"Peter" wrote in message
...
On Sep 7, 9:59 pm, "LGLA" wrote:
"Peter" wrote in message

...
On Sep 6, 10:19 am, "LGLA" wrote:

....

Thanks this Xenar was manufactured between 1968 and 1970, probably 1969,
seeing the serial and their chart. This lens I have just attained is in excellent
condition glass-wise. NOW it feels better to me, from your statement.

... Testing is still a worthwhile investment.

Yes, the seller says this particular lens has a tested image circle of 195mil, and he has
used it on an 8x10 Deardorff. And that it was his favorite on the 4x5, because of the
sharpness and contrast. And that he's been shooting LF for 45+ years.

You mean "angle of View at f/16"? Would that be the angle of light-cone
projected at the film? Which would create an image circle of 180mm OD?
Or is the 'angle of view' how the lens sees the subject compared to wide
angle and telephoto?

I mean the angle of view as seen from the 'center' of the lens. It is
not a comparison with other lenses; it is a property of the lens.

OK so as much angle as goes into the front of the lens, it's center.

Strange they mention this lens to be recommended for medium format,
when that image circle of 180mil = 7.08661417322835 inches, two inches
beyond five inches of film. I should think that would be plenty for nominal
4x5 shooting!

Schneider has over the last 50+ years sometimes touted the wonderful
possibilities that their lenses might provide and sometimes taken a
more cautious view. In fairness both the market and the management
changes over such intervals. The current approach seems to be a
little conservative and somewhat technical.

Plenty is not quite the right word. Adequate might be a better
adjective. As noted elsewhere it is enough for small corrections when
focused at infinity. For copy work, it is a bit more generous.

As I learned in another post/reply in this thread.

The corresponding claim for the Symmar of a similar age is 70
degrees. My experience with older Symmars is that some of them
'cover' (i.e., illuminate, with poorer quality) even more than that;
this property can be useful, sometimes. If memory serves faithfully,
I think Schneider at one time or another has actually claimed a little
more as the coverage of the older Symmars, but not recently.

Seems pretty evidentt hat little changes for corrections are made in
design-to-production with little mention. I think I read the Caltar II-E has
a slightly larger image circle than the Rod. Geronar.

Broadly, a good 150 mm. Symmar should cover an image circle of about
180 mm. in diameter...

"Should" - but that is the same that is stated for the Xenar 150mil.!

Oops! I meant to type Xenar, not Symmar in that place. A Symmar will
cover a little over 200 mm and optimistically 210 to 215mm.


...and some might provide 60 line pairs/mm. over much

of that field if your demand for contrast is reasonable. If it
doesn't do better than 40 (especially in the center) either re-
consider your test method or throw it back.

Right-on, thanks much for the reply indeed. But I was asking about image
qualities by experience, which I now know I should have mentioned. My
apologies for not.

Regards, Large_Alex

Sorry for the confusing typo!

And thanks for the reply.