Sironar-N 150/5.6 v. Apo-Symmar 150/5.6

[semck83]

Hi all,

I was wondering how you would compare these two lenses, given approximately equal prices (but Symmar about $20-$30 more). The main use would be 4x5 landscape, mostly B&W but also some color. Are the added movements of the Symmar worth it? How does sharpness compare?

Many thanks,
Stephen

[rdenney]

Hi all,

I was wondering how you would compare these two lenses, given approximately equal prices (but Symmar about $20-$30 more). The main use would be 4x5 landscape, mostly B&W but also some color. Are the added movements of the Symmar worth it? How does sharpness compare?

Many thanks,
Stephen

I'd be tickled to have either. Both are a lot fancier than my 150mm Geronar, but the Geronar gets the job done as long as I stop it down.

Optically, I doubt you would notice any difference, let alone any important difference.

Rick "noting that one of the advantages of large-format photography is not having to stress out over the extremes of lens performance, at least in the middle focal lengths" Denney

[jeroldharter]

I doubt you would notice any difference. I have the 150 Apo-Symmar and a 210 Sironar-N (Caltar) and both are excellent. Go with the newer, less used lens. I don't recall that the image circles are greatly different, but if you anticipate using a lot of movements (I sometimes hit the limit with rise), then get the one with the larger image circle.

[vinny]

I had a brand new apo-symmar (the pre-apo "L" series) for a while that I sold because it wasn't very sharp, especially past f16. Maybe it was just the copy I had but I like the rodenstock's better. If you can wait to find a deal, get a sironar-s.