Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,940   Posts: 1,557,505   Online: 987
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Fastest lens?

  1. #31
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,331
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by thafred View Post
    thanks for explaining Ian, I didn´t know that Tessars were single coated at Zeiss even in 2000! very interesting
    sweet deal you made btw :-)
    The Xenar's are Schneider, not Zeiss

    The 135mm Tessar covers 5x4 but with a drop in edge/corner sharpness until f22, they were often fitted to US 5x4 Press cameras. They were more commonly fitted as standards on 9x12 cameras, but they shouldn't vignette on 5x4, I have two, and there's room for movements. The 150mm Tessar covers 5x4 far better, and the 165mm will cover perfectly with no corner /edge sharpness.

    I have 135mm, 150mm & 165mm Tessar's, (more for 35mm etc), it's interesting that these lenses are what all other's used to be compared to.

    Ian

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    5
    Ian, offcourse it´s schneider! sorry for the mistake, it was very late for me yesterday so my brain must have been in sleep mode allready.

    you´re talking about the 135mm f4.5 Xenar? Do you think the 135mm f3.5 has the same covering even if it´s a reverse Tessar type like the 150mm f3.5 Xenar? (I thought the reverse Tessars were limited in covering compared to the usual design) ... I´ve seen that my 150 f3.5 doesn´t cover 4x5 as well as my 150 f4.5 Xenar at the same f-stop but maybe I saw an artifact or user error!

  3. #33
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,331
    Images
    148
    You'd need Ole or Dan Fromm to tell you about the design. The catalogue does say the 135 f3.5 Tessar lens will cove 9x12cm, and 5x4 is only a little bit larger.

    I guess I'm agreeing with you though, my 135mm Tessars don't really cover 5x4 that well until f22, but when they were made photographers in Europe didn't make particularly large enlargements. My 150mm f4.5 50's Tessar and modern Xenar cover far better because of their much larger image circles.

    Ian

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    396
    Quote Originally Posted by thafred View Post
    I have the mentioned tessar 165mm f2.7 on my anniversary Graflex and thought of it as I read your post. on my flickr I have a few snapshots with it, you can see if you like it´s signature.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/5749381...essar165mmf27/

    I have one picture with the 150 3.5 xenar too: http://www.flickr.com/photos/57493810@N00/2600355264/

    all snapshots, handheld using the graflex rangefinder. lens was wide open.

    best
    fred
    Lovely out of focus areas, almost swirly. Hmm, another lens to start searching for. (I better get me a Graflex too...)

    //Björn

  5. #35
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Only the "Typ D" f:3.5 Xenars are reverse Tessars. The others are "normal" - and so are many "Typ D's" too, it would seem? All I'm certain of is that mine is a Typ D, and it's a reverse Tessar...
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin