Who knows anything about Schneider Xenon 50/0.95?

[DanielT74]

Hello Knowledgeable People!

I can't find anything except for a few samples from this c-mount lens.

When was it made? Did it get used in any serious productions? What about the construction? How good is it?

I know it covers the APS-C sensor and some people adapt it to Leica M-mount, but is it really comparable to the Noktilux 50/0.95?

Any help will be appreciated as always and if I get it, I will be sure to post samples!

[Sevo]

[iangreenhalgh1]

Actually, there was a vogue for using 16mm in the 50s and 60s, particularly in France for the Cinema Verite school.

I can think of three examples of 16mm Bolex used in a major production - Dr Strangelove, Paths Of Glory and A Clockwork Orange. In Strangelove, the battle for the airbase is filmed handheld with 16mm (it is where Spielberg got the idea for the style of Saving Private Ryan from), Paths of Glory includes handheld shots of Kirk Douglas on 16mm during the advance into no-man's land sequence and in A Clockwork Orange some of Alex's dreams after being beaten by the police are shot on 16mm, particularly, the section where he throws himself from an upper storey window - they threw a Bolex out of a window to get the first person perspective of Alex falling.

16mm and Super 16mm has been used to shoot a lot of theatrical films and television dramas, although I suspect the theatrical stuff largely used Arri and Aaton cameras which aren't C-mount, I'm sure some Bolex with c-mount was used, particularly in the 50s, 60s and early 70s.

[Sevo]

[iangreenhalgh1]

[ForenSeil]

C-Mount lenses were used in some cinema-productions
At least I read in another forum that "The Punch Bowl"/"Die Feuerzangenbowle" (Comedy, 1944, Germany) is made with Carl Zeiss C-Mount lenses.

EDIT: My Info seems to be wrong. According to IMDB it's made with 2686m 35mm negative film

[mdarnton]

Ha. I would hardly call news photography "fringe" or obscure, or second-rate. . . . whatever is belng implied here. Probably their demands exceed the entertainment fluff industry, which accounts for an f/.95 lens made for them.

[danfromm]

There's a little here: http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/pdf/ccctv.pdf

[Sevo]

[paulhofseth]

I use mine on a 4/3ds. Big and heavy, but sharp and good contrast. I never worry about whether famous films were shot with it. I bought mine some 15years ago. Occasionally I also use a schneider 25/ 0.95, that one vignettes far more.

Due to its diametre I doubt that it was ever intended to be used on a Bolex turret. Also, the later Bolexes had reflex viewfinders and their optics were designed to allow for the splitting prism.

p.

[DanielT74]

Thanks you, folks! Very interesting.

I am still unclear as to the years of production, optical diagram and especially image quality. If Paul or some other users else can comment how it compares to other very fast lenses, that would be useful too.

Edit: Just found this from Schneider website:

[paulhofseth]

I have no experience with other 095s. covering the mft format. A long time ago I used the (full frame) canon 50/1,2, the extra speed was bought at the expense of contrast and resolution so I got rid of it.

I have not run any careful tests, but it does well enough compared with other well regarded lenses , with f. 1,4- 2,8 in that focal lenght, to stay on the camera for indoor pictures. The slower lenses did not seem to have better resolution or contrast at the same apertures, whether wide open or stopped down, and would need too high iso settings to compete for sufficient shutter speeds. BUT it is large and heavy, so there is no point in using it in better light, such as outdoors, even if its picture quality is good there as well.

My copy has a sn above 12 000 000, so it is medium late. The diaphragm is hexagonal and like many lenses designed for fadeout in filming, it closes completely when stopped down beyond minimum aperture. The minimum is f.11. Closest focus is 0,8m.

p.

[DanielT74]

Thank you again, Paul.

I have the Canon you refer to (the LTM one, right) and indeed it is not very sharp (it leaks light wide open like most of the lenses of that vintage) but it has an interesting character though. On the other hand, the later FD 55/1.2 Aspherical appears to be an exceptionally good fast lens. I am still not clear when was the Xenon 0.95/50 designed and manufactured - it is a 60ies lens? From the looks of it, it appears to be a more recent lens.

Would you possibly have any shots with the Schneider you could post here to show what it can do?

[danfromm]

To date a Schneider lens, look up its serial number at http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/service/serie.htm

FWIW, my 17/0.95 Xenon was made in 1996. Not a '60s lens at all.

[paulhofseth]

I cannot find my list of Schneider serial no, so I cannot date the design. Enclosed is a crop of about 750x440pixels from the uppermost edge of a 4000by 3000 jpg frame. It is taken at F2 at a distance of about 3 metres. It is cropped in photoshop,but not sharpened. The camera was an olympus p-1 with sharpening turned off. A similar crop of a Kinoptic 50/2 and kitlens snaps are enclosed for comparison. BUT proper comparisons should be made with several rounds of focussing, since the depth of field is not that great

p.

[danfromm]

Paul, what is the shape of your 50/.95 Xenon's diaphragm? I ask because my little 17/.95's is approximately square.

[DanielT74]

Dan, the one's I've seen have been rounded hexagonal. I think Paul said his is too.

[DanielT74]

I posted some test pics with the Xenon here: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1220220.html#1220220

Would be nice to hear from other users if this is similar to what they are getting (mine has some damage on the coating of one of the inner rear elements, probably from past fungus).