[LargeFormat] 360mm Teles and Longer Lenses in General

[Clive Warren]

>
>I actually have two 360s.  The TX and a Fujinon "A" lens.  I believe that
>the Fuji is the sharpest lens I own, and it will cover 11x14!  The TX will,
>however, work on my Wista field camera.
>
>You can still go with the procedure I mentioned by focusing the image on a
>white wall or piece of paper.  You may get better results by cutting a
>lens-sized hole in a piece of cardboard to shield some of the stray light.
>You will get a recognizable image when you hold the lens elements the
>appropriate distance from the sheet of white paper/wall.

snippety

Karl,

Have always wanted to try out one of those Fujinon teles - what you 
have said makes me even more keen. Invariably I find that on my 
travels it is the longer lenses that get most use. On the last US 
trip it was the trusty 203mm Ektar that was most often on the camera 
and I found myself wanting something much longer on many occasions.

The 15" Tele Optar is a fine hunk of glass - but it is a hunk of 
glass and weighs a ton. Just too much to even consider lugging around 
through airports and dragging around on trails. How heavy is the 
Fujinon A 360mm?

I often use the technique you have described for a quick check of 
lens coverage  - one real test of a lens is to see if it can image 
the filament in a bright quartz light or the surrounding glass 
envelope without losing the plot.

One of the most amazing lenses in the growing armoury here is a 21 
1/4" f11 Copying Ektanon - I guess from the old world of broad sheet 
newspapers. It has more coverage than I'll ever need - have yet to 
try it out on an 8x10 camera with a 5x7 back for head/shoulder 
portraiture. Neither of my 5x7 cameras have enough bellows for 
anything much more than infinity focusing. It's too heavy to hang off 
a piece of drainpipe fixed to the lens board - but still nowhere near 
as heavy as the 15" Optar!

Cheers,
        Clive