Cooke XVa?

[John Kasaian]

I didn't know Schneider and Rodenstock were still making triple convertibles.

[Asher Kelman]

I didn't know Schneider and Rodenstock were still making triple convertibles.

The question is whether it is indeed an advantage to use the Cooke in conditions that would challenge the Scneider and Rodenstock due to flare!

Then one could ask about the handling of bright harsh light.

Asher

[ederphoto]

It must be a bad lens since no one has posted any pictures taken with it .

[Blumine]

I have one and I can assure you it is far from a bad lens. I love mine. Tomorrow I will find a few shots and post them.

Blumine

[ederphoto]

Thank's Bluemine ! Finally we will get to see some shots with this lens after God knows how many years ...

[fuegocito]

I once had access to an older XVa 12" mounted in a #5 shutter, it was a big sucker.

Anyway, I put it up against a Dagor, and a G-claron 12", I'll see about digging up those images later, just going from memory, I don't remember it towered over the other two, in fact, I think the Dagor resolved better. Maybe the XVa is more than just resolution.

Rob

[Steve Hamley]

What are people expecting to see?

Are you expecting an observable difference in negatives and/or prints, if so what kind of difference?

Cheers, Steve

[Songyun]

I once had access to an older XVa 12" mounted in a #5 shutter, it was a big sucker.

Anyway, I put it up against a Dagor, and a G-claron 12", I'll see about digging up those images later, just going from memory, I don't remember it towered over the other two, in fact, I think the Dagor resolved better. Maybe the XVa is more than just resolution.

Rob

Robert,
It should be XV not the XVa, XVa is the newer one.

[fuegocito]

Robert,
It should be XV not the XVa, XVa is the newer one.

Oh right, never mind...

Rob

[djmoonlight]

I also have #019, and the contrast is excellent.