Largely because I had an empty afternoon, I took pictures of a large pumpkin with both a Tessar and a Planar, the first on a Rollei T and the second on a Rollei GX. In both cases, Rollei #2 power close up lenses were used to get the subject about 15 incxhes away. Exposure in both cases was at f/16 but I found comparabile results using f/8. Film was Tmax 400 developed in dilution H of HC-110. Both negatives were enlarged on a Kodak Precision enlarger with an Aristo cold light head and with a 63mm Nikor f/2.8, which vignettes slightly at the corners buts covers most of the negative and provides for very great magnification. . The full enlargement size would be three feet by five feet, but these 8x10 images represent and central portion of the pumpkin, showing the stem. -- As you can see, the Tessar is amazingly good but even with the lens closed down, it will not provide the same sharpness or resolution as the Planar. At other f/ stops, the results were predictable. The Tessar from f/8 was very good through f/16. The Planar was really good from f/4 through f/16. At all f/ stops, the Planar was superior to the Tessar. Wide open, the Planar was good but depth of field was so very shallow, that other than at a very limited area of sharpness, there was blur. I can not imagine making such large magnifications in real life. I was not surprised that the Planar was as good as it performed but that the Tessar was really able to hold its own. I can not imagine that one would find the Tessar wanting under normal circumstances, certainly up to 20x26 inch prints. Certainly, when closed down, a good coated Tessar is quite good. Given these results, I do not see how anyone could possibly see much difference between Planars and Xenotars. At individual lens openings, perhaps there might be some small difference, but this is bound to be subject to the differences between individual cameras, degree of focus accuracy. Considering, additionally, that these images were produced not with a negative scanner but with a canon scanner using 8x10 inch prints, the initial quality of the images is even more impresive. I think these informal tests very clearly demonstrate how truly good Rolleis are, even those of more modest specifications. I am sorry that I did not have a rolleicord with a triotar because I thing it would interesting to see how even a more modest lens would do. Now I goota go clean bird seed husks out of my downspouts. Jerry F. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com