Rodenstock VS Fuji VS Schneider VS Nikon, Um who cares

[Rust Never Sleeps]

I have the following lenses:

Nikon
75 4.5
120 8
180 5.6
360 8

Rodenstock
65 4.5
90 6.8
150 5.6
210 5.6

Fuji
300 8.5

As I was getting into large format I looked at lens charts, web opinions, reviews, talked to camera shop employees. All in a effort to educate myself about who makes the best lenses and which lenses are the best. Of course the opinions where all over the place so instead I worried about size, weight, price, image circle, shutter size, filter size instead of getting worked up about who makes the damn lens.

Now that I have shot LF for a couple of years and looked over a healthy amount of transparencies I have realized the people that stated there is not a big enough difference between manufactures to get all worked up about it where right.

Of all the lenses I have all are stellar so long as I get the focus and exposure right with the camera being on a stable platform and none of my movements are off. Not a single one would I label a lemon or a dud. Being a fanboy for a certain company is silly and one of the greatest pluses for large format is all the great lenses available for the photographer from 4 great companies.

And certain gems come from all of the big four
to list a few:

Fuji 240 A and 250 cm-w
Nikon 360 tele and 120 w
Schneider XL lenses
Rodenstock 45, 55 grandagon and 150 sironar s

[paulr]

Yup, I came to the same conclusions. But back when I bought my lenses, I fully indulged the ritual of treating it like the biggest decision of my life. I talked tech reps into comas, and quinted at MTF charts til I was half blind.

A year later, after much experience with Brand A, I inspected a friend's negs made with Brand B. No way anyone could tell which images came from which lens.

Looking at my own, I noticed that the biggest difference was between my sharpest negs and my average negs. Which meant that most of the time, I wasn't coming close to what the lens was capable of. Subject matter outside the focal plane, wind, vibration, user error ... all conspire more often than not to give results that don't measure up to the lab results.

The fierceness of the discussion, alas, will never go away. Photographers will continue to be geeks, and glass will continue to be expensive.

[munz6869]

Agreed also - my chronic inexpertise and sloppy procedures will have infinitely more effect on the final picture than the sharpness/distortion/brand of the lens. Not to mention the cheap orange filters I keep sticking in front of them...

That said, I do appreciate a new or freshly CLA'd shutter though....

Marc!

[jeroldharter]

If they are all about the same, what makes you say that some are gems?

[Rust Never Sleeps]

If they are all about the same, what makes you say that some are gems?

Cute response, but I'll take a shot at your silly question.

By "Gems" I obviously meant unique lenses that deal with features more so than performance. A couple of examples:

The Fuji 240A is the longest lens in a copal 0 shutter. It is small, light, but has a F9 max aperture which may be a problem for some people. It is a sharp lens but not much more or less more the the standard 210 plasmats from the big four.

The Fuji 250 CM-W: Not many options in this focal length but Fuji give us this lens that is a plasmat at 250mm but in a copal 1 and a 67mm front for filters. Not a small lens but for plasmat at this length certainly not big like a 300mm Sironar S.

The Nikon 360 tele: I have this lens because if I got I standard 360 Tessar design I would have to get a long rail extension and a long bellows for my Arca-Swiss just for this focal length. With this lens I use the medium rail extension I have for a 300 tessar and my standard bellows work just fine.

The Nikon 120 W: The smallest of the 120mm wide angles. 77mm front, biggest image circle of the 120's. Nice price compared to a 110 XL from Schneider. Not any better or worse that the other 120mm wide angle designs as far as sharpness is concerned.

Schneider XL lenses: These lenses are completely unique to Schneider. Small but big coverage for some and huge and big coverage for other lenses in this series. 47mm Xl widest lens for 4x5. Many need center filters while others don't. They are expensive.

Rodenstock 45 and 55 grandagon: unique focal length for large format. The 45 won't cover 4x5 but will 6x12 pano. The 55 grandagon is the only lens for LF in this focal length. The lenses aren't too big.

Rodenstock 150 Sirorar S: The smallest 150 plasmat but the biggest image circle. Other than that not any better or worse than any other 150 plasmat

Nikon 90 F8: Has a image circle just as big as the bigger 4.5 brother, but a smaller and lighter lens. The biggest image circle of any modern 6.8-8 wide angle 90mm. Again other than that not any better or worse than any other 90mm .

As I said in my first post lens selection should be more about size, weight, price, image circle, shutter size, filter size then getting worked up about lens MTF charts. Am I making any sense to you yet jeroldharter or are you still confused because paulr and munz6869 got what I was trying to get across??

[roteague]

I've pretty well standardized on Schneider lenses. Mostly because of the XL series (I only own 1, but am looking to buy a second one next year). But, I'm sure the others brands are just as well made.

[Scotty230358]

I have a variety lenses from Fuji, Rodenstock and Schneider. They all perform admirably and there is no discernible difference in sharpness. My maximum image size is 16 inches on the long side and any softness is down to my technique. Any lack of contrast is also down to me. Briefly:-

75mm Fujinon SWD f5.6 - sharp and surprisingly easy to focus. The image circle is probably not large enough for extreme movements but then again I only use modest rise and tilt in most of my work. Also it does not seem to need a centre filter. I have not noticed any fall off at the edges.

90mm Super Angulon f6.8 - In terms of sharpness and contrast the results are indistinguishable from the Fujinon.

125mm Fujinon W - A really nice modest wide angle that delivers the goods. Image circle (IIRC) is about 220mm. Again does all that I need.

120 Berlin Series III Dagor f6.8. I bought this lens before I bought the 125 Fujinon. Probably got seduced by the fact it was a Dagor at a very reasonable price. It is tiny and very light but I think its the worst performer of all my lenses. Not a lemon but lets say there is a "hint of citrus". It does not seem to snap into focus on my ground glass like my more modern lenses. I have not used it enough to make my mind up whether its worth keeping.

150mm Symmar S f5.6 - Nice and sharp and contrasty but I have run out of coverage with it.

180mm Symmar S f5.6 - Purchased it as a replacement for an old 180/305 Schneider convertible that whilst sharp was not that contrasty. A very good lens. It gets more use than my 150.

240mm Rodenstock APO Ronar - An older single coated lens that gets a lot of use. Although marketed as a process lens it performs admirably at infinity. More than enough coverage for my needs and turns out really nice images. Another plus is that it s a tiny lens that weighs next to nothing.

250mm Fujinon W f6.3 - bought this on a whim because the price was very good (under £200) and the photographs I saw taken with it were excellent. A good back up lens in case the older shutter on the Ronar packs in.

300mm Rodenstock APO Ronar F9 - the longest lens I own but performs as well as the others. Again compact and light weight with more than enough coverage. The only down side is that it comes with a Compur Electronic shutter that will be next to impossible to repair if it dies. It also uses obscure batteries that are expensive to buy but there are solutions available. If the worst happens the lens will go straight into a Copal No. 1 shutter.

So my point is that I have lenses from 3 of 4 major manufacturers of modern lenses and sharpness and contrast wise they are all so alike as to be virtually indistinguishable. As I say the only lens I am unsure about is my Dagor. I have no idea who old it is but I don't think my particular example will be as good as my modern stuff.

[Heroique]

...I have lenses from 3 of 4 major manufacturers of modern lenses and sharpness and contrast wise they are all so alike as to be virtually indistinguishable...

I have a 110-150-240 kit.

My 150 g-claron distinguishes itself from the other two – in a peculiar way.

It’s the tiny “runt of the litter,” but it makes up in “fun” what it lacks in coverage and other features. Indeed, this tiny-gem-of-a-lens has taught me to see the world like it does. (Very clever ... it knows this will get me to pull it out of the bag sooner than its peers.) Yes, it has me whipped – even though the 110 and 240 are just as sharp & certainly more glamorous. Let’s just say the 150 g-claron possesses one of those “intangibles” difficult to describe, but there all the same…

[Brian C. Miller]

Since I got into photography with pennies, I bought a Super Graphic. Then I found out the problem with the ground glass, and after all that was fixed, I tested the lens.

Bicycle spokes at two blocks, and quite clearly on Techpan. You don't see them until the negative is enlarged to 16x20, and you still need a loupe. So for a very long time, I didn't buy another lens. Seriously, why bother? When a 135mm Wollensack does that, why "upgrade?"

Now I also have an 8x10, and I have Fuji and Nikon lenses. Will I buy a German lens just because? Um, no. The most important factor is the operator, me.

[rdenney]

Yup, I came to the same conclusions. But back when I bought my lenses, I fully indulged the ritual of treating it like the biggest decision of my life.

I've always made my large-format lenses the smallest decisions of my life. I'm too cheap to make it a big decision.

The most I've ever paid was $600, and that was for a 90/5.6 Super Angulon about 20 years ago when they were still very much the current model. That was about half price.

Of my dozen-plus large-format lenses, only three or four cost more than $200.

Rick "who has the best that (a little) money can buy" Denney