Fuji Tele 400m f/8 vs Schneider APO-Tele-Xenar 400

[Ross Borgida]

Hello

I am currently shooting a 4x5 Shen Hao with the 90mm grandagon and 210mm g-claron lens...I am selling the grandagon as I do not have much use for the wide angle lens and am intersted in purchasing a 400mm tele lens. The Shen Hao has a 12" rail and I cannot go longer than a 300mm lens. However, with the tele lens, I can go up to 400mm and this would be ideal as I am looking for a longer lens.

Has anyone used the Fuji Tele 400m f/8 or Schneider APO-Tele-Xenar 400 f/5.6? Has anyone done any testing on resolution, sharpness, or contrast--if so, what are your findings?

Thanks in advance.

Ross

[Mike Lopez]

I use the Fuji on my Shen-Hao. I like it. I haven't done any testing of anything, but I like my results (black and white contact prints).

Mike

[Ben Crane]

I use the Fuji 400 telephoto on my Shen Hao. I have it mounted on a top hat style lens board that gives me a 4-5 cm extra extension which comes in handy for near subjects.

[KenM]

I also have the Fuji - it requires around 260mm of draw.

It's a great lens, and works very well with my Master Technika....nope, I haven't done any testing, except make good photographs with it. Very sharp, as long as you stop down to f22, which for 4x5 is pretty much normal in the landscape....

[Brian Ellis]

I too owned the Fuji and liked it. One of the nice things about it is that it's in a Copal 1 shutter, a little unusual for a 400mm lens, and is comparatively small and light. Never used a Tele Xenar so I can't compare them but I'd be surprised if it's noticeably better than the Fuji.

[Scott Davis]

My understanding with the Tele-Xenars is that they have VERY limited image circles beyond the minimum required to cover 4x5. I have a Fuji 300T, and it provides me with a substantial amount of coverage, more than enough for most things I'll shoot with a 300. I would expect the same is true with the 400T.

[Arne Croell]

"My understanding with the Tele-Xenars is that they have VERY limited image circles beyond the minimum required to cover 4x5."

The Apo-Tele-Xenar 400mm has an image circle of 250mm according to Schneiders web site, and is rated for 5x7. And Schneiders ratings tend to be conservative. The older 360mm non-Apo Tele-Xenar had a 224mm image circle.

[Ken Lee]

You can see some sample images and scan samples from the Fujinon here (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php). Scroll down around 2/3 of the page, to the section on lenses.

If filter-size is important, consider that the Fujinon takes 67mm filters. When shooting, make sure to avoid camera shake, wind, etc. It doesn't take much to ruin an image.

[Scott Atkinson]

You might also consider the Nikkor 360T. I used to use one when my primary camera was a Toyo 45AII, which had a maximum bellows extension just over 12 inches. The Nikkor also takes interchangeable rear elements, so you can convert it to a 500mm or even a 720mm...but you'd need about 14-1/2 and 19 inches extension for those two setups.

[Leonard Metcalf]

I have the Schneider Tele-Xenar 400mm and love it. Yes it is a heavy, and large lens, and often on longer bushwalks it is the first to leave my pack. I have been using it at all apetures and have found no disernable differences in sharpness, resolution etc. Though I have not done any testing. Adequate movements particularly when using rise / fall or shift. But when you start tilting the lens, you can move out of the image circle quickly. Particularly when you compare it to the image circle of the 450mm fujion compact that it replaced. When tilting a long lens the image just moves quickly due to focal length. When I first started using this heavy lens I was worried that the camera mightn't hold it still enough, but haven't found any problems (I am using it in an Ebony).

[Michael S. Briggs]

The Nikkor-T series uses ED glass, which reduces the secondary spectrum of chromatic abberation. Schneider's webpage (http://www.schneideroptics.com/photography/large_format_lenses/apo-tele-xenar_hm/)
says that the Apo-Tele-Xenar HM lenses use "special optical glass" for a "clear reduction in the secondary spectrum", which is the same. One would expect some performance improvement over lenses not using ED glass -- whether it will make a noticable difference is another question.





There is a 400 mm f5.6 Apo-Tele-Xenar and 400 mm f5.6 Apo-Tele-Xenar Compact, but both are in Copal 3 shutters, and the first weighs 1270 g and the second 916 g. The 360 mm f8 Nikkor-T ED is in a Copal 1 and weighs 800 g (http://www.europe-nikon.com/specifications.aspx?countryid=20&languageid=22&prodId=523&catId=151). VERY heavy lens, very heavy lens, heavy lens.....