PDA

View Full Version : Rodenstock Apo Ronar f9 360mm lens



Anton Lukoszevieze
18-Sep-2014, 06:39
Is this a good lens for 8x10? Is it super sharp or little bit creamy or?
thanks

djdister
18-Sep-2014, 06:47
You would not find the Apo-Ronar a "little bit creamy" under any circumstances, however the 360mm Apo-Ronar is designed for 5x7 maximum, as shown on this page:
http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/largeformat_en.html#table1

hiend61
19-Sep-2014, 14:38
You would not find the Apo-Ronar a "little bit creamy" under any circumstances, however the 360mm Apo-Ronar is designed for 5x7 maximum, as shown on this page:
http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/largeformat_en.html#table1

The 360 Apo Ronar just covers 8x10 with no movements.

djdister
19-Sep-2014, 14:53
The 360 Apo Ronar just covers 8x10 with no movements.

So if the image circle just barely covers the diagonal, how does the image quality look at the corners?

Louis Pacilla
19-Sep-2014, 18:11
So if the image circle just barely covers the diagonal, how does the image quality look at the corners?
Hey Dan
The Rodenstock link you posted shows the 360mm APO Ronar just covers @ inf used at a working aperture of f22/32 w/ 3mm/4mm (ver/hor) shift. I would think the corners to be acceptable given this is manufacturers information & most times they tend to be conservative @ least at this time in history. Not always the case in the early days.:)

Dan Fromm
19-Sep-2014, 18:51
If I'm reading the 360/9 Apo Ronar MTF chart posted here https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=8D71BC33C77D1008!324 correctly, at f/22 the 8 and 16 lp/mm MTFs are under 5% 24 degrees off-axis (that's at the edge of a 320 mm circle). Look for yourselves.

The table at the top of the document recommends the 360 for 14" x 18" @ 1:1, i.e., 7" x 9" at infinity. If you want sharp images with good contrast of a distant subject in the corner of an 8x10 negative you might not want this lens. If you're going to use it for closer subjects or what's in the corners isn't really that important, it might do for you.

murphy
20-Sep-2014, 10:57
So I would guess this would also apply to the Red Dot Artar, with similar angle of view. Amazing how many different opinions on coverage for these len's.

Adamphotoman
20-Sep-2014, 12:48
Quote
"Hey Dan
The Rodenstock link you posted shows the 360mm APO Ronar just covers @ inf used at a working aperture of f22/32 w/ 3mm/4mm (ver/hor) shift. I would think the corners to be acceptable given this is manufacturers information & most times they tend to be conservative @ least at this time in history. Not always the case in the early days.

In the advertisement brochure from Rodenstock for the 360 Apo Ronar the recommended format is 5x7, however in the same doc they include max shift values for different film formats. Included is 3&4 mm shift for 8X10. Essentially no shift... You could be out that much if the lens is not perfectly centred in your board. At closer focusing distances even larger formats will work [which the lens was originally designed for]. the shorter Apo Ronars perform best at f22. The lens is not flat field but behaves as such when stopped down.

So the corners should be sharp stopped down. Depending on subject matter, one could shoot with a wider aperture and intentionally let the edges go soft.

Anton Lukoszevieze
22-Sep-2014, 06:46
Thank you all.

djdister
22-Sep-2014, 09:24
I neglected to mention in my earlier post - I have a 360mm Apo-Ronar in a Copal #3 shutter. It's a beautiful lens and works wonderfully on my 5x7.

Rick A
23-Mar-2015, 11:50
Okay, I've read this thread(what there is of it), but have a slight dilema concerning an APO Ronar 360/9 that I just acquired. It's a process lens, I've read all the specs and opinions I could find on line, but am puzzled by coverage, and more importantly, f-stops. If you look at the photo, you will see I have full coverage on my 11x14, no vignetting, and this is with full front rise. I know, it's hard to see in the photo, but I am stunned, focus is at infinity, WFO at F 9.
Now my real problem, no F-stop markings. There are some small tick marks on the barrel, but they are obscured by the flange mount. I can't figure out how to get the barrel off the flange. When mounted, the barrel turns, actuating the iris. Also, there is a small lever that does nothing when operated. I've had the front cell off, and can see a collar that turns inside the barrel, but nothing connected to it. I have no idea what purpose it serves. I've tried to turn the knurled ring on the back, it doesn't budge and I'm hesitant to force anything.
Any help or suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

Phil Hudson
23-Mar-2015, 12:03
there is a small lever that does nothing when operated. I've had the front cell off, and can see a collar that turns inside the barrel, but nothing connected to it. I have no idea what purpose it serves

The "lever" might just be a sliding cover for slotting in waterhouse stops?

Rick A
23-Mar-2015, 12:24
The "lever" might just be a sliding cover for slotting in waterhouse stops?

I didn't think of that. On closer inspection, the slot closes when the lever is turned one way, open the other. Thank you.

jbenedict
23-Mar-2015, 20:02
Dodge the corners a bit and you might be surprised what covers what. The furthest corners of an image are rarely the most important part of the picture. Or even an important part of the picture.