Brand consistency throughout lens lineup?

[Vaughn]

Anyone trying to duplicate your findings.

Bull -- duplicate my 'findings' that they all work for me? Why would anyone want to do that? There are so many other factors/variables that totally overshadow differences between the type of lenses I use...film, scenes, developers, print processes, etc. But for the record, none of my lenses are soft-focus.

I truly appreciate your contributions to this forum, but are you having a bad day? I am, so my BS tolerance is very low right now.

Frank -- if the future researchers really want to know, I hope they are smart enough to look at my profile (copied from there):

600/9 Rodenstock Apo-Ronar-CL (anybody want to buy it?)
TR 12" - 21" - 28"
19" Red Dot Artar -- barrel
300mm Fuji W f5.6
210 Wollensak Graphic Raptar -- barrel
210/6.3 Computar Symmetrigon
159mm Wollensak Series IIIA f12.5
150 Caltar f5.6

And add a 24" Red Dot Artar and a Computar 270/9 and perhaps another odd lenses here or there.

Whoops, that is a Caltar-IIN...just in case someone wants to duplicate this image -- but whoops again, a new fishing pier has been built over these pilings, and the pulp mill had been closed for years and dismantled. And Ilford Gallery, Grade 3 is tough to find these days:

[Drew Wiley]

If there was a recognizable difference (non-antique), I'd guess it would fall into that era
when Rodenstock was being modernized faster than Schneider, maybe early 70's (?).
Certainly when my brother was a commercial photographer in the 60's there was a fair
amt of color variation among lenses, and some still weren't even very well color corrected
at all. But within the last 20 yrs or so, if I pick up a single-coated G-Claron and a multi-coated Fujinon A of equal focal length (and similar design), except for a tiny difference in
contrast, I can't see any color rendition difference, or even between even of these and
a Nikkor M or a Fuji W MC plasmat. I did once use a single-coated 250/6.7 Fuji W which had a tiny bit warmer color balance - wonderful color otherwise - but those haven't been
made for quite awhile. The major lens brands have gotten so standardized that I don't think one could even purchase a CC filter with enough batch to batch control to make the
tiny correction one lens relative to another. As far as plastmats go, I'd consider the Symmar S to be the end the line prior to full modernization. By that point, all the MC Fuji's,
whether N, NW, NWS, CMW, along with the A's seem to have very tightly matched color.
I'll let the Rodenstock expert chime in with what he know. My own experience with Rodenstock is mainly in the darkroom.

[BrianShaw]

... are you having a bad day? I am, ...

Me too, so I hesitate to say anything.

As someone who has never had to match chromes exactly for publication, I've never worried about the minor differences that may occur between brands. In fact, I've never even really noticed too much of a difference in color rendition, but believe htat htere must be a difference because it is a hot topic with those who have critical color requirements.

[Dan Fromm]

Brian, I've seen huge color differences between lenses, and even from shot to shot with the same lens, all due to the sun going behind a cloud between shots. Sun behind cloud shots are blue blue blue. And I have a 35 mm E-6 shot taken with a 105/2.8 MicroNikkor of a very blue -- in color, not in mood -- alligator. Deep shade did it.

There's so much uncontrollable -- outside of the studio -- variation that discussion of small differences seems silly.

Dan "Roses are red, shade is blue" Fromm

[Drew Wiley]

I doubt any method of color printing ever invented is capable of accurately representing
some of the subtle distinctions between modern lenses. Offset color printing never could,
modern digital like inkjet far far from it. The best of darkroom like dye transfer printing
probably not - maybe a slide show could if you have a good enough projection lens.

[Frank Petronio]

Judging color of natural light is always going to be a moving target. But you guys can ask any old fart studio photographer how critical matching color was - they used 005 Wratten CC filters - and they'll tell you how exponentially easier it is with the gross moves an outdoor photographer would make.

(And in the end the Art Director would have a crappy lightbox and all that mattered was that they were consistent more than correct.)

[Drew Wiley]

And the Ektachrome itself varied from box to box, so you'd pull out those Wratten filters,
which themselves varied due to either age/fading or batch inconsistencies; and the dude's
lightbox probably had a cool-white bulb in it at best, and his eyes were fatigued, but all he really wanted was some chick in the scene in a red bikini anyway. Then it was up to the platemaker to patch it all up. But at least it was an industry which supported a lot of jobs.

[BrianShaw]

... so what is the basis of the OPs question: studio or outdoor? I didn't notice until just now that we don't seem to know.

[BrianShaw]

Dan "Roses are red, shade is blue" Fromm

[Vaughn]

... so what is the basis of the OPs question: studio or outdoor? I didn't notice until just now that we don't seem to know.

His profile says he is a freelance photo assistant in Chicago and uses B&W film, no mention of color.