Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48

Thread: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    2,412

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    I don't think that he has validly equal fine details in the corners and edges of that negative.
    Bob, I don't know why we even spend time and effort to entertain these comments. I guess Rodenstock and HP Marketing just didn't know what they were talking about.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    667

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Dan, you might want to 'recheck' that URL Link.
    Thank-you!

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Luis-F-S View Post
    Bob, I don't know why we even spend time and effort to entertain these comments. I guess Rodenstock and HP Marketing just didn't know what they were talking about.
    I only spent time as the Rodenstock Product and Sales Manager in the USA from mid 1986 to Feb of 2015 dealing with photographers, including Clyde Butcher, professional labs, military, government, industry, professional photo labs as well as advanced amateurs and schools. Never, in any piece of information from Rodenstock or and conversation with Rodenstock or with any of our dealers or users has anything as ridiculous as this claim been made. So I strongly suspect his test protocols as well as possible abuse to the lens that he is testing.
    We actually had an album of prints made from a negative shot on a current, at that time, Leica rangefinder camera mounted on a Linhof Heavy Duty Pro tripod and Linhof head. That had comparison prints from the same negative printed on a Durst L1200 with glass carrier from each lens that Rodenstock made for 35mm going from the Rogonar to the Rogonar S to the Rodagon, the Rodagon WA, the Rodagon G and the Apo Rodagon N. each lens had a print at the optimal magnification of each of the lenses as well as maximum magnification of each lens.

    What Rodenstock states as coverage for their lenses is absolutely right on. There is no way that his 105 will outperform the 120 on 45 across the frame.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Taija71A View Post
    Dan, you might want to 'recheck' that URL Link.
    Thank-you!
    https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resi...t=folder%2cpdf

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    2,412

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    What Rodenstock states as coverage for their lenses is absolutely right on. There is no way that his 105 will outperform the 120 on 45 across the frame.
    Preaching to the choir.......

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,566

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Luis-F-S View Post
    Preaching to the choir.......
    Not at all, the 105 may have a 40% fall off in the 45 corners, and this is a major issue. Perhaps not much resolving power difference can be seen with small prints, but with the 105 you reach very soon the limits of the lens as prints size increases.

  7. #17
    Thalmees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    342

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    ... Optimum aperture on these lenses is two stops down from wide open ...
    Hello Bob,
    My observations so far shows that f/16 on the Rodagon 105/5.6 at 6X enlargement, has much better sharpness and fall off zone, at the edges and corners, than f/11, without sacrificing center sharpness. Do not know the effect of f/16 on Rodagon 120/5.6 WA compared with f/11 on the same lens. But the tests yesterday(6.7X at f/16), brought both lenses almost to the same zone of performance. So, I think the optimal aperture of both lenses are not the same.
    Details of my observations will post it later.
    Thanks so much.

    The generosity of spirit in this forum is great, its warmly appreciated.
    ------------------------------

  8. #18
    Thalmees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    342

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    ... Perhaps it depends on the enlargement size, for small (or medium, 6.7X) prints it may cover 4x5" ...
    ... it should have fall off ...
    Hello Pere,
    Thanks for sharing your experience.
    Half of the pre assumptions in this thread, are derived from manufacturers and retailers.
    Half of that, unfortunately, convert to believes.
    I think it depends "more" on f/stop, specially at 6-6.8X magnifications. BTW, I think, sweet zone of Rodagon WA 120/5.6, is 6X and f/11. Outside this zone, Rodagon WA 120mm has no strong practical advantage over a 20 years older Rodagon 105mm.
    My darkroom setup does not permit me to print on easel every possible enlargement for the lens.
    Observations so far, at f/16, at least much of the claims created around Rodagon WA 120/5.6, are more theoretical and manufacturer propaganda, specially at larger than 6X magnification and using f/16. I think this is the reason behind the successful introduction of Schneider APO 120mm HM lens!
    Honestly, it(Rodagon WA 120mm) is a good lens for 4X5(better coverage specially at f/11, with 6-6.8X magnification), BUT, it does not deserve the 10 folds increase in price compared to a Rodagon 105mm(again at f/16). The samples I'm comparing, are from 1978 for the Rodagon 105mm, and from 1998 for the WA Rodagon 120mm.
    All the pre assumptions may be based on comparisons at f/11 which I think not justice for the Rodagon 105/5.6.
    Wondering, what can be the results of Rodagon 105mm(compared to Rodagon WA 120mm), if it was from the latest batches?
    And yes, both lenses have fall off at f/11(corners and borders). But, it's minimal with Rodagon WA 120/5.6, and improved well(with more sharpness) in Rodagon 105 at f/16 without any noticeable decrease of sharpness in the center. This area(borders & corners) are usually burned in, as the last step in making the print.
    When you adjust exposure for the mid tones, each lens has its optically natural rendering of objects and photo, mainly in terms of contrast.
    In term of sharpness(only) at 6-6.8X, center and off-center zones are equal(visually no loupe) when you compare prints from both lenses, at f/11 or at f/16.
    Thanks so much Pere.
    Last edited by Thalmees; 21-May-2017 at 07:11. Reason: Schneider part, added.

    The generosity of spirit in this forum is great, its warmly appreciated.
    ------------------------------

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thalmees View Post
    In term of sharpness(only) at 6-6.8X, center and off-center zones are equal(visually no loupe) when you compare prints from both lenses, at f/11 or at f/16.
    In other words, you haven't taken good measurements.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,009

    Re: Rodagon 105/5.6, Perfectly Covers 4X5 at 6.7X, with high performance. Is It True?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    In other words, you haven't taken good measurements.
    Exactly. Then again, he seems to believe that the manufacturers have a vendetta against him - see his nonsensical ramblings about film price.

Similar Threads

  1. my Beseler 810 VXL is not workign with my Gra Lab 451R perfectly.........why?
    By Jeff Liao in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 5-Apr-2002, 09:47

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •