PDA

View Full Version : Cooke XVa?



Donald Hutton
3-Jul-2005, 17:08
Does anyone own one of these? Apart from the limited review on Clive Russ' website, I have been unable to find any user experience. I am considering one as a "do it all" lens for 8X10 (two samples with one shutter, so that I can have the complete range). Any thoughts?

Gregory Owens
3-Jul-2005, 18:08
Don,

I received mine in November, #019, and I love it! Very sharp and contrast is excellent. It is considerably better than my Turner-Reich, but that was to be expected:^). The only problem I have with it is remembering to make sure the aperture ring is correctly positioned for the focal length I am shooting, and that is usually when I am in a hurry. Rumor has it that they will be coming out with a 4x5 version, I will be getting one of those also. Email me if you want any particulars.

Cheers

Greg

George Stewart
3-Jul-2005, 18:38
I just received #52, and although I haven't shot with it yet, 6x groundglass views indicate excellent quality - price now up to $2500 for the optics only. I think that I'll add a 210 Angulon to the package for an ultra-portable (if one can say 8x10 is portable) travel package. I'll also be getting the 4x5 version if it becomes available.

Tony Lakin
4-Jul-2005, 09:22
Hi Don
I have recently taken delivery of a Cooke XVa and am delighted with its performance, resolution and evenness of illumination are excellent with all focal length combinations and therefore would thoroughly recommend it.

Best wishes

Tony

Michael Whiting
22-Nov-2005, 18:09
Hi: I have owned one for a while now and I can echo all the comments. It is remarkably sharp and contrasty wide open. All 3 focal lengths cover my Canham 7x17 back, too. I haven't developed the negatives yet, but the image on the gg looked good. I bought the screw-on element caps that S.K. Grimes makes and they are a great idea. It makes putting down one of the elements a much less stressful action. This lens, combines with my 24cm Dagor a great combo. My Dagor is in barrel, but it screws directly into the front of a Copal #3 shutter. So I have one shutter and 4 focal lengths in my 8x10 outfit.

Right now, I have a lot of fixed focal length 8x10 lenses sitting around gathering dust as a result of purchasing this lens.

-Mike

e
22-Nov-2005, 19:36
Mike, I would especially like to know how this lens performs with your 7x17 in the corners at infinity as I'm sure other forum members would. Emile

Walt Calahan
22-Nov-2005, 20:00
Love this lens. Got #065 in August.

Getting great negatives on 8x10.

Michael Whiting
22-Nov-2005, 21:49
Hi Emile:

Yes, I would like to know to<g>. The negatives are still in the holders and my darkroom is as yet still unpacked. I just moved into a new place. As soon as I know, I'll post the info. The image looke fine on the gg, but the real proof will be the negative.

Take care.

-Mike

John Kasaian
22-Nov-2005, 23:17
Don,

Jim Galli has an original in a Betax. I think he posted some of his photos that he'd taken with it on the APUG forum. Wonderful photos! I wonder if the ghost of AA had anything to do with it?

Rhondal McKinney
9-Dec-2005, 18:19
Does anyone know of any comparison testing of the Cooke XVa lens compared to the latest Schneider or Rodenstock? I can only find glowing testimonials from people who have purchased the lens or in marketing literature. I use an old Caltar II-N 300mm lens and am sometimes disappointed when the sun is just outside the image circle. I shade very carefully with a Lee compendium shade. I sometimes wonder if the lens performance could be an issue (coating, for example.) I would consider spending the money for one of the Cooke XVa lenses if it is actually better than a 300mm Apo Symmar or the Apo Sironar-S (which costs about the same as the Cooke, in fact.) Are there any side by side tests by objective reviewers?

John Kasaian
9-Dec-2005, 20:31
I didn't know Schneider and Rodenstock were still making triple convertibles.

Asher Kelman
6-Oct-2007, 23:52
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
24-Feb-2010, 19:45
It must be a bad lens since no one has posted any pictures taken with it .

Blumine
24-Feb-2010, 20:20
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
24-Feb-2010, 21:42
Thank's Bluemine ! Finally we will get to see some shots with this lens after God knows how many years ...

fuegocito
25-Feb-2010, 10:39
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
25-Feb-2010, 11:13
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
25-Feb-2010, 14:50
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. :D

fuegocito
25-Feb-2010, 17:57
Robert,
It should be XV not the XVa, XVa is the newer one. :D

Oh right, never mind...:p

Rob

djmoonlight
2-Mar-2010, 07:32
I also have #019, and the contrast is excellent.

Diane Maher
2-Mar-2010, 10:06
Sorry, but I haven't had the time to develop my first images made with the lens. :( Been too busy during the day and too tired at night.

r.e.
2-Mar-2010, 10:23
What is the difference between the Cooke XVa that was being discussed in this thread five years ago and the XVa that Cooke has apparently been shipping only since last fall: http://www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/products/xva.html?

Robert Hughes
2-Mar-2010, 10:26
Uh... five years?

r.e.
2-Mar-2010, 10:39
Uh... five years?

On my screen, the first post in this thread was made on July 3, 2005.

IanG
2-Mar-2010, 10:53
As Robert says 5 years, and this is a new production run.

Ian

r.e.
2-Mar-2010, 10:55
Ah, got it. I read the Cooke web site as saying that this was a new product:


We are in production and first deliveries of Cooke XVa lenses will be Fall 2009.

The same classic lines, format and focal length combinations as the original Cooke Series XV lens. Cooke's redesign of this still popular classic maintains the favorite characteristics of the original lens while incorporating new features requested by contemporary photographers:...

Retail appears to be $2550, presumably without a shutter. Anyone know what a Copal 3 sells for?

it would indeed be interesting to see some photographs made with this lens.

ederphoto
2-Mar-2010, 12:05
I've been waiting to see some pics too for a long time .This is either a bad lens for black and white due to coating or has to be something else ,or nobody here has one !

CarstenW
2-Mar-2010, 12:57
IIRC Jack Flesher had one, and liked it well enough. I don't think he hangs around here any more, since he sold his LF stuff and bought a Mamiya/Phase setup, but you could ask him on his own forum:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=22

Oren Grad
2-Mar-2010, 13:17
Scroll down on this page:

http://www.cliveruss.com/cooke/cookexva/cooke%20xvaproto/cookexva.html

Pfeiffer Duckett
2-Mar-2010, 16:57
Scroll down on this page:

http://www.cliveruss.com/cooke/cookexva/cooke%20xvaproto/cookexva.html

I always thought that page was funny.

Ni-Invisible Glass!

r.e.
2-Mar-2010, 17:12
If the regard in which Cooke's cinema lenses are held is anything to go by, it is probably a superb optic.

Do I understand correctly that it costs $5,100 to get all three focal lengths plus the cost of buying a Copal 3 shutter and getting it mounted?

It's kind of odd that Cooke doesn't put images made with this lens up on its web site. Are they taking their cue from M. Vogt :)?

Oren Grad
2-Mar-2010, 17:27
Do I understand correctly that it costs $5,100 to get all three focal lengths plus the cost of buying a Copal 3 shutter and getting it mounted?

No. The three focal lengths are obtained by choosing one, the other or both cells. If you buy two sets you can actually have five possibilities, not three.

See more info and pricing here:

https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=3034

r.e.
2-Mar-2010, 17:39
As anyone who reads American Cinematographer knows, Cooke has a great reputation for its cinema lenses. The price of this lens, if it is $2550 plus shutter for the three focal lengths, and assuming both that one has a use for those focal lengths and that the lens is as well-made as their ciné lenses, strikes me as perfectly reasonable.

Some time after the 4x5 lens came out, I spoke with the woman who owns Cooke at the New York photo show. I asked her whether she had any prints that she could show me, or send to me on the basis that they would be returned. She didn't have anything, although with that lens Cooke at least had some images up on its web site. The discussion did kind of remind me of the conversation that I had at the same show with Phillipe Vogt. Anyway, I'm inclined to send Cooke an e-mail and try again, this time with reference to the XVa.

If anyone knows where in New York or London I might see prints of photographs made with this lens, I'd be obliged. I'll be in both cities in the coming months.

Frank Petronio
2-Mar-2010, 17:57
Getting a second Cooke to obtain the two intermediate focal lengths only 38 and 57mm from 311mm is pretty expensive. The basic three focal lengths for $3K is kind of steep in its own right but not out of line compared to buying any other 8x10 lens new.

r.e.
2-Mar-2010, 18:26
Frank, your heads up on the appearance on the market of one of the 8x10 cameras is responsible for the fact that I'm on the hunt for lenses that cover 8x10 in the first place. Still not sure whether to curse or thank you :)

Seeing as how you have an interest in web stuff, have a look at the thread that was just started on a Livebooks implementation. Pretty slick.

Diane Maher
2-Mar-2010, 21:25
If the regard in which Cooke's cinema lenses are held is anything to go by, it is probably a superb optic.

Do I understand correctly that it costs $5,100 to get all three focal lengths plus the cost of buying a Copal 3 shutter and getting it mounted?

It's kind of odd that Cooke doesn't put images made with this lens up on its web site. Are they taking their cue from M. Vogt :)?

Keep in mind that there is also the difference in exchange rates, which will make the price a little steeper.