M42 Schneider-Kreuznach Xenar 105mm F3.5

<p>I asked a while back on which camera this lens was used since I can not find it in the pdf archives at Schneider or the internet? Anybody knows, I will soon use it again on a city stroll in Zurich :-)<br>

look here for photos please: http://www.photo.net/pentax-camera-forum/00R6qq</p>

<div></div>

<p>It looks nicely made. If we take the M42 mount as a clue and assume your lens was for 35mm then the likely candidate cameras of that time (1960's? is there a serial number?) with M42 mounts are Zenit, Practika and Pentax. But there were several others and I imagine Schneider made the lens with a view to selling it to any of them.</p>

<p>Markus,<br>

I looked at the photos you took w/ this lens, and it makes photos just like you would expect from a Xenar. Sharp, and very nice. Great lens. I prefer something faster for portraits, but your lens looks great for walk abouts, and probably takes great portraits once you get to know it. Might be a tad too sharpish though. </p>

<p>Thanks Colin and Steve. The serial no. is 4396870 and the Schneider archive is here but the Xenar 3.5 105mm for 35mm looks different, is black and more of a zebra design.<br>

http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/archiv.htm</p>

<p>merry Christmas!</p>

<p>That serial number translates to a manufacture date of between 1954 and 1957 according to Schneideroptics Info page :</p>

<p>http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/service/serie.htm</p>

<p>That is a bit earlier than I had thought and maybe puts your lens into the Contax S or Kiev kind of period. The Contax S was introduced around 1948.<br /> Here is another link to a list of M42 lenses. It is in French but easy enough to follow :</p>

<p>http://www.photopentax.com/compatibilite.html</p>

<p>There is a Tele Xenar mentioned which is 105mm f3.5 for the Alpa-Reflex from the 1940's. Scroll down until you come to manufacturers and you will see it under Schneider.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I acquired a Schneider Jsogon from around the same period (I think). Tiny, but heavy. I can see some similarities in design to the pictured Xenar. I bet it weighs a ton.</p>

<p>I have seen a few similar lenses. Schneider seems to have mounted their medium/large format lenses on barrels with a heilical for 35mm. Notice the aperture is on the front of the barrel. i've never owned one to try, but I suspect the lens elements can be removed and put into a standard shutter.</p>

<p>Colin, you solved the puzzle, thanks a lot!It is in fact this Alpha lens http://www.photopentax.com/objectifs/schneider/schneider%20m42/schneider%20m42%20xenar%20105mm%20f3.5.jpg (you can change the language to english by clicking on the flag on this site) <br /> Thanks as well Brett an Darin, I appreciate your quick responses and interesting information. Another reason to use this lens soon again and show the results here. It is quiet heavy but looks great on a Pentax DSLR :-)</p>

<p> </p>

<p><a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/SCHNEIDER-KREUZNACH-XENAR-135MM-F4-5-LENS-M42-SCREW-MOUNT-WEST-HAVEN-/320911288359?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item4ab7cda827">This</a> is his bigger brother. The sellers says he is coming from a Pentax camera, but not which one.</p>

<p>your right Ann. I would love to have the 90mm macro of that series :-)</p>

<p>It would be interesting to know if it is a Xenar (bit like a Tessar) or a Tele-Xenar which are normally physically shorter than the focal length and with a different configuration of lens elements to the standard Xenar. As it calls itself a Xenar I would expect it be about as long as its focal length. The older Tele-Xenars tend to not have the sharpness and contrast of the Xenar.<br /> Alpa cameras were all hand-made in Switzerland (Alpa - Alps - geddit?) so are correspondingly scarce. As a possible made-for-Alpa lens I think it might well be sought after by Alpa collectors. Nice find!</p>

<p>Colin, it's around 75mm from mount to front lens so it must be a Tele-Xenar. Thanks again, very interesting information!</p>

<p>Hi Markus, I should have said that the distance <em>counted to the film plane</em> rather than the length of the lens itself. I am more used to Xenars and Tele-Xenars on Large Format cameras where the lens fits on a lens board at the front of the camera. But taking your lens body as about 75mm from front to mount, then the depth of the body from mount to film plane for an M42 camera is about 45mm. So a total of about 120mm. Given the glass is inset a bit from the front of the lens body that sounds about right for a Xenar. Apologies for the confusion. :-) Great results so far - have fun with the lens. Nice to see shots of Switzerland. It is a while since I was in Zurich and then I only saw the airport and the station! regards - Colin</p>

It may still be a Xenar, not Tele-Xenar.<br>It would probably say so on the lens if it were a Tele-Xenar.<br>And the length of the mount alone is not enough: you need to add the flange to film distance to the length of the mount to get an indication whether it may be a tele-construction or not.

<p>Thank you both for the lesson, it's much appreciated.</p>

<p>I wanted to take a longer morning walk but it is cold and rainy here so I only went to the local gardener and did some window shopping at the drugstore (the owner is over 90 and still working every day) for some quick snaps with the Xenar fully open at F3.5 and F4 for you :-)</p><div></div>

<p>-2- at closest distance</p><div></div>

<p>-3-</p><div></div>

<p>-4-</p><div></div>

<p>1 at the drugstore, 1 Meter distance, through glass</p><div></div>

<p>2 at the drugstore, 1 Meter distance, through glass</p><div></div>

<p>The Xenar looks as though it is working well! I particularly like the elf in number 2.</p>