Rodenstock Ronar 360mm f9 - 10x8 Coverage in the real world

[Bernice Loui]

Nope, or why one of the all time faves is the 12" f4.5 Ektar and 12" f4.5 Portrait Ektar and a HUGE set of Tessar design view camera lenses from 100mm to 480mm..

IMO, sorta-focus lenses have a personality all their own and should be put in their own lens personality universe...


Been and still doing this sorta-focus stuff as there is nothing modern like then.. and no, foto shop and all that post digital processing does Not produce similar image results.
Bernice

So you deny the value of portrait lenses over the last 140 years?

[Tin Can]

Agree

[ridax]

....a HUGE set of Tessar design view camera lenses from 100mm to 480mm.

Agree

Disagree. Why stop at 480? I like my 900mm.

[Tin Can]

I have a 900 Jena

I like it too

Disagree. Why stop at 480? I like my 900mm.

[pixelda]

Thank you to everyone who replied and for the useful information posted

As a landscape photographer, my 10x8 images tend to have sky at the top, so if it is a little less sharp or a little out of focus that is not an issue compared to light fall off
Thus far, sharpness in the corners is fine with the Ronar 360. For my work I shoot stopped down - so bokeh is not something of interest
I've seen the G-Claron 355 has unusual bokeh - but again, not something I aim for personally

If I really need image circle, I can shoot in 5x4 - most of my LF lenses are plasmat types with extended IC - such as the Rodenstock-S variants

I have used the Rodenstock 210-S on 10x8 which covers the film - with limited movements
I've fitted all my 5x4 lenses just to see how they perform - many do cut off of course
The Rodenstock 180-S is just usable with a some corner cut-off

Surprisingly, the Schneider XL-110 covers 10x8 as a super-super-wide lens, albeit with a lot of light fall off which has to be corrected after the film is scanned in
Here is a test shot https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelda/52032466681

Some have mentioned the lovely Fujinon lenses - but these are very expensive, and anything imported into the UK has additional duties and text which inflates the price even more
The Ronar 360 I purchased was about £300 - I am pleased with the results it has given and will stick with it

[Bernice Loui]

The 110mm f5.6 Super Symmar XL does not cover 10x8, it illuminated up to 10x8 on this image..


Again, there is a significant difference between proper image circle as the lens has been designed for -vs- what the same lens will illuminate. Post process fix up via digital does not make the claimed image circle coverage for 10x8 fact and true.

This is a constant claim by many on the web these days as to the 110mm f5.6 SSXL covers 10x8 when in fact an reality it really does not.. Having owned and used this lens since it's beginnings and burned many, many, many sheets of film using it.. does not cover 10x8 properly (try this on 10x8 color transparency film, becomes far more apparent. This test was done back in the 1990's) and it has more light fall off than the Biogon style wide angle lenses. This myth perpetration needs to be understood as conditional..

Bernice

Surprisingly, the Schneider XL-110 covers 10x8 as a super-super-wide lens, albeit with a lot of light fall off which has to be corrected after the film is scanned in
Here is a test shot https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelda/52032466681

[MAubrey]

The Rodenstock APO ronar brochure.
https://www.kennethleegallery.com/pdf/Apo-Ronar.pdf

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00817/00817.pdf

Rodenstock notes the image circle of 308mm @ f11, 318mm @ f22 infinity focus, why?
This has more to do with Rodenstock's standards and point of reference for optical performance, not illumination circle of a given lens.

In the case of many sheet film foto images, the optical performance criteria might not be the same as the optical designers at Rodenstock. Or simply put, what is acceptable to the image maker is not the same as what is acceptable to the optical designers of the given lens... and this happens quite often as image circle size coupled to a small size lens IS highly desirable for many view camera users today.. in the same way as the current popularity of lightweight field folder view cameras and carbon fiber tripods... This is much about current view camera market fashion and what the current user/market base expects/demands.


Bernice

Re:

Of course, the glass types each manufacturer uses and the specific cell spacing is going to be different between them.