Anyone heard of a Xenostar lens?

[franklin_h1]

I received an old folder and was trying to find some history on this old fella

but haven't been able to learn much about a Xenostar lens marked Jos.Zacharias

Regensburg.

 

From my searches i think this is probably a Balda Baldax from the look of it,

marked Jzette on the camera in 6x6 format.

Compur shutter that works pretty well at all speeds except B&T, when set to

these the cocking lever won't budge at all.

Haven't got film in yet, needs a good cleaning and going to try some new

leather if all goes well.<div></div>

[michael_gilday]

I've never heard of a Xenostar - but that's a mighty fast lens for a MF folder! Also, on rim-set Compur shutters, at least of this vintage, you don't cock the shutter for B or T - just "trip" the shutter release. Trying too hard to do so could break your shutter.

[franklin_h1]

Thanks Micheal, B and T do work as you described.

[patrick j dempsey]

I've got a f/2.9 645 folder... they weren't THAT uncommon... the shutter is the same size as a f/3.8 shutter for a 6x9 camera. 75mm is often "normal" for 645, while 80mm is usually for 6x6... I can't see the viewfinder well enough to see if it's square or vertical rectangle though.

[franklin_h1]

It has a square viewfinder Patrick, but now i'm thinking the lens may have been changed, on the back of the camera it has a dof chart that ranges from 2.8 to 22 which doesn't match the lens stops.

[cliffmanley]

I think that lens is a Tessar type made by Voigtlander.?

[cliffmanley]

It's not a Balda, it's a Zacharias, another small camera maker, he probably re-branded that lens, like most of the little guys did. It looks to be a fairly rare camera. Have fun with it!

[colin carron]

As noted above f/2.9 is not exceptional at this period (1930's onwards). Quite a few manufacturers made f/2.9 lenses or faster.Fast lenses first appeared on 1920's press cameras such as the Dallmeyer Speed (Pentac f/2,9)

 

http://members.lycos.co.uk/presscam/

 

and the Plaubel press (Anticomar f/2.9) cameras. The daddy of these fast press cameras was the 1924 Ernemann Ermanox camera with its f/1.8 Ernostar lens.

 

Having cracked the fast lens technology it filtered down to cheaper models and became important for amateurs when colour film became available. The first colour films were very slow so any help from a fast lens was appreciated even if the quality wasn't that good at full aperture.

 

The Vade Mecum has an entry under 'L' for Lousy Lenses which discusses these f/2.9 lenses and other lower quality types. It says they have a poor reputation but in fact can sometimes be quite good. The only way is to try them and see. So....

 

Makers include Balda (Zecanar), Steinheil (Cassar), KW (Pilotar) , Ludwig (Victar), Meyer (Trioplan), Schneider (Radionar) etc These cheaper fast lenses are almost always triplets. I imagine the Xenostar was either a badged version of one of these or a small independent manufacturer.

 

Try it and see what you get!

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

Balda used to equip their cheap versions of their cameras with their "house brand" lenses named Baldanar. Also, Balda were the king of selling cameras to wholesellers, there were quite a few Balda cameras sold with different manufacturers' names. Probably they even changed the lens name for this particular "manufacturer" or rather wholeseller of cameras.

 

It is probably a triplet lens pushed to f/2.9 for marketing reasons. I once had a 6x6 Hapo (Porst) folder made by Balda with a Haponar lens (probably made by Enna). Although this 80mm lens was pushed to f/3.5 only it was hardly useable fully open.

[charles_stobbs3]

Is it a connection to Schneider - Xenon and Xenar? Or a Sccneider wannabe?

[dan_fromm2]

Charles, only if you're trying to sell the thing on eBay.

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

I think the Xenotar was not yet made back then, and the Xenostar designator could not cause any confusion.

[colin carron]

I too wondered if the name was a reference to the high quality super-fast Schneider Xenotar lenses but I think the Schneiders came later than this.

[michael_gilday]

F/2.9 might not be "exceptional", but it is remarkable, I'd say. On 1930s rollfilm folders, f/7.7 or f/6.8 are "slow", f/4.5 or f/4.8 are "normal", and the f/3.7 or f/3.5 lenses are usually considered "fast". Compared to that, f/2.9 is, I guess, "very fast".

 

Not that fast=good or slow=bad; I licensed a photo through one of my agencies about a month ago that was shot with a Zeiss 515/2 Nettar and 115/6.8 Novar-Anastigmat...

[arlen_c._elkins]

Yes, the Schneider Xenotars were introduced in the late 1950's, so this lens was made quite a few years prior to that.

[weezul]

I own and occasionally use KW Pilot Super with the 2.9 lens - it is very soft, vignetting is very strong, contrast is low. I love the results for that sort of "vintage" feel but if you look for high quality, these lenses might disappoint you...<div></div>

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

"F/2.9 might not be "exceptional", but it is remarkable, I'd say. On 1930s rollfilm folders, f/7.7 or f/6.8 are "slow", f/4.5 or f/4.8 are "normal", and the f/3.7 or f/3.5 lenses are usually considered "fast". Compared to that, f/2.9 is, I guess, "very fast"."

 

This is also a question of the shutter. For an f/2.9 lens, of course, you need a shutter with larger opening (and higher price) than for a f/6.3 lens.