Re: opinions solicited -- telephotos for the R cameras

[Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net>]

At 01:39 AM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote:

>Does anyone have any experience with any of these lenses that they can
>share with me to guide me in making a choice?  I'm mostly interested
>in them for daylight photography of distant landscape details and
>(more rarely) nature photography.

I used to own the 400 6.8. It has two lens to air surfaces, and so it's
pretty efficient, like most other 5.6 lenses of the same focal length. It
breaks in half and you can put in an extension tube (30mm?) that gives you
1:3 maginification at minimum focus. It's very light, and it should come
with the shoulder stock. Some versions actually will fit on the Visoflex or
an R camera both.

It is VERY sharp, and I was very happy with it, except for the speed. I
finally got a 280 Apo Telyt and sold the 400. And have been kicking myself
ever since I sold the 280 (but had to pay for grad school!) It has some
curvature of field, but in practice it's not a problem at all, because the
bottom of the picture can usually use the focus a bit closer than the center
without hurthing. They're designed to be shot wide open, so they are useful.
And you can buy the 560 6.8 head and use the same back end as the 400.

>P.S. I haven't actually seen a 350/4.8 for sale -- in fact, some of my
>     books don't even mention it.  Did this lens have a particularly
>     short production run, or is it so well-loved that no one wants to
>     sell one?

I saw one for sale a couple years ago at Citizen's Photo in Portland, OR for
$1,300. That was a bargain. I tested it with Kodachrome and it's very sharp.
Not Apo, but close enough. It's rather bulky and heavy for a 4.8 lens, but
if you find one you can afford, I'd say get it. Very nice.

==========================
Eric Welch
Grants Pass Daily Courier