That sounds like my big Fuji 300mm. I guess it's an L. Mounted with a lensboard I don't think I paid much more then $300 from MPEX for it.
That sounds like my big Fuji 300mm. I guess it's an L. Mounted with a lensboard I don't think I paid much more then $300 from MPEX for it.
I had a 300mm f:4.5 Xenar in use until a while ago. It was in a massive Compound #5 shutter, and weighed so much that I sold it along with the 5x7" Technika I used it on. That's the beast I'm holding in my avatar picture...
If you don't mind me asking how much you sold the combo for? I picked up one of the 300mm lenses not to long ago and considering it for a much smaller lens for 8x10 on my newly purchased Kodak 2D.Originally Posted by Ole Tjugen
Not certain a transaction that occurred over six years ago is going to be relevant to your current interests...
The date of the reply is given in the left hand side of the header.
This is simply not completely true (depends on the specific lens in question) based on my collection of Schneider Xenars from 105mm to 480mm.
Stopped down to f16 / f22, they will equal the majority of modern lenses and they have better tonality than a modern Plasmat, better out of focus rendition at full aperture.
Xenars are very fine lenses and are often neglected due to their wide availability and perceived problem of small image circle. Excessively large image circle for a given format will result in more stray light inside the bellows causing flare and lower image contrast.
The modern plasmat came into being due to optics manufactures need to consolidate their offerings and giving LF image makers a different look (hard edged, high contrast, less than pleasant out of focus rendition, less than pleasant overall tonality IMO ) that was fashionable at that time. They are no worst or better than vintage optics, they are just a different set of trade offs driven by marketing and technology. And no, newer is not always better.
The 300mm Xenar appeared in f4.5 and f5.6 in a Copal shutter. Image circle is 360mm at f22. 8x10 requires a definition specified image circle of 312mm.
I'll post an image circle chart from the Linhoff LF book which list this Xenar and a number of other lenses from that time in a separate post.
Bernice
Well, its more of a reference. I can deduce cost from it, in modern US monopoly money from it
What I'd really like to know, is what shutter I should be looking for, for this beast. Packard is a bit sloppy on timing since I can't shoot at like f128 on this guy for >5s exposures that can be like T/B modes with the shutter. Any help on both points would be greatly appreciated.
If I could remember, I could tell you. But I can't, so I can't!
On the other hand I do remember that I sold it more or less locally - so the transaction was in norwegian Kroner. The official exchange rate is correct, but the real value of money is a different matter.
There were even faster Xenars before WWII: f/2.9 (35 - 105mm) and f/3.5 (35 - 300mm, I've got 240mm).
Buffalonian,
These lenses were also found residing in the older style Ilex #5 shutters (black with chrome ring).
I have a Schneider 270mm Xenar in a compound shutter. It's ancient, probably dating back to the 30's. I believe it's designed to cover 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 (i.e., full plate). I use it on an 8x10 and it covers well in that it doesn't vignette. It does show signs of softness in focus in the corners sometimes. I like it because it gives the same proportion as a 135mm Optar that I have on my Super Graphic 4x5. I've used these two cameras more than any other large format cameras I own. It's gotten so I naturaly see the world in that perspective for most of my photography.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks