusing a 270mm at portrait distances with the Technika rangefinder.

As the British would say, it's "spot on".

[Bill_1856]

My 270 appears to be the early version -- huge in size and weight. Not particularly sharp, and mounted in that Gawd-awful Compur #2. Focuses perfectly with the Technika rangefinder. The 250 Wollensak tele-raptar on my Crown is a far better lens.

[E. von Hoegh]

My 270 appears to be the early version -- huge in size and weight. Not particularly sharp, and mounted in that Gawd-awful Compur #2. Focuses perfectly with the Technika rangefinder. The 250 Wollensak tele-raptar on my Crown is a far better lens.

That sounds like the one I have, except that the Cumpur #2 is a perfectly good shutter. Mine makes a nice portrait lens. It's 5mm off from the 265mm my 150 Symmar gives when converted. The Symmar also makes a nice portrait lens when converted. For landscapes in this focal length, I use a 10 3/4" Dagor, which is sharper than either the Symmar(converted) or the Tele Arton, and much lighter than the Tele Arton. The Dagor also covers 8x10 with movement. My main reason for keeping the Tele is that it is part of a set.

[Bill_1856]

That sounds like the one I have, except that the Cumpur #2 is a perfectly good shutter. . My main reason for keeping the Tele is that it is part of a set.

1) mechanically it's a great shutter, but there's no press-focus mechanism (you've got to set it on "t" to focus), and the aperture scale is on the side of the shutter, not the front, where it's very hard to see, with no lever or button to move it, and if it gets a little "sticky" it become impossible to move without removing it from the camera (to avoid moving the camera).
2) I also keep it because it uses the same 58mm filters as my 90, 135, 180, and 360 mm lenses.
3) I wasn't aware there was a later version, and may look into it. It's a good, usable focal length.

[Armin Seeholzer]

Schneider changed at least 3 times the design of this lens mine are from around 1965 then they got later a black outside finish and MC on the last production run!
I like mine also it is sharp at f8 and very sharp at f16!

Cheers Armin