Hello I own the following lenses and mainly make B&W landscape photographs with a Sinar 4x5 and Linhof Technika 5x7. Zeiss Biogon f/4.5 - 75 mm with Synchro Compur #4118376 Schneider Super Angulon F/8 - 120 mm with Copal 0 # 13504347 Schneider Technika Super Angulon f/8 - 121 mm with Synchro Compur # 10588630 Schneider Symmar-S f/5.6 - 150 mm MC with Copal 0 # 13751238 Schneider Symmar-S f/5.6 - 210 mm MC with Copal 1 # 13776050 Schneider Technika Symmar f/5.6 - 240 mm f/12 - 420 mm with Linhof Compur # 10788397 Schneider Technika Tele Arton f/5.5 - 360 mm with Compur 3 # 10795387 Any experiences, performance tests and info with these lenses will be most appreciated. Bulent Ozgoren bozgoren@veezy.com 25 January 2002

-- bulent ozgoren (bozgoren@veezy.com), January 25, 2002

Answers

None of these lenses is actually very good. They were high priced and probably okay when new, but have all been superceeded by later models, most with multi-coating. I am sorry you are stuck with these elderly pieces of glass, and even more sorry that you chose to flaunt it before the readers of this forum. Why don't you get rid of them and buy newer stuff. Ps, you forgot to mention your Mercedes and Rolex.

-- (bmitch@home.com), January 25, 2002.

So, Mitch, you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something? Your response to the posting is unhelpful and positively hurtful. Did the guy posting the inquiry do something to you?

To All: Isn't there some general principle on this list that we try to mind our manners to some minimal extent? -jeff buckels (albuquerque)

-- jeff buckels (jeffbuck@swcp.com), January 25, 2002.

yeah man, you accidentally put an "m" in your email address - what gives?

-- tim atherton (tim@kairosphoto.com), January 25, 2002.

I stand corrected, and apologize to anyone I offended with the post. Perhaps my original impression of "one good troll deserves another" did not apply. At any rate, I shall try to avoid posting on this Forum again.

-- (bmitch@home.com), January 25, 2002.

I thought I saw bmitch's tongue firmly implanted in his cheek. Perhaps I was mistaken.

-- Charlie Strack (charlie_strack@sti.com), January 25, 2002.

Well, all the nonsense aside...I am not sure what the original poster is asking. There's not a dud in the bunch of lenses you mention although some are more highly regarded than others. If you are using all these lenses than you can certainly make your own judgement of quality. Do you just want us to say yes they are good lenses or is there a point?

-- Dave Schneider (dschneider@arjaynet.com), January 25, 2002.

Why the serial numbers??? Go out & use the lenses to take photographs and then decide whether or not they work for you.

-- Dan Smith (shooter@brigham.net), January 25, 2002.

Bulent Ozgoren ?

Well I suppose that could actually be the posters name. But with a line-up like that, it sounds more like somebody pulling Tribs' chain - ya know - cameras as male jewelry.

Meanwhile, I'm getting tired of cleaning the Pirelli's on my Lamboghini, I wonder if I should switch to Yokohama's when I drive to down Rodeo and save the Pirelli's for special occasions?

-- moe (moe@cynic.com), January 25, 2002.

Puleez! What would a famous Turkish photographer be doing on this board? Your English is excellent by the way. Or are you Bulent Ozgoren who finished third in the 1998 Beko/Conrad International Pro-Am Golf Tournament? Who are you really?

BTW the following sites have some info for you.

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/compare.html

http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/lflenses.html

Good luck.

-- Wayne DeWitt (wdewitt@snip.net), January 25, 2002.

What in the world is going on here? -jeff buckels

-- jeff buckels (jeffbuck@swcp.com), January 25, 2002.

My 5th grade students know that their teacher loves LF photography. And for better or worse, I think we as LF'ers have alot in common (personality wise).

So, after reading a number of replies to bogus posts such as this one, I thought of a new way to conceptualize algebra for them with this formula:

Large Format Photographer = "Nice Guy" = Sucker

-- Andre Noble (andrenoble@worldnet.att.net), January 25, 2002.

You have the same lenses on which I've standardized, and I think you have some very nice optics. Why have the both the 120 SA and the 121 SA, when the former is multi-coated. (Is the former MC?) The Symmar-S lenses are excellent. As for the tele's, they will never be as good as the Symmar-S lenses, but they have their reasons to exist. I'd probably sell the 240mm convertible and get a G-Claron.

As to whether or not to get new lenses, it depends. I'm an enthusiast, so I like the Symmar-S lenses because of their excellent quality, and also because of their reasonable cost. I spoke to a Schneider LF technician (Robert) and was told that, under most conditions, it's difficult to see a difference in photographs between the single versus the multi-coated versions of the Symmar-S. The MC on these lenses does more to filter UF and IR than to reduce flare. Note that the Caltar S-II lenses are Symmar-S lenses in disguise, and are especially reasonable in price.

If I were a professional, I'd probably upgrade to new optics. There is a perceptible difference between the Symmar-S lenses and the Apo-Symmars. But, think of the expense!

-- neil poulsen (neil.fg@att.net), January 26, 2002.

I think some of you guys are so experienced that you really can't understand some of the questions that people like me ask when we are in our 1 or second year of serious LF effort, as a hobby.

I don't know for sure, but if I had asked that question, I would have been asking: " I am in a suitation where I have all these lenses, and have the ability to move closer or furthar back for the shot I want. Which lens should I use?"

To my mind, the 75mm is the best and sharpest lens he has. Especially at the wider F stops.(the market seems to agree with that.) Also according to an answer I got from Zeiss, it doesn't suffer much from not having a "T" coating. I also find that it really doesn't need a center filter. With the short focal lenght he will get the most depth of field. However, he probably doesn't have a lot of 100mm dia filters. Also the 75 doesn't have the coverage that the Super Angulon has so for some scenes where he uses a lot of movement, he may need to use that.

Neal

-- Neal Shields (shields@ftw.com), January 26, 2002.

okay,

it's not very nice to talk trash on someone when they're not around....

ya queers, and with love,

trib

p.s. ya call that a troll? I mean the eejit ain't eeben got any warts!

-- tribby (linhof6@hotmail.com), January 26, 2002.

Just a note to the under-experienced and ethnocentric among us, Bülent Ozgoren is a normal, run-of-the-mill Turkish name, and NOT a joke of any sort. I suppose I would have found it strange before I moved to Europe, where the society is significantly more polyglot than in the good old isolated US of A. Those who follow foreign affairs will note that the Turkish Prime Minister (or President, I'm not sure now) has Bülent for a first name. Let's try and be helpful to the non-native English speakers on this forum, and try to give them the benefit of the huge amount of information on LF that is available here and possibly not in their location.

Bülent, There are a number of sites with lens comparisons and listings which will give you specifications and opinions about the various lenses you have (which are quite a few!). Try looking at the lists on the Large Format Home Page first. Kerry Thalmans page also has a lot of information as well as the home pages of the various manufacturers. Schneider's site is particularly rich in info compared to others and you can date your lenses by serial number. Searches on large-format lenses and brand names should find you loads of info. Hope this helps, ;^D)

-- Doremus Scudder (ScudderLandreth@compuserve.com), January 26, 2002.

Doremus - My response was a tongue-in-cheek slap at those who are so Eurocentrically-blinded that unless your name is Dan Smith you're suspect (no offense to Dan Smith). Wait until someone named Osama or Mohammed posts, then you'll really see the twits fall all over themselves.

-- Wayne DeWitt (wdewitt@snip.net), January 26, 2002.

Gentlemen Thank you all for sharing your opinions with me. I have simply asked If someone knew anything about these lenses that would be helpfull. I was nat able to obtain any data about them on the net. Hi Wayne, you are right on spot.Kind regards to you all and send me a mail if you ever plan to travel to Istanbul Bülent özgören bozgoren@veezy.com 27 January 2002

-- bulent ozgoren (bozgoren@veezy.com), January 26, 2002.

Yep, with a last name like Smith in the USA you get funny looks & comments every time you check into a motel...

Maybe I should change it to Ansel Caponigro Weston?

-- Dan Smith (shooter@brigham.net), January 26, 2002.

Hello Bulent;

Now that the others have stopped posting here are a few more links:

The Biogon is mentioned in the following sites:

http://www.archiphoto.com/personal%20pages/LFlenses.html

http://www.lensrepro.com/USED/used-lgf.htm

The Arton and others are mentioned in these:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_len ses/tele-arton/

http://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html

You'll have to forgive some of the others - we've had "trolls" drop by from time to time (a Triblett Lunger-Turd III or some such blather pops to mind) and your command of the English language just threw them. Are any of your images online at this time? Happy shooting.

-- Wayne DeWitt (wdewitt@snip.net), January 26, 2002.

Hello Wayne Thank you for your contribution and consideration. I will visit the sites you've mentioned in your post. I hope you always get the lights of your dreams. Bülent Özgören

-- bulent ozgoren (bozgoren@veezy.com), January 27, 2002.

Bulent,

I hope you received my e-mail about the history and statisics of the 75mm Biogon. Your lens set up is fine indeed! I don't think it is UNUSUAL to have that many lenses, especially if photography is also a hobby and you happen to be a collector. None of these lenses are "dated" even without multicoating. Unless you are shooting into the sun, your results should be fine. Please ignore the rudeness of the first responder....as a wise friend once told me: "Jealousy is such a sin in a grown man"

J. P. Mose

-- J. P. Mose (j.p.mose@lmco.com), January 28, 2002.

I have make a millon $$$ off of using one lens, A 90 something or another, shooting Architecture. The sharpness of this lens allows me to get down and dirty with my subject matter while this lens keeps me looking professional and my clients coming back for more(I'm talking about my trannies man!)....This is a round about way of saying that it is a mystery to me that you have a very nice selection of lenses but you have left out the most important lens. I'll share my reasoning w/you. If you shooting Wide on 4x5 one must be careful not to crowd the image. Many of my architects will hold their hands streched out about 3 feet from each other and say can we get all this in the shot. My reply uasually goes like this " Yes! But lets maintain the integrity of what you have designed by concentrating on one area at a time. Lets pull the eye into the shot not confuse it. If a lens is to wide you are loading up the image and you focal area becomes diluted, sorta like my overly wordy paragraphs.... In the early 80s I bought this one lens with the Idea of getting down to the bussines of photography. Close your eyes, pick up one lens and go have some fun......

-- John Forrest Grunke (johngrunke@msn.com), February 01, 2002.

Bulent,

I am afraid I can offer no expert advice on your lenses...I'm only using a 35 mm and 6x6 at the moment but I really do want to get into large format .... would you like that I may test your gear for you? I'll pay the postage to Oz....please?

Stephen

-- Stephen Thomson (sdthomson@optushome.com.au), February 28, 2002.