I noted this Xenar in a list of possible ULF lenses:
https://www.schneideroptics.com/info...4,5-420mm.html
I don't know anything else about it, but the image circle suggests it would cover 7x17.
With 120mm filters, it must be a large lens.
Keith Pitman
EdC, I need to amend my previous observations. I took the 420 L back out and tried it again. The subject was a building wall about 50ft. away and I used a significant amount of rise (~1.5") and exposed at f32. The neg looks fine. No "stretching" or other anomalies. I am afraid I mixed my notes up when trying out lenses earlier this summer and the "stretching of the image must have been some other lens. Or maybe it was the heat and humidity. I don't know but I do plan to try some other images with the 420 L and report back. I am having other issues such as leaking film holders so it may be towards the end of the year before I get them back and can shoot again. Just wanted to let you and others know that my reporting was inaccurate. Fake lens news! You got it here first.
I used both the Fuji 420 L and 16 1/2 RD Artar on my 8x20. I never had coverage issues or complaints about the images (except for my visual acuity).
Mike
“You can’t have everything. Where would you put it?”
Just for reference, my artar 16" definitely covers 717.
Bookmarks