Help buying a lens for 4X5

[maayanz]

Hi there,
I can not decide what lens to buy camera 4X5
I do not quite understand the differences and I'm very glad your help.
I shoot mostly studio portraits
1. 210 F5.6 SINARON-S
2. 210 F5.6 SYMMAR-S

And another question:
What is the difference between 210 f5.6 SINARON-S and the 210 f5.6 SINARON-N

Thank you to everyone who can contribute his knowledge.

Maayan

[Bill_1856]

Save your money. If you don't know what you need then you don't need it.

[E. von Hoegh]

What Bill1856 said. Any modern lens will do you just fine. You wouldn't be able to see any difference between the two lenses you mentioned.

[Alan Gales]

The Sinaron-S has more coverage than the Sinaron-N. It is also said to be slightly sharper. It is also a lot more expensive.

For portraiture you would be very happy with either the Sinaron-N or Symmar-S as said earlier.

[Ari]

Save your money. If you don't know what you need then you don't need it.

Hah! Then most of the people on this forum should be quite rich by now :)
If you can't be helpful, then at least don't be discouraging.

Maayan, the two lenses you mentioned are good for 4x5 portraiture; as others have said, the main difference will be price and image circle.
For portraits, you don't really need to worry much about image circle, so find the lens in the best condition at the best price.

[Oren Grad]

What is the difference between 210 f5.6 SINARON-S and the 210 f5.6 SINARON-N

There is no "Sinaron-N".

Sinar re-branded Rodenstock lenses, unfortunately using a confusing naming system:

Sinaron-S = Sironar-N / Apo-Sironar-N
Sinaron-SE = Apo-Sironar-S
Sinaron-WS = Apo-Sironar / Apo-Sironar-W

[Alan Gales]

There is no "Sinaron-N".

Sinar re-branded Rodenstock lenses, unfortunately using a confusing naming system:

Sinaron-S = Sironar-N / Apo-Sironar-N
Sinaron-SE = Apo-Sironar-S
Sinaron-WS = Apo-Sironar / Apo-Sironar-W

Your right, we misspelled it. I even knew better! :eek:

There is also a Caltar II-N which is a rebadged APO-Sironar-N

[Alan Gales]

Sorry, that's You're right. Man I'm having a bad day!

[Ivan J. Eberle]

The 210 Caltar IIN is also the same lens as the Sironar S same as the Rodenstocks APO Sironar N though it can often be found about 10% to 20% less expensively. It's not at all unusual to find mint ones selling for a bit less than $200 USD. Surely this must be one of the best values in all of photography.

Mine is terrific, super sharp with great coverage. The huge 301mm image circle allows experimenting with all the camera moves that make view cameras so worthwhile.

[Bill_1856]

If you can't be helpful, then at least don't be discouraging.

I think it's excellent advice. Wish that I could follow it myself. :)

[Frank Petronio]

If you are buying used, either the Schneider Symmar or Rodenstock Sironar-series are fine lenses so you want to buy the one in the best condition. Look for clean glass, no separation or defects, and a smooth, modern Copal or Compur shutter - the latest versions having mostly all-black cosmetics. At least at first, until you develop preferences, I'd look for one from the late 1980s or newer. Prices can start at under $200 because it is a soft market, but the latest, wide coverage and very sharp Rodenstock Sinaron-S can be quite expensive, maybe $1000 used. The differences are subtle at best, so aim for the less expensive options!

Rodenstock Sironar and Schneider Symmar-series 210mm f/5.6 lenses are the most plentiful and thus, the most affordable used. The slightly wider 135-150-180mm versions are also good to start with, but the longer 210mm will have the largest image circle. Having the extra coverage is good for learning to use camera movements.

Sinar, Linhof, and Calumet have, at various times, selected and rebranded lenses, which is why you have Sinaron and Caltar variations.

There have been many versions over the years, from the Symmar to Symmar-S MC to Symmar-APO to Symmar-L, etc as well as the Sironar MC (multi-coating) to Sironar-N to Sironar-S, etc.

For starting out try to avoid the alternatives with smaller image circles, like the Schneider Xenar or Rodenstock Geronar. Those can be great lenses but for learning you probably want a lens capable of larger movements.

[rdenney]

...but the latest, wide coverage and very sharp Rodenstock Sinaron-S can be quite expensive, maybe $1000 used.

Heh. Even Frank said "sinaron" when he meant "sironar".

The Rodenstock Sironar is their standard normal plasmat, just like the Schneider Symmar. The Symmar is an old design (like all conventional plasmats), and has evolved over the years. The oldest Symmars that are generally available on the used market are called Symmar Convertibles because their front elements can be removed to provide a decent triplet of much longer focal length. That model was replaced by the improved Symmar-S, which was replaced by the APO-Symmar-something-or-other and so on.

The Sironar was replaced by the Sironaro-N which was later labelled the APO-Sironar-N (same lens) and most recently the APO-Sironar-S.

For portraiture at that focal length, I would have a hard time justifying the expense of a Sironar-S. The middle-aged Symmar-S and Sironar-N are both excellent lenses are they are cheap and plentiful.

The Symmar-S was sold as a Caltar S-II, which is not common, and not the same thing at all as a Caltar II-S.

The Sironar-N has been sold as a Caltar-II-N and also as a Sinaron-S. The alternate labeling can sometimes save a few bucks, and it's identical to the Rodenstock-branded lens.

Sinar should have changed their name if they were going to rebadge a Sironar. Fingers connected to this batch of brains should not have to deal with typing correctly amidst the likely confusion.

Frank has it right--a multi-coated lens in a black Copal or Compur will provide about all there is to provide.

But I will also offer one possible alternative. These lenses are designed to make sharp images. If you desire to make images that are not razor-sharp, with wide apertures, unfocused backgrounds, and dreamy softness, then a modern plasmat may not be the best choice. You could go with some ancient swirly Petzval or something like that, but then you'd be unable to go sharp when needed. A classic Tessar might be a reasonable middle ground.

At that focal range, there are several tessars of interest, including an Ilex Paragon, a Kodak Ektar, or a Wollensak Raptar. These are all variations on the tessar design, and come in pretty wide maximum apertures (the Paragon, for example, is an f/4.5 lens). Stop them down to f/22 and they get plenty sharp, but I like their rendering more at wide apertures than plasmats. There are also some f/6.something tessar designs, including the Kodak Commercial Ektar and the Rodenstock Ysarex (which was also marketed as a Caltar Type-Y, at 240mm) plus many, many others. Most of these are not multicoated, but I don't see that as a fault for portraiture. These lenses don't have as much coverage as the plasmats, but they'll have plenty for 4x5 at this focal length.

I have an Ilex Paragon at 8-1/2" f/4.5 lens that is really decent for portraits and images where I want a vintage look. I also have a 210mm Sinaron-S (Sironar-N), which is a modern multicoated f/5.6 plasmat. I use it when I want everything sharp.

Rick "whose plasmats render busy shapes in the out-of-focus areas" Denney

[maayanz]

Thanks guys!
You're really nice!
Helped me a lot
Maayan