Re: MicroPress 4x5 question

In article <13ikncss2g3ls1a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Nicholas O. Lindan <see@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>"Max Perl" <max_perl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
>> The camera came with a Xenar 135/4.7 lens. Is this an OK performer?
>
>Variable, some are good, some not so good -- you would have to
>test and make your own decision.  Best performance will be at f22.

To emphasize what Nicholas said, the major problem with older Schneider
lenses is that their quality control was terrible until some time in the
1960s (a rough estimate of my own; Richard may know more precisely).  The
basic design is fine though in general a higher-end example of this same
design type (such as a Kodak Ektar) would probably perform better and not
cost much to acquire.

The high-end Schneider lens for press cameras was the Xenotar, but even
with those (which have a much more complex design which should offer
considerably better performance at wide apertures than the Xenar) there
is the curse of inconsistent Schneider quality control for most of the
press-camera era.  If you are in love with your press camera and want
the best lens money can buy, there is a very rare 135mm Zeiss Planar
(a few were even made with modern "T*" multicoating) that is the ne plus
ultra of press lenses, but you could literally buy twenty press cameras
on eBay for what it is likely to cost if you can find one.

-- 
  Thor Lancelot Simon	                                    
tls@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
   be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem."	      - Noam Chomsky