Opinions on new 400 f5,6 Apo Tele Xenar vs other lensesgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
This new version of the Schneider tele lens seems really worthy of interest with it's new price, features and performances. It is very luminous and that's a good point for critical focussing. But how useful is this point in practice? My fears are about the Copal #3 shutter and the vibrations some sets of speeds can induce. I have never used a #3 shutter except an old Compur #3, a lot smaller than the Copal #3. I have read complaints from former Nikkor M 450 owners who switched to a Fujinon because it was in Copal #1 instead of #3. My camera is not very sturdy and I am not sure it will handle the 912g lens properly (Toyo VX 125). In the other hand, a 450 f12,5 Fujinon C will require a lot more extension (43 cm instead of 28,5), so the gain in weight and shutter size may be in balance with the shorter extension of the Tele-Xenar. The Tele-Xenar may moreover allow for some nice shots of vegetation or flowers with blurred background and has close-up capabilities, but this I would need very occasionally. Finally, a Nikkor T 500 f11 in Copal #1 would be a good choice to assort with the 300 mm I already have. It is interesting for it's additional focals by rear element exchange, although I find the multi-scales on the shutter sometimes hard to read. So far, the only point that would make me choose the Tele-Xenar is it's luminous aperture. But I am not sure this is a real advantage over the Nikkor T 500 for instance. Thanks for your thoughts and opinions!
-- Paul Schilliger (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 02, 2000