[rollei_list] Re: Thanks Richard! (was: recoating and polishing the Xenotar lens)
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:55:09 -0700
Is the design of the Xenar that much different that it would be
referred to as a individual design? I thought it was a Tessar copy?
As to the Xenotar, in the 50s and 60s, it was considered the ugly
stepchild, now we say otherwise. I have had Xenotar and they were good
but personally I think the Planar delivered slightly better results
especially at the corners. Perhaps this is perception on my part, but
this is what I see from numerous transparencies I have taken over the
last dozen years.
Peter K
> On Tuesday, April 12, 2005, at 04:06 AM, Richard Knoppow wrote (edited):
> The Xenar is a Tessar _type_ lens but is an individual design.
> Actually, both Zeiss and Schneider made several versions of these
> lenses over their lifetimes.
> The f/2.8 Xenotar seems to be an exceptionally lens. I judge this
> because it reproduces textures in a way typical of very good lenses on
> a larger format. Also, this very fine detail holds up under
> magnification so its not an illusion of some sort.
Other related posts:
