caltar II-N

[false_Aesthetic]

Hey,

I'm interested in a 180mm lens for 5x7. I've done a bit of digging and found that the Caltar II-Ns are made by rodenstock. What is the comparable lens in the Rodenstock line-up?

I thought it'd be an Apo-Sironar N but there's no 180mm mentioned on the Linos/Rodenstock website

Is it an Apo-Sironar S?

Thanks

[Oren Grad]

It's the Apo-Sironar-N. The reason you don't see it on the Linos website is that the Apo-Sironar-N series has been discontinued, except for the 150 and 210 focal lengths.

[false_Aesthetic]

Thanks

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have that lens in the Caltar II-N version and recommend it highly.

[Ted Harris]

I use it for 5x7 but find that I generally prefer my 150 Apo Sironar W and when I move longer it is most frequently to a 240.

[Joseph O'Neil]

I have the older APO-Sironar, no "N" or "S", in 180mm, and i live it very much for 4x5. Never used it on 5x7. I suspect my version is very similar if not identical to the "N" version or the one you are looking at.

As far as sharpness goes, very difficult, IMO, to say the new "S is better in that regard. Coating might very well be better as they are newer lenses. Usually the "S" version has a larger image circle which is always nice - you never have too large an image circle. Sometimes that larger circle is worth every penny.

[false_Aesthetic]

Yeah, Ideally I'd like to get a phatty boom batty lens for my 5x7 but most 180s are a bit out of my price range right now. I figured a 180mm on 5x7 is similar to a 125 on 4x5 (its the look I'm most familiar with)--correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyways, KEH has some 180mm Caltars for sale under $400 that I was checking out. Thats why I asked.

[tim810]

I use a caltar 240 nII on my 810 and love it. Sharp as a razor and tons of movements!!! I belive that the diference between the N and the S is coverage. The N has more coverage.

[Oren Grad]

I figured a 180mm on 5x7 is similar to a 125 on 4x5 (its the look I'm most familiar with)--correct me if I'm wrong.

I've used a 125 on 4x5 as well as a 180 on 5x7; I'd say the "feel" of the latter is a bit tighter, closer to a 135 on 4x5 if you're comfortable translating such things across different aspect ratios. For my taste, 180 is a good semi-wide focal length for 5x7, especially if you're going to enlarge. For negatives intended for contact printing, though, I've found myself reaching for a 210, which is exactly normal, more often.

On a couple of the other points raised - the Apo-Sironar (no "S" or "N"; it's the predecessor of the later "W" series) was made only in 150, 210 and 300 focal lengths. For a given focal length, the S always has larger coverage than the N. In the 180 focal length, though, even the N has ample coverage for 5x7.

[walter23]

I have that lens in the Caltar II-N version and recommend it highly.

Caltars are quality control rejects. Mushy and soft and sometimes with coating flaws that lead to ghosting and reflections.

I'm going to repeat this line until I fill out my other desired focal lengths with Caltar II N's, too. Prices are climbing on the things.

Caltars are crap. Junk lenses. Forget all about them. Don't bid on them.