Exakta Xenar 50mm f2.8 and Retina-Xenar 50mm f2.8

<p>I have a Xenar 50mm f2.8 lens in Exakta mount. I noticed that the front element has a number of cleaning marks. The pictures I get are really soft wide open so I wish to have it replaced. I believe my lens was made before WW2 started so the exact same lens becomes hard to find. I am wondering if there are alternative Xenar lenses elements that I can use as a replacement, for example, the Retina-Xenar 50mm f2.8. Have the Xenar 50mm designed changed over the years?</p>

<p>I'd think the Xenar would be worth keeping for a shelf item and portrait photography, but I wonder if you wouldn't find it better for actual picture taking to find a newer Exakta-mount normal lens:<br>

<br /> Tessar<br />Xenon<br /> Pancolar <br />Biotar<br /> Even the Exakta-mount Domiplan is OK and does not much share the aperture problems that you find on the M42 versions.<br /> I have all of these, and they all are good to superb (the Biotar).</p>

<p>If your body is pre-war, then one of the (expen$ive) German vendors could supply either the orginal lens or a contemporary alternative (the Biotar was also made pre-war) if you need a period-correct one.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Schneider's inexpensive, classic Xenar asymmetrical, anastigmatic, 4-element, 3-group lens design was introduced in 1919, and is largely unchanged from the original <a title="Zeiss formula" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeiss_formula">Zeiss</a><a title="Tessar" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessar">Tessar</a> formula. They feature an angle of coverage of 60-62°. [From Wikipedia on Schneider lenses]</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A Zeiss Jena Tessar will be a very good option. They are not that expensive. A good sample will give very good sharp pictures, though the Tessar may not be as good in Bokeh formation [OOFs rendering] as the Zeiss Pancolars, the Myer Orestons and the Zeiss Biotars. Best, SP</p>

<p>I think that a Biotar might be the best classic fit if you have an older Exakta.</p>

<p>A later model Pancolar (multicoated) will give better performance and an improvement over the swirly bokeh of the Biotar. But that Biotar was a milestone in lens performance circa 1950!</p>

<p>Good Luck!</p>

<p>My Kine Exakta was also made before the war. A Biotar lens made before the war is pretty much a collector's item nowadays and therefore becomes quite expensive. I haven't seen that many around and most of them have issues due to their age. It will be great if I can get one for my Kine but I always think twice due to its price. I have tried the later Biotars made in East Germany. They are quite good at producing nice swirly backgrounds.<br>

I am just wondering if I can somehow repair the Xenar with a compatible front element so that the lens can be used when it is not displayed on the shelf.</p>

<p>First, you have to make sure that the parts donor has the same design as the damaged lens. This is sometimes hard to determine. The Tessar designs have been changed several times pre-war and also post-war to different specs in west and east Germany. <br>

Second, if you swap an element of a lens, it probably has to be readjusted. There are always minor tolerances in lens elements. Some manufacturers even match their elements to get best performance. Maybe that the lens with the swapped element (if this is possible at all, see above) will not perform exactly as it should even if it is recalibrated. </p>

 

<p>Except for the serial numbers, some of the immediate post-war Biotars are otherwise pretty much identical to the pre-war ones. As you say, the price of historical correctness is very high.</p>

<p>Here is one- alas badly scratched and in M40 (Praktiflex) mount (<a href="/classic-cameras-forum/00b9KG">link</a>):</p><div></div>

<p>Looking at prices for the DKL Retina Reflex mount lenses, it might be worth it to pick one up and see. They're ~$50-$60 on the big e auction site. If it doesn't look doable, you can always just sell it back.</p>

<p>Mr. Lee</p>

<p>I have both the 50mm f1.9 Retina-Xenon and the 50mm f2.8 Retina-Xenar in DKL mount. Both are probably only single coated (early 1960s) but quite sharp. The 50mm f1.9 at F:1.9 is a little sharper than the 50mm f2.8 at F:2.8. The 50mm f1.9 is a even more sharp at F:2.8. Around F:8 to F:16 both are excellent and not too far apart in resolution. </p>

<p>I also have the 45mm f2.8 Retina-Xenar which came as the standard lens on Retina’s 126 Instamatic outfitted SLR. It is sharper than the 50mm f2.8 but not quite up to the 50mm f1.9. Although supposedly designed for the smaller diameter 126 film exposure (39.82mm vs 43.27mm) it seems to cover the standard 35mm quite well and is a smaller lens like the 50mm f2.8. </p>

<p>Ya’ pays ya’ money and ya’ takes ya’ chance. </p>

<p>A. T. Burke </p>

<p>I would just look for a decent pre-war Tessar and leave the Xenar be. They are relatively common, not nearly as sought after as the Biotar and usually don't go for much more than a postwar version. Plus they render very nicely.</p>