Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar 5,6/360mm

[dellos]

I could get this lenses on Compound from B to 1/75. It could be transfered to f=620mm. Is it good deal for 4x5 ?? or not ?

[Len Middleton]

That is a great deal of weight on the front standard of the camera. You will of course need somewhere around 360mm (over 14") bellows draw at infinity, and more for anything closer. Is this within the limitations of your camera you are looking to use it on?

There are smaller and lighter options for 4x5 (process lenses) and lenses requiring less bellows draw (telephoto designs), but if you do not have to carry it far and have the bellows, then that is less of an issue.

If it is in good shape and cheap enough, by all means go for it.

Hope that helps,

Len

[BradS]

this is an enormous monster piece of glass. It wont even fit between the front standards of some 4x5 cameras and would be quite a heavy burden for a little camera to bear.

[MIke Sherck]

I think that you need to actually get some idea of the sheer size and weight of this lens before you decide. There's a reason they don't cost much. :)

[dellos]

I would like to use it in studio for nudes and portrait's on my Cambo Legend, would it feet to this cammera ?? What do I need to do wyth the bellow's draw ?? I cen get it for abut 150$ I'm wondering if going for it... would be good for studio nude's ??

I have quite big studio so standing 5-10m from model is not a problem. The lenss wgot some mainor defect on back glass, saw picture and nothing seeing from it on picture made on 8x10.

[dellos]

I need good cheap lenses for nude / portrait made in studio wyth my lamp's. I won't carry it outside or something.

[Len Middleton]

To put the bellows draw into perspective, my 355mm process lens mounted on a flat lensboard with a camera with a 16" bellows draw, can focus no closer than about 10 feet.

[BradS]

to focus the 360mm lens at 5 meters, you need roughly 388mm of bellows.

to focus it at 10 meters, you only need about 373mm of bellows.

[dellos]

And how mutch of bellow's got the Cambo Legend ?? I'm not shure how mutch. So would you say that is good choice for nude photography ??

[Peter K]

The 360mm lens will work for "head and shoulders" used with the Cambo Legend and it's 480 bellows, but for "whole persons" look for a 180 - 240mm lens.

Peter

[dellos]

Great info, best thanx i will look for some cheap lenses on campur I think, the old versions of schnider or so... best thanx...

[rdenney]

Instead of a Symmar Convertible where the combined lens is already at the limit of your camera's focusing abilities, find one where the rear cell focuses at that limit. A Symmar 180/5.6 will convert to a 315/12. Even at f/12, you'll get selective focus for head shots. And at 180, you'll be able to photograph your subject's whole body, not just the face. These are quite affordable (I just bought one for $160 a few months ago).

There is also a 210/360 Symmar that will also be a good buy.

But I would prefer a faster lens than any of these, and they do come up from time to time. For example, I have an 8-1/2" f/4.5 Ilex Paragon, which is a well-made Tessar lens. It's mounted in a very large Ilex No. 4 shutter, but the package is not that large and I used one on my Calumet/Cambo with no issue at all. Short of a lens designed for soft focus, this one will give you an old-world look when wide open but still allow you to make very sharp and contrasty images when you want to. And these are also quite inexpensive when you can find them.

Rick "who just bought a Caltar Type Y in 240mm for the same basic purpose, except nobody will pose nude for me" Denney

[Daniel Unkefer]

I recently bought a Sinar 360mm F5.6 Symmar, forward-mounted on a deluxe Sinar Norma spring-loaded aperture board. I want to use it for 8x10 headshots. Classic fashion lens.

Yes it was cheap.

[Donald Miller]

If you can find a 305 repo Claron it would be a good long lens for you. It is much smaller physically than the 360 Symmar. I have one mounted in a Compur that I have used extensively on 4X5. According to Schneider it is equally as sharp as the G Claron with slightly less coverage. For portrait work I use it with some Bronica soft focus filters that I have.

[erie patsellis]

I recently bought a Sinar 360mm F5.6 Symmar, forward-mounted on a deluxe Sinar Norma spring-loaded aperture board. I want to use it for 8x10 headshots. Classic fashion lens.

Yes it was cheap.

I love mine in a DB board, as long as I don't have to carry it very far.

[mandoman7]

Its not about the lens with body studies, its about the use of light and how it reveals the form. Any lens can be used; wider for the fuller body shots, longer for isolating small areas. In either case, the challenge will be your ability to work with light and your model, which will take some practice.

[Peter K]

Its not about the lens with body studies, its about the use of light and how it reveals the form. Any lens can be used; wider for the fuller body shots, longer for isolating small areas. In either case, the challenge will be your ability to work with light and your model, which will take some practice.
It's also the lens resp. the perspective one gets with the distance between subject and lens.

With too short lenses one gets distorted limbs, noses etc. And with too long lenses faces will look almost flat.

Peter

[BradS]

It's also the lens resp. the perspective one gets with the distance between subject and lens.

With too short lenses one gets distorted limbs, noses etc. And with too long lenses faces will look almost flat.

Peter

That's not due to the lens focal length. It is due to the distance from lens to subject. You get the same perspective regardless of focal length if you leave the camera in the same position. This has been shown again and again and is easy to prove to yourself. Focal length only changes the image size.

[Peter K]

That's not due to the lens focal length. It is due to the distance from lens to subject. You get the same perspective regardless of focal length if you leave the camera in the same position. This has been shown again and again and is easy to prove to yourself. Focal length only changes the image size.
As I've written: ... the perspective one gets with the distance between subject and lens. ;)

Peter

[aduncanson]

I have an 8-1/2" f/4.5 Ilex Paragon, which is a well-made Tessar lens. It's mounted in a very large Ilex No. 4 shutter, but the package is not that large and I used one on my Calumet/Cambo with no issue at all.

Rick, reportedly that 8-1/2 f/4.5 is a convertible plasmat, not a tessar. Some folks report that they cover 8x10. Is it labeled a "Type-S"? Count reflections or try it converted. The real test is if the front cell will form an image on a wall. The front cell of a tessar will not. Let us know please.

- Alan

[rdenney]

Rick, reportedly that 8-1/2 f/4.5 is a convertible plasmat, not a tessar. Some folks report that they cover 8x10. Is it labeled a "Type-S"? Count reflections or try it converted. The real test is if the front cell will form an image on a wall. The front cell of a tessar will not. Let us know please.

Well, that jumps right into the "No sh$%?" category. As soon as I get home, I will absolutely look.

Rick "stand by" Denney

[rdenney]

Rick, reportedly that 8-1/2 f/4.5 is a convertible plasmat, not a tessar. Some folks report that they cover 8x10. Is it labeled a "Type-S"? Count reflections or try it converted. The real test is if the front cell will form an image on a wall. The front cell of a tessar will not. Let us know please.

Okay, I checked. The label ring reads: "ILEX PARAGON ANASTIGMAT F:4.5 E.F. 8-1/2" Series S No. 50940"

And it is a Tessar, without question. It has a cemented doublet in the rear cell that is nearly plano where it faces the shutter, and two air-spaced elements in the front cell. The rear cell's focal length is 2/3rds or 3/4 the complete lens, and the front will not focus an image.It is single coated, and mounted in a No. 4 Universal with shutter speeds on the old series. Everything about the way it looks suggests the 1950's.

As to coverage, I can't say, but I always took it to have been intended as a fast normal lens for the 5x7 format.

EDIT: More searching on the Internet suggests that the Ilex-Calumet Series S Caltar 8-1/2" (215mm) f/4.8
lens is a convertible plasmat. I saw a picture of it on another forum in an Ilex shutter (looks more like a No. 3 than a No. 4) with two sets of aperture markings. Not the same lens.

Rick "just the facts" Denney

[aduncanson]

Interesting, I had deluded myself that "Series S" was meant to imply symmetrical, like the Ilex built Calumet 8-1/2 inch "Type S" lenses that preceded their arrangement with Schneider. On second thought that lens was f/4.8. You have certainly described a tessar. Thanks for checking, and sorry to get your hopes up or whatever.

[rdenney]

sorry to get your hopes up or whatever.

Not hopes--I like the lens a lot as it is. But if it turned out to be usefully convertible--that's always worth knowing. Mainly, I was surprised and curious.

Rick "for whom this lens has earned its keep" Denney