Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: (modern) 240mm Sironar N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    125

    (modern) 240mm Sironar N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    hey guys..
    I wanted to ask you what would the difference be between this two lenses regarding sharpness and rendering for full body portraits.

    i use the modern 360mm Schneider f6.8 and im pretty happy with it, but i also tested the 210/370 symmar and its also ok.. mybe a bit less sharp.. but ok ... i find the 210 to be abit too wide angle.. so i decided to go for a 240mm

    I want to buy a "full body" lens for my 8x10 ..
    (for portrait (head and shoulders) stuff im using the 360mm)

    thanks for any input.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,437

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Apo Sironar S.

    The Sironar N MC was replaced a long time ago by the Apo Sironar N.

  3. #3
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    9,224

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Generally, newer lenses from the major manufacturers are more consistent, and I'd expect a general increase in edge sharpness, but as long as the lens wasn't damaged, most lenses should perform well. There are lots of considerations from shutter, sync, filter size, self-cocking that matter more. Older lenses sometimes have many-bladed, and hence very round, apertures. This can contribute to nice out-of-focus rendition, although there's many other factors with this. For some people, this won't be important. So, condition, price, features....are often more important than the brand/model of lenses from the same era. Like many people here, I have a bunch of lenses, from fairly current to really old. I haven't found one yet that wouldn't be good for a specific purpose.

    Note that self-cocking shutters are useful for portraiture, as it's one less thing to do between shots.
    “You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
    ― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    125

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Thanks! I was "a bit" worried about the thing that the Schneider had 2 focal lengths in one lens, so i imagined in my head this would affect rendering and quality in a non good way.

    Thanks for the info!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    125

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Regarding "Schneideritis" is it something to be aware of (long tirme) getting worse so far to affect image rendering?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    2,369

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Quote Originally Posted by Jbuck View Post
    Regarding "Schneideritis" is it something to be aware of (long tirme) getting worse so far to affect image rendering?
    Personal experience is that "Schneideritis" never effected the image rendering of a lens. Value of the lens might go down but not its image quality. Would be interesting to hear from others on this topic.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,437

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Quote Originally Posted by Jbuck View Post
    Regarding "Schneideritis" is it something to be aware of (long tirme) getting worse so far to affect image rendering?
    Best to avoid it as it can increase and it will effect edge performance. How badly depends on the condition of the problem. And why buy something that will continuously diminish the future value should you want to get a better lens later? That will only make your investment more expensive in the long run.

    BTW, like the old convertible Symmar the old Sironar was also convertible. None of them are very good converted and both may require more bellows converted then your camera has. In that case you are only looking at the focal length at 5.6 not converted and the newer lens will be a much better performer with a larger image circle.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Bellingham, WA (displaced Canadian)
    Posts
    531

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    I recently compared the Symmar 360/620 f5.6/12 with the multi-coated Symmar-S on a 11x14 contact print, since I unexpectedly had access to both (the old convertible symmar is my own). I couldn't tell the difference between the two. Same subject, same lighting. Even contrast was the same.

    Granted, I would expect that if I was on the field rather than the studio and was dealing with light sources that could flare or ghost...the multi-coated lens would been far superior.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,437

    Re: (modern) 240mm Siranor N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    Quote Originally Posted by MAubrey View Post
    I recently compared the Symmar 360/620 f5.6/12 with the multi-coated Symmar-S on a 11x14 contact print, since I unexpectedly had access to both (the old convertible symmar is my own). I couldn't tell the difference between the two. Same subject, same lighting. Even contrast was the same.

    Granted, I would expect that if I was on the field rather than the studio and was dealing with light sources that could flare or ghost...the multi-coated lens would been far superior.
    And did the shot have fine detail on the edges? Did you use movements on both?

  10. #10
    Peter De Smidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Fond du Lac, WI, USA
    Posts
    9,224

    Re: (modern) 240mm Sironar N vs. (older) Schneider 5.6/240mm aka 12/420mm

    The general rule of thumb is that using separate cells of a convertible lens will lead to a bit less performance than using than using both cells together, but the big advantage is having more focal lengths. A perfect lens is nice, but a mild bit of Schneideritus shouldn't be a big deal, but you should certainly pay less for one that has it.
    “You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
    ― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know

Similar Threads

  1. Schneider 240mm APO Symmar vs. Nikon 240mm
    By Gary Smith in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 4-Dec-2006, 09:05

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
  •