4x5 portrait lens in 240mm

[nonuniform]

I've read as many of the threads as I possibly can, so, I'm just looking for anyone that can point me to samples of various portraits taken with the lenses I'm considering.

I've been using a Schneider 240/5.6 Symmar S MC on my Zone IV (Wista version, not the later Wisner) field camera. It's a big lens, as other threads have mentioned, can't really focus close enough for a head shot. I'm okay with that.

I let a friend borrow this lens, and, he dropped it out in the desert and scratched it. He owns it now and is buying me something new.

I found this on ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330583382533&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_500wt_1413

What is that shutter/mount? I have a spare Copal #3, can I just unscrew the front/rear elements and pop them in my shutter?

Other lenses:
Tessars - not sure, did they make a 240/250?
Rotelar 270mm - someone else on the forum mentioned this lens.... is it an interesting piece of glass for portraits?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=390294983481&ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT#ht_3443wt_1163

Found a Nikkor 240/5.6 at KEH, I've always found Nikkor and Schneider to be very close.

I probably won't be convinced to shoot 210mm, since I sold that to get the 240mm!

I guess I'm just looking to see samples of people's work shot with other lenses - especially the Tessars.

Thanks!

[Raidahl]

I have Tessar 250mm/f4.5, so they sure do. There seems to be couple of those available on ebay

[Ken Lee]

The first lens you mention, is mounted in a Sinar DB mount: it has no shutter. It's designed to be used on Sinar (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/index.php#Sinar) cameras with a Sinar Copal Shutter (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php#SinarShutter). So unless you want to use a hat for a shutter like they did 100 years ago, forget that one. Or get a Sinar and a Sinar shutter :) I love mine.

If your camera doesn't have enough bellows draw for a head shot, the the problem is with the camera, not with the lens. Changing lenses won't fix that problem, unless you go for a telephoto design rather than a prime lens. Am I missing something here ?

I like Tessars for portraits. They usually come in vintage shutters with many-bladed diaphragms. You might this article (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php#Vintage) interesting. It shows several sample images.

[Frank Petronio]

There are vintage Schneider Xenars 240/5.5s in older compound shutters. To use the lens wide open in bright light you may need to use neutral density filters (our ancestors never had such problems with ISO 25 film). Those would be my first choice for a portrait lens.

Your little Wista won't be able to focus it very closely though. You're probably out of luck unless you switch to a camera with a longer focusing track.

There are Schneider telephotos like the 240 Tele-Xenar (there are also 270 and longer versions) but it will vignette, it was made for 6x9.

The 270 Rodenstock Roletar is a fine portrait lens, I used one and thought it was nice. Most are full of haze but that's not always a problem for portraits most of the time.

Of course you can drop the elements from a Sinar DB-mounted lens into your Copal 3 shutter. Having an expert check it is a good idea as some lenses use thin metal spacers to adjust the distance between the front and rear, also to get the aperture scale lined up properly... but you can probably do it yourself and see what happens first.

[Gem Singer]

You're asking quote a lot from a Wista Zone VI when mounting a heavy lens, in a Copal 3 shutter, on its' front standard. Especially a lens that requires a lot of bellows extension.

Why not consider a Nikon/Nikkor f9 300M or a Fujinon f8.5 300C?

Both are 4-element lenses, mounted in Copal 1 shutters, and are excellent portrait lenses for 4x5.

[Tim Deming]

Voigtlander Heliars of 240mm f4.5 are also out there

cheers

Tim

[Arne Croell]

Voigtlander Heliars of 240mm f4.5 are also out there

cheers

Tim

Certainly nice for portraits. They come in a Compound IV shutter, though, which barely fits on a Technika lensboard; I assume the Zone VI lensboard has a similar size.

[Fotoguy20d]

In that focal length, my favorite is a 240mm (9 1/2") Dagor. Mine is circa 1908 but in a Supermatic shutter. I usually use it with my 8x10 but happened to have used it yesterday on my 4x5 Wood-Field (but not for portrait use). I've never tried a head shot with it - for portraits in 8x10 its too wide, and this was the first time its been on a 4x5 camera.

Dan

[drew.saunders]

If you're looking for a Tessar-type lens in that focal length, I recently picked up a Fujinar 250/4.7 in Copal 3s (they also made it as a 4.5 in a "Shanel" shutter that's larger than the Copal). It's single coated and would be an excellent "gentle focus" portrait lens. I haven't used it for any portraits yet, but am liking it even for general purpose work. Stopped down, it's functionally as sharp as my 250/6.3 Fuji Plasmat lens for my purposes.

The Copal 3s fits a Technika lensboard and the lens, although heavy, isn't obscenely heavy.

[Ole Tjugen]

A 240/4.5 lens would require a Compound IV or similar huge shutter which is a problem with many smallish lens boards.

A 240/5.6 lens should fit in a #3 shutter, Copal, Compound or other, which is a bit more easy to handle.

240/7 or slower should fit in a #1 shutter.

[Jim collum]

I just picked up a Heliar 240/4.5 from Jim Galli, in a Studio Shutter (Type B). It *just* fits on a Technika board on my Ebony. (fantastic lens, btw)

[nonuniform]

This is great info, thank you everyone for taking the time to reply.

I agree, a heavy lens on the Wista is really pushing the little camera, and yes, a longer bellows draw would be the answer to controlling close focus etc.

Based on the examples of the Heliar and Tessar lenses that I've seen, I'm definitely leaning in that direction. This is my first foray into the world of the early lenses, so I don't know what will actually fit/work on my Wista. I'm not married to the camera, it's just what I've got right now. I don't really have the money for a new lens/new camera, so it's one or the other!

The Copal #3 shutter is pretty much as big as my lensboard can handle, so, I'll have to figure out the sizes of the other shutters in relation to the Copal #3 (as a reference).

Guess I'll be trolling here, the *bay, and other places for a lens!

[nonuniform]

From what I've read, the Wista and Technika lens boards are *basically* the same. They aren't quite of course, but for my purposes, if a lens works with a Technika lensboard, it will work with the Wista.


Certainly nice for portraits. They come in a Compound IV shutter, though, which barely fits on a Technika lensboard; I assume the Zone VI lensboard has a similar size.

[nonuniform]

Thanks! I also read your post regarding compound shutter dimensions. Very helpful!


A 240/4.5 lens would require a Compound IV or similar huge shutter which is a problem with many smallish lens boards.

A 240/5.6 lens should fit in a #3 shutter, Copal, Compound or other, which is a bit more easy to handle.

240/7 or slower should fit in a #1 shutter.

[nonuniform]

Final question - barrel lenses. I've seen a few Zeiss Tessar 250/4.5's around, but, before I do a ton of research on putting a barrel lens in a shutter. Should I? Is it worth it?

[Arne Croell]

From what I've read, the Wista and Technika lens boards are *basically* the same. They aren't quite of course, but for my purposes, if a lens works with a Technika lensboard, it will work with the Wista.
Here are two images of the 240mm Heliar on a Technika lensboard. One has to attach the flange ring to the front, since the back cell diameter just fits through the ridged area on the board's back. And there is a reason the air brake of the Compound shutter is at an angle, because it otherwise interferes with the lensboard locking mechanism.

[nonuniform]

Thanks for posting the pix Arne. That really helps me see what I'm getting into. That's just a bit bigger than the Copal #3!

[Peter De Smidt]

How about a 240mm G-claron, Doktor Optic or Fujinon A? They all work in a copal #1 shutter. They're very good lenses.

[nonuniform]

I have to admit, there are a ton of choices, and short of getting every single lens and testing them all out, it's a bit daunting. The Fuji A sounds: expensive; lens "character" might not be what I want for portraits. I haven't fully researched the G-claron or Doktor Optic. Weight and size are only part of my decision-making process.

[Jim Galli]

Before you consider very expensive lenses in very expensive shutters that will barely fit and double the weight of your outfit, I always encourage people to "dedicate" an older speed graphic with a working focal plane shutter to this type of work. That free's you to explore many of the older barrel lenses that we all love the best for portraits.

For instance I have an f6.3 (slowish) 250mm petzval that I'm planning on listing in the classifieds soon. Chances are you could buy the lens and an old Speed Graphic (get the one with 4X4 inch wood lensboards) for about half what a 240mm Heliar is worth. Heliar's are fantastic, I'm just throwing out other options. Bellows draw on the speed is notoriously short though. Cake and eat it too? A 5X7 Speed.........but there went the budget.

[Peter De Smidt]

Weight and size are only part of my decision-making process.

Well, sure. But I'll chime in with what some others have told you: Using a heavy lens, such as one in a Copal #3 or larger shutter, on a Wista Zone VI at long extensions is not a good idea. As a result, you can either use a lighter lens with the Wista made camera, or get a heavier lens (like some of the old and fast ones) and get a stronger camera.

[Armin Seeholzer]

There are Schneider telephotos like the 240 Tele-Xenar (there are also 270 and longer versions) but it will vignette, it was made for 6x9.

This is is incorrect for the Tele Xenar 270mm ( 178mm covering power at f16 and infinity stated in a brochure of Schneider) which is on my 4x5 inch as a Portrait lens and was also as a 9x12/4x5 inch lens sold from Schneider.

Cheers Armin

[Tim Deming]

Before you consider very expensive lenses in very expensive shutters that will barely fit and double the weight of your outfit, I always encourage people to "dedicate" an older speed graphic with a working focal plane shutter to this type of work.

I agree. My 240mm Heliar (barrel) just fits on a pacemaker board.

cheers

Tim

[engl]

If you are looking for lighter lens in a smaller #1 shutter that still offers a fairly big aperture, there is the Fujinon W-250/6.3.

[Ole Tjugen]

I have an "Anniversary" Speed Graphic and a collapsible-helical-mounted Heliar 240mm. Works like a dream, and the camera can even be closed with the lens on thanks to the helical mount.

[nonuniform]

I totally respect and appreciate the points of view from everyone. Very, very helpful. I'm experimenting with some ideas, and I actually *want* whatever happens when I stick a heavy lens on the Wista at full extension. I know, weird, right? Oh well, I enjoy the creative process!

Anyhow, I like the idea of using the focal plane on a speed graphic. Very cool idea.

[venchka]

If you are looking for lighter lens in a smaller #1 shutter that still offers a fairly big aperture, there is the Fujinon W-250/6.3.

BINGO! I was going to mention my fondness for this lens. It's kinda big. It's kinda heavy. I forget all of that when I see the negatives. I use mine on a Richard Ritter vintage Zone VI camera. I don't know what your bellows extension is, but I can get plenty close with the 16"-17" of bellows on my camera. No doubt Eugene can tell us the exact number. ;) The image circle is huge-nipping the corners of 8x10 according to the Fuji brochure. The best money (and not a lot either) I've ever spent on a 4x5 lens.

My Fujinon-W 250/6.3 in "portrait" mode. The vegetation prevented me from getting closer.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/232819-2/Kremers+Angels-1.jpg

[E. von Hoegh]

In that focal length, my favorite is a 240mm (9 1/2") Dagor. Mine is circa 1908 but in a Supermatic shutter. I usually use it with my 8x10 but happened to have used it yesterday on my 4x5 Wood-Field (but not for portrait use). I've never tried a head shot with it - for portraits in 8x10 its too wide, and this was the first time its been on a 4x5 camera.

Dan

I have a 240mm and a 9 1/2 inch Dagor. The OP might find the wide - open softness to be useful for portrait, if not they're sharp as can be at f16 or so.

[Steve Goldstein]

I believe the f/6.8 240mm Caltar Type Y (=Rodenstock Ysarex) is a Tessar, so might do for portraits. An extended lensboard might also be helpful, depending on your bellows draw.

[Jon Shiu]

Caltar IIN 240mm F5.6 is beautiful lens in Copal 3. I used it with no problem on Tachihara field camera. Only would focus to about 5 feet, though.

Jon

[aduncanson]

I've got both the 240/6.8 Caltar Type Y and the 250/6.3 Fuji W. The Caltar Type Y is much smaller. I use it on a 5x7 Canham Traditional camera with lots of bellows. The Fuji stays at home mounted on a board for my monorail studio cameras.

[Joe Forks]

well since no else mentioned these options, how about 250mm Fuji soft focus or a 250mm Imagon? Of course you have the option to go sharp or soft with either of these lenses.

[Scott Davis]

Another vote for the Heliar. I just got mine with a custom flange from SK Grimes to make sure it clears whichever camera's lensboard locking mechanism I choose to mount it on - I have a Canham 5x7 wood field and a vintage Seneca whole plate that was adapted to take the Linhof Technika boards. I haven't put it on my Shen Hao yet, which also takes the Technika boards, although I think it would handle it, but the front struts might not clear the Compound shutter without applying a bit of rise.

[rdenney]

I believe the f/6.8 240mm Caltar Type Y (=Rodenstock Ysarex) is a Tessar, so might do for portraits. An extended lensboard might also be helpful, depending on your bellows draw.

This lens is also compact, fitting in a No. 1 shutter. And it is recent enough for a modern shutter--mine is mounted in an older chrome-ring Copal--but any No. 1 shutter would work.

It is not large and heavy at all--a trade-off for the slightly slower speed.

If you don't mind older, the Ilex Paragons were faster (f/4.5) and came in 8-1/2" (215mm) and 10" (254mm) focal lengths. They are mounted in large Ilex No. 4 shutters, but will mount easily on any camera. I have an 8-1/2" f/4.5 Paragon on a Pacemaker Graphic board at the moment, and I have also mounted it on an old Calumet CC-400 with a 4x4" board.

None of these will cost more than $200-300 in good condition. All are tessars, and provide the typical tessar look. All are coated, too, and are quite decently sharp when appropriately stopped down.

Rick "who wants portraits to be sharp, at least in the focus plane" Denney

[Peter De Smidt]

I had one of the Ilex Paragons that Rick mentions on a twin lens 4x5 camera, the 10" if memory serves me rightly. It was a very good performer.

[tbeaman]

I just did a shoot with my tiny and light 240 Apo-Ronar. It's F9, and hardly what one thinks of when they think of a portrait lens, but I like it:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6139/5931621401_c71c328677_z_d.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tombeaman/5931621401/)

More here (http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=15692938@N04&q=apo%20ronar).

This message is shamelessly self-aggrandizing, but being a gear hound myself I know it's always nice to see real-world examples. These scans are just quick Epson 4990 "sitting right on glass, still in the sleeves, and at 800dpi" jobs, but I've posted them good and large so you can peep at 2048px anyway.

[Ari]

Several others have chimed in regarding the Fujinon 250 f6.3, I just wanted to add that the f6.7 version of that lens is even better.
It has an image circle of 400mm, sharp as hell, and sits on a Seiko shutter, just slightly larger than Copal 1.
I've used it on a Wista field and Toyo monorail with equal ease.

[sully75]

I have a Fujinar-SC 250mm f/4.7. I got it from Kumar. Definitely an interesting lens. I haven't used it very much at all, but it's nice and bright.

This is really the only photo of note that I've used it for (on 5x7). I was worried it would not be sharp, but this was pretty close, in pretty low light, and it's one of my sharper negatives:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5062/5643641274_8d417982fa_z.jpg

[sully75]

ps I don't get the feeling that there are a ton of them out there.

[Ken Lee]

I just did a shoot with my tiny and light 240 Apo-Ronar. It's F9, and hardly what one thinks of when they think of a portrait lens, but I like it.

APO Ronars (http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/largeformat_en.html), like other process lenses (APO Nikor for example), are symmetrical designs with 4 elements. They don't open as wide as some designs - and they don't have the wide coverage of other designs - but they have extreme sharpness and wonderful blur rendition. Best of all, they perform superbly at close distance. That they are small and light, is icing on the cake.

[Bob McCarthy]

For portraits in large format, you don't necessarily want biting sharpness so many lenses of older/lesser pedigree apply. I would also suggest trying a 210mm.

Do not take the literal 35mm equivalents as gospel, large sheet film cameras do not require as much focal length. The 14 inch (360) mm on 8x10 has taken some of the most famous portraits of all. That's the equivalent of a 180 in 4x5.

I would recommend you go with a 210mm, it will be in a smaller shutter, therefore lighter and smaller. Better all around lens too. I know you came from 210, but from the limits of your camera, its to my thinking the more appropriate lens. Most modern 240's are really meant for larger formats than 4x5.

Another consideration is aperture and the ability to select a shallow depth of field if you want to. Small 240's are slow (I have both a Fuji 240A and a Nikon 200M) and fast 240's are huge. A fast 210 fits best and is reasonably small (usually a copal 1).

Bob

[Gem Singer]

Bob,

If you are referring to a 3/4, or a full length portrait, I agree that a 210 will do the job, but it is a slightly short focal length for 4x5 a head and shoulders portrait.

Not only does a 210 limit the amount of working distance between the subject and the camera, but it also tends to distort facial features when used close up.

The Fujinon 240A is a small lens that can be used for 4x5 portraiture and allows slightly more working distance between subject and camera.

However, as I previously mentioned, the Nikon/Nikkor f9 300M or the Fujinon f8.5 300C are excellent choices for 4x5 head and shoulders portraiture. Relatively small lenses. Increased working distance. Less distortion of facial features, and, if desired, can be softened with the use of a softening filter such as a Tiffen Soft FX.

[Ken Lee]

Less distortion of facial features, and, if desired, can be softened with the use of a softening filter such as a Tiffen Soft FX.

Indeed. We can always soften an image after the fact, but we can't restore detail that isn't there.

[Bob McCarthy]

I guess I concider shooting at f5.6 (vs. F9)as more useful than 30 mm more fl.

Then again you can count the number of close-close portraits I've done on the fingers of my right hand. But head and shoulders, sure you can.

Bob



Bob,

If you are referring to a 3/4, or a full length portrait, I agree that a 210 will do the job, but it is a slightly short focal length for 4x5 a head and shoulders portrait.

Not only does a 210 limit the amount of working distance between the subject and the camera, but it also tends to distort facial features when used close up.

The Fujinon 240A is a small lens that can be used for 4x5 portraiture and allows slightly more working distance between subject and camera.

However, as I previously mentioned, the Nikon/Nikkor f9 300M or the Fujinon f8.5 300C are excellent choices for 4x5 head and shoulders portraiture. Relatively small lenses. Increased working distance. Less distortion of facial features, and, if desired, can be softened with the use of a softening filter such as a Tiffen Soft FX.

[Gem Singer]

Bob,

It doesn't surprise me that you disagree with my reason for using a longer lens for portraiture. I expected that response.

However, I am not speaking about something I read in a book or saw on a video.This is something I learned from my own experiences.

From 1948-1952, I used a 4x5 large format camera to make portraits of people for publication, both in a studio and in the environment.

It didn't take long for me to realize that large format lenses have a much shallower depth of field than 35mm and MF lenses.

I found that using an LF lens wide open for portraiture is not a wise thing to do. The subject tended to move his/her head slightly while I was transitioning from focusing on the GG to firing off the shutter.

When focused on the subject's eyes, the nose and ears would be out of focus unless I closed down the aperture.

Head and shoulders is a close-up portrait. From the waist up is a 3/4 length portrait. From the feet up is a full length portrait.

The 210 focal length works fine for full length and 3/4 length portraits, but the smaller distance between subject and camera doesn't leave much room for lights and reflectors when doing a head and shoulders portrait.

IMHO, a 300 mm lens is much easier to use for 4x5 head and shoulders portraiture.

[sully75]

I know a 180mm was way too wide for 5x7 for portraiture for me, that's why I got the 250mm.

[Bob McCarthy]

Eugene, I'm not disagreeing with you, but in the litany of possible compromises, I concider a small aperture more of a compromise than a slightly shorted FL, when you add in the darkening due to closer focus, it can be a challenge to nail focus.

It's not a disagreement to me, but a different set of priorities. I'm not impugning your level of experience, but I just don't agree with your compromises.

Beyond that was the issue that OP said he was bellows constrained with a 240mm, can he even focus a 300 close. It was why I thought he should shorten up in my first post

Bob

[Gem Singer]

"Darkening due to closer focus"?

If you focus wide open, then close down before making the final exposure, where does the darkening occur?

I'm not compromising here. A longer lens for head and shoulders portraiture just works better, and gives less distortion to the facial features.

Using a smaller aperture results in greater depth of field, and also helps to correct for slight movements of the subject that can result in focus errors.

There are better ways to soften facial features and remove blemishes and wrinkles for portraiture than the use of wider apertures.

The OP should not find it difficult to focus a head and shoulders portrait using a Nikkor 300M with his Zone VI (Wista) camera. It's not the type of close-up shot that requires an extra long bellows extension..

[Bob McCarthy]

You appear to be making this personal, wish you wouldn't.

I did not suggest to look for soft focus, but merely mentioned galli style lenses are an option, of course you can soften modern lenses with many methods, from filters to grease on a uv.

I currently use a Fuji 240 f/9 and when close focusing (yes I'm focusing wide open) the GG can get dark and difficult to perfectly focus. A 5.6 plasmat of same FL is a breeze.

Sometimes the subject sings when shooting wide, I usually don't, but see many who search for old brass lenses to get a fast aperture. It has it's place.

A 300mm may give you the look you want, but I was answering the original post where a 240mm won't focus close. I'm betting a 300 is unusable on his camera for this purpose.

Bob

[Adamphotoman]

I used a 305mm G Claron for a lot of work. Also a 360 Apo Ronar. The way I approached the problem was to mount the lenses into a box-type of (extension Tube) which in turn was attached to the camera. This gave me the extra bellows length that I needed. The lighter Apo Ronar won't stress the clips which hold the lens board in place. A very heavy lens will stress the clips.

[Armin Seeholzer]

I still recomand a Tele like the Rotelar 270mm or the Schneider Tele Xenar 270mm they are for short bellows and sharp and not heavy!

Cheers Armin

[Reinhold Schable]

Large format portraiture is not easy as most of us know. If "easy" was the most important, 35mm digi-snappers would be revered as having the true faith.

Me, I tend toward taking the "bed of nails approach"...

Try the Wollaston Meniscus soft portrait lens in longer lengths. Now -there's- the test of your ability to keep the sitter in the same place as you (sort of) last focused. One sitter drove me to frustration because she would nod her head at everyting I said. "Ok, now ...hold really still..." and she would nod her head...

If anyone would like to join the party, I'm making a line of Wollistons in 190, 250, 285, and 310mm focal lengths.

See here...
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=78594
And here...
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum44/93999-photagraphys-first-lens-wollaston-meniscus.html

Reinhold

www.classicBWphoto.com

[John Berry]

8 1/2" Ektar small, tessar, and and does the trick. I like the 300 better for the shot like singer but doesn't fit the OP like bob said.