I have been looking into lens's that cover 8x10 and I keep coming across these affordable convertible lens's. Many of which are made by schneider. Does anyone have any experience with these types? Especially the 240/420? f5.6 schneider or 300/500? I see them selling for only 400 bucks!

-- mando morlos (morl0853@students.sou.edu), November 29, 2000

Answers

I've had a couple of the convertible Schneider lenses including the 360/620mm. Rule of thumb, buy the lens for the "standard" length, ie. the 360mm and if the "convertible" length (ie. 620mm) proves to be to your liking as well, in terms of sharpness and contrast, consider it a bonus. I've found the "standard" focal length, (with both elements in place) to be very good, but the converted length was always used "in a pinch".

The second focal length is achieved by removing the FRONT element, so that the shutter is revealed in front of the rear element.

-- William Levitt (light-zone@operamail.com), November 29, 2000.

I agree about the Schnieders. I have one that I use for 4x5 primarily as a prime lens, and occasionally converted. It works o.k. as a long lens for black and white if you use a yellow filter and stop down. Watch for focus shift as you stop down. There were some of the older lenses for 8x10 which were quite good stopped down. The Cooke triple convertable that Ansel Adams used to make "Aspens" and "Moonrise" were good as were the Double Protars. The older lenses had as many as 8 or 10 elements when used at the prime focal length, converting into four or five single cell longer lenses. For 8x10 contacts, most any of them can be plenty good.

Regards,

-- Doug Paramore (dougmary@alaweb.com), November 29, 2000.

I don't think the 240/420 option will cover 10x8, in fact I'm sure it won't. The convertible Symmars don't give a very big increase in usable image circle when converted, and the image quality in the converted state is less than average. Unconverted, they're excellent lenses.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), November 30, 2000.

In regard to the previous reply: Isn't a 240 a natural moderate wide angle for 8X10?

-- David Grandy (dgrandy@accesscable.net), November 30, 2000.

Yep, but doesn't not mean that it will cover.

-- sheldon hambrick (sheldon_hambrick@hotmail.com), November 30, 2000.

...sorry for the double negative...

-- sheldon hambrick (sheldon_hambrick@hotmail.com), November 30, 2000.