PDA

View Full Version : Deciding between Rodenstock vs. Fujinon entry level 150mm lenses



Mike in NY
8-Mar-2019, 19:50
I'm in the market for an entry level 150mm lens, and found two equally priced options in fine condition, as follows:


Rodenstock APO-Symmar S f/5.6 with an image circle of 210

Fujinon W 150mm f/5.6 with an image circle of 245


I like the Fujinon's larger image circle, but I've read that Fujinons are super sharp - perhaps too sharp for some tastes. I'm wondering if there are differences in contrast.

Thoughts, experience?

Peter De Smidt
8-Mar-2019, 19:55
Rodenstock didn't make an apo-symmar. Schneider made Symmars. I like Fujinons, and so that's what I'd go with, but both are likely excellent.

Mike in NY
8-Mar-2019, 20:02
You're right, of course, Peter. I had made a list of options and had a Rodenstock listed below the Schneider. My eyes must have dropped to the next line and misread the Symmar as a Rodie, so that's what I typed in the post. Thank you for the correction.

Dan Fromm
8-Mar-2019, 20:30
Toss a coin.

More seriously, buy on price and condition.

Eric Leppanen
8-Mar-2019, 20:34
The Fujinon may be single-coated (it is single coated if there is lettering on the inside of the front barrel, rather than the outside). The APO Symmar is multi-coated. In many cases this won't matter (particularly if you use a lens hood) but on occasion a multi-coated lens may flare a bit a less or provide a smidge more contrast, particularly if there is a light source in or near the frame.

Two23
8-Mar-2019, 20:42
Can't go wrong with either one. I have a Rodenstock 135mm and a Fuji 180mm. I like them both.


Kent in SD

ic-racer
9-Mar-2019, 07:36
I'm in the market for an entry level 150mm lens, and found two equally priced options in fine condition, as follows:


Rodenstock APO-Symmar S f/5.6 with an image circle of 210

Fujinon W 150mm f/5.6 with an image circle of 245


I like the Fujinon's larger image circle, but I've read that Fujinons are super sharp - perhaps too sharp for some tastes. I'm wondering if there are differences in contrast.

Thoughts, experience?

Assuming the lens elements are clear and clean in both, I'd go with the one that has the better shutter. I use a Fujinon 150/5.6 for my Horseman FA.

188575

Emmanuel BIGLER
9-Mar-2019, 08:22
Hi!

The nice thing about large format (LF) lenses manufactured by the Gang of Four (by alphabetical order: Fuji, Nikon, Schneider-Kreuznach, Rodenstock) is that there are very few bad lenses. Those lenses were designed and marketed as production tools for demanding professionals. They inherited of about one century of experience in lens design and manufacturing.
Now you can choose whichever brand you find suitable, affordable or desirable, as far as the lens is not damaged by fungus, lens-element separation, and providing that the shutter works fine.

Not all kinds of lenses can be found in all four catalogues, though.
For example, to the best of my knowledge, Fuji and Nikon never developed lenses to compete with ultra-wide short focal lenses like Schneider's Super Angulons XL 38, 47, 58 and Rodentock's Apo-Grandagons 35, 45 and 55.
Conversely, you won't find from the German manufacturers the equivalents of the modular long focal length Nikkor telephotos.
For the 150 mm, standard focal length of the 4x5" format, you have a lot of models, it is hard to give a recommendation except of course, that the most recent is the best.

What can be said regarding the series Symmar-S by Schneider-Kreuznach, is that they represent a significant improvement versus the previous series, the convertible Symmars. So you can safely go for a Symmar-S.

At a certain time in history, German authorities issued a so-called DIN standard DIN 19040, for us the relevant standard is
DIN 19040-5, Ausgabedatum: 1979-04
Begriffe der Photographie; Allgemeine optische Begriffe in der Photographie

Do not even try to find on the Internet a free copy of any document for DIN, ASA and ISO standards since they are available only if you pay for, and you are not allowed to disclose the contents publicly!
Moreover the now legendary (at least for aficionados of fine photographic lenses) standard DIN 19040 is outdated and no longer available ...
So when the DIN19040 appeared, apparently in 1979, sub-section DIN-19040-5 re-defined what "APO" meant for a photographic lens.
And the definition was probably not the original definition introduced at the end of the XIX-st century at the times of Ernst Abbe for apochromatic microscope lenses or apochromatic triplets.

Brief Summary: there is a very high probability that an early, post-1979 Apo-Symmar or Apo-Sironar are extremely close in their design and manufacturing process to a late pre-1979 Symmar-S or Sironar.

And needless to say that Japanese manufacturers soon labeled some of their lenses "APO".
There is no obligation for manufacturers to inform customers about all improvements in their lens designs and manufacturing processes.
You can of course find patent documents, but commercial names are never mentioned in patents, and you never know if a product is actually manufactured exactly as described in the patent.
The only documents allowing to track the change in lens designs for the same or a similar commercial lens name are FTM curves, but unfortunately they were not available or not published before 1970 for LF lenses. Moreover a change in anti-reflection coatings has absolutely no influence of FTM curves.

Actually, all this fuzziness is a real blessing for discussions on LF forums worldwide: if everything was know and publicly available, a lot of discussions would become irrelevant, this would not be fun ;)

Bernice Loui
9-Mar-2019, 08:56
Majority of LF lenses were not "entry level". Keep in mind LF was primarily a image quality oriented medium back then, only folks serious about image quality were interested in this niche.

What has changes is the number of recent folks interested in LF film that has never done film before. They often bring their smaller format habits, marketing influences and all with them as they begin the LF learning curve and LF image making journey. They often discover LF is a very different experience than digital in many ways.

Essentially, any of the big four Nikkor, Rodenstock, Fujinon, Schneider are far more similar than different. Coatings are not going to make that much difference due to the smaller number of lens elements compared to lens specific to smaller film formats.

So, pick the lens that has the best working-reliable shutter and good condition glass. More important when starting out in LF is a shutter-lens that does what it must do and not produce grief as this will amplify potential grief and stunt the learning curve.


Bernice

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 13:44
Thank you all. By entry level, I was referring to cost (as opposed to, say, a much more expensive 150mm Sironar-S, for example). My other size lenses are in Copal 0 and 1 shutters, and I can either get either the Schneider or the Fujinon that I'm considering in a Copal, as the Fujinon is a later model not in the earlier Seiko shutter.

Bob Salomon
9-Mar-2019, 15:13
Thank you all. By entry level, I was referring to cost (as opposed to, say, a much more expensive 150mm Sironar-S, for example). My other size lenses are in Copal 0 and 1 shutters, and I can either get either the Schneider or the Fujinon that I'm considering in a Copal, as the Fujinon is a later model not in the earlier Seiko shutter.

Apo Sironar S. Rodenstock never made a Sironar S.

Luis-F-S
9-Mar-2019, 16:35
I'm in the market for an entry level 150mm lens, and found two equally priced options in fine condition, as follows:


Rodenstock APO-Symmar S f/5.6 with an image circle of 210

Fujinon W 150mm f/5.6 with an image circle of 245


I like the Fujinon's larger image circle, but I've read that Fujinons are super sharp - perhaps too sharp for some tastes. I'm wondering if there are differences in contrast.

Thoughts, experience?

Just get one, it probably won't make that much difference, and whatever you get you'll probably sell it within a year!

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 17:01
I was referring to the Rodenstock Apo Sironar S.

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 17:03
Just get one, it probably won't make that much difference, and whatever you get you'll probably sell it within a year!

Trying to understand, why do you think I would probably do that?

Dan Fromm
9-Mar-2019, 17:41
Trying to understand, why do you think I would probably do that?

Pardon me for jumping in. That's what many of us do.

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 18:16
Hm, I'm having trouble following...

Dan Fromm
9-Mar-2019, 18:26
Buy, try, sell. What's not to follow?

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 18:31
OK... back to my original question... does anyone have thoughts on differences between the two lenses?

Dan Fromm
9-Mar-2019, 19:17
There are none that matter. If you disagree, buy both and test.

Peter De Smidt
9-Mar-2019, 19:26
+1.

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 19:29
I see no need to buy both lenses and sell the one I like least. I posted my question hoping to learn from anyone who might have had enough experience with both lenses to offer insights into the distinctions beyond those that I already mentioned, such as the Fujinon's notably wider circle of coverage.

Peter De Smidt
9-Mar-2019, 19:53
Both are generally excellent lenses. Doing careful and statistically relevant tests is a huge undertaking. Even if someone here has samples of both lenses, and the ability to do very careful tests, that wouldn't say that your samples would be exactly the same, and comparing image circles between manufacturers isn't straight forward. So it's unlikely that anyone can give you the advice that you're seeking. Pick one based on condition and price. If you really can't decide, flip a coin.

Bernice Loui
9-Mar-2019, 19:57
Why do you believe there are any significant differences between the Rodenstock -vs- Fujinon?

-How long have you been burning sheet film, about how many sheets?


Bernice



OK... back to my original question... does anyone have thoughts on differences between the two lenses?

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 20:02
I'm sorry, but I just have to say that I'm continually baffled by posts that do not answer an OP's original question, both in this instance and in other threads. I appreciate when people explore tangents, but only after they address the question originally asked. Honestly, there are times when I think we should change the name from LPF forum to ADD forum. Think about it... I researched a number of purchasing options, narrowed it down to two, and wanted to know if anyone had an opinion about the contrast between the two lenses in question, based on their experience. That was my topic. If you don't believe me, go back and look at Post #1.

Then someone has the nerve to presumptuously ask me how many sheets of film I've exposed, all because I asked if there was a difference in contrast between two different lenses. Really? That kind of post often makes me ask myself why I bother posting questions and looking for friendly help in this forum. I feel like St. Sebastian tied to a tree and pierced by half a dozen arrows just for seeking advice.

Look, we're all friends here, and conversations tend to take twists and turns, but honestly, it doesn't sit well with me when someone makes a dig at me without knowing anything about me, my background as a photographer, or having viewed my work. I'm simply interested in answers to the topic I raised (e.g., contrast between two specific lenses) than condescending questions that reflect upon the person who asked them, not me. For those who can shed light on the original topic, I am extremely grateful for your insights (Eric, for example, among others). If you are unable to address the question I raised, resist the temptation to offer a non-response and move along to another thread.

Thank you.

Bernice Loui
9-Mar-2019, 21:06
The only way to decide Rodenstock or Fujinon is to purchase BOTH lenses, then do lots of lens testing on your own to decide which lens works for your image making needs. While there are differences between Rodenstock, Nikkor, Schneider, Fujinon as mentioned many times before these four are far more similar than different in sharpness, contrast, color rendition and such. This is due to their common lens formulation-perscription of a six element Plasmat. There are slight variations in each individual lens, again the only way to really determine this is to test the specific lens. Once any specific lens becomes acceptable, sell the lens that is not acceptable or pass on the unacceptable lens on to another image maker.

There is no valid way to determine the specific visual results for a specific individual lens via web based images. There are FAR too many variables in the way data for images is compressed, transmitted, image monitor performance and more.

This is the premise or why the comment was made about home many sheets of film used-produced. For those who have burned a few hundred boxes of film over a few decades, the question of lens performance would have been experienced and understood to some degree.

Also as previously mentioned, LF film lenses made after the later part of the 1970's by Rodenstock-Fujinon-Schneider-Nikkor were designed and intended for working professional photographers where their livelihood depended on their image-making performance. Add to this the cost of setting up a 4x5 or larger studio film image and the cost of film including Polaroids that were very common to evaluate the image and set up before the film was exposed. All these real world cost demands nothing less than the best lens performance possible as the cost of a single studio image can easily exceed the cost of a new lens back in those days. On location images can cost more than studio work due to all the other adders from permits to location rental and a LOT more.

Consider this question of Rodenstock or Fujinon being better in this context.



Bernice

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 21:18
For those who have burned a few hundred boxes of film over a few decades, the question of lens performance would have been experienced and understood to some degree.

Another arrow for St. Sebastian, who made the mistake of asking a question with the hope of learning from more experienced photographers, not by being belittled by them.

AJ Edmondson
9-Mar-2019, 21:39
I chose the Fujinon over the APO Symmar for one reason (used both). I prefer the older single coated lenses for their rendition (relative to contrast)... they remind me - in performance - of the old single-coated Angulons. For my taste, the APO Symmars are too "harsh" but we all have our own definitions. As far as sharpness, I honestly haven't seen any measurable difference in sharpness but maybe I am just not refined enough (and I rarely print anything larger than 11x14).
Joel

Bernice Loui
9-Mar-2019, 21:40
Specific to this question, the only way to learn this is to experience these lens differences in real life, real time, real world.

-There is no other effective way.

There was a time when better photography stores would offer trials, loaners or rental lens for customer evaluation. This was another means to gain real world, real time experience with these lenses. This has been mostly replaced by hear-say and self proclaimed experts on the web.

Journey of learning, acquiring knowledge-wisdon is never easy or instant. This journey is often full of failures, mistakes, happenstance, Serendipity, total defeat and at times results. There is no short cut or instant answer to this question as it is packed with complexity and subtlety.


Bernice



Another arrow for St. Sebastian, who made the mistake of asking a question with the hope of learning from more experienced photographers, not by being belittled by them.

andrewch59
9-Mar-2019, 21:42
If they are similar enough that the choice becomes a flip of a coin, choose by filter size. My largest modern lens takes 67mm filters if I were to get a bigger lens I would have to buy more filters. However if I go down in size I can use step up rings.

Mike in NY
9-Mar-2019, 21:46
AJ, thank you for answering my question.

188630
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/a1fdcc02-42fa-488c-aef7-781d2023810d

Bernice Loui
9-Mar-2019, 21:54
This reply is at the core of why trying to answer this question is so very, very difficult. There is an individual need, goal, definition of what too high or too low the image contrast from any given lens might be. What is excellent for one image maker will be horrifically awful for another.

As been mentioned numerous times on LFF, modern Plasmats are not for me. Been there done all that. The prime choice is Kodak Ektar which could be horrid for many other image makers and their specific needs.

There is a possible analogy with food and individual taste and preference for specific food types.


Bernice




I chose the Fujinon over the APO Symmar for one reason (used both). I prefer the older single coated lenses for their rendition (relative to contrast)... they remind me - in performance - of the old single-coated Angulons. For my taste, the APO Symmars are too "harsh" but we all have our own definitions. As far as sharpness, I honestly haven't seen any measurable difference in sharpness but maybe I am just not refined enough (and I rarely print anything larger than 11x14).
Joel

Bernice Loui
9-Mar-2019, 21:55
Know lighting and shading of the lens also affect image contrast. So does internal reflections from bellows and more..

Not simple.


Bernice

Sal Santamaura
9-Mar-2019, 23:07
I'm in the market for an entry level 150mm lens, and found two equally priced options in fine condition, as follows:


Rodenstock APO-Symmar S f/5.6 with an image circle of 210

Fujinon W 150mm f/5.6 with an image circle of 245


I like the Fujinon's larger image circle, but I've read that Fujinons are super sharp - perhaps too sharp for some tastes. I'm wondering if there are differences in contrast.

Thoughts, experience?


I was referring to the Rodenstock Apo Sironar S.

Based on those posts, it's clear you are referring to the older, single-coated, inside-lettering 150mm Fujinon W with 46mm filter threads. It's the only one that had a 245mm image circle.

The 150mm Rodenstock Apo Sironar S was specified to have an image circle of 231mm, not 210mm. I'm still not certain which lens you're referring to; note that neither a 150mm Schneider Apo Symmar nor 150mm Apo Symmar L had image circles of 210mm. For the moment I'll answer assuming your second alternative is a Rodenstock Apo Sironar S. I'll also assume that no damage has been done to either of your alternatives, i.e. their performance is similar to when they left their respective factories.

I own pristine single-coated, 80-degree, inside-lettering Fujinon lenses in several focal lengths. None of them exhibit circles of good definition as large as their circles of illumination; the latter parameter tracks Fuji's "image circle" specifications closely. They also suffer from field curvature within their circles of good definition. Surprisingly, their contrast is not significantly degraded by their single coatings. It's still slightly lower than that of multicoated later versions.

The Rodenstock Apo Sironar S can be counted upon to exhibit high sharpness and contrast, as well as low field curvature, all the way out to the edge of its 231mm image circle. It will outperform the Fujinon by a large margin.

If price and condition of your two alternative samples are comparable, I wouldn't hesitate for a microsecond to purchase the Rodenstock.


I'm sorry, but I just have to say that I'm continually baffled by posts that do not answer an OP's original question, both in this instance and in other threads...

Welcome to the place where many believe they know better than you what question you should have asked. There's no bigger ego boost than showing off one's "superiority." :)


...ask myself why I bother posting questions and looking for friendly help in this forum...One way to jump past the situation is performing a search of the very large archive this forum offers. Use Google, limit the search by including site:largeformatphotography.info and you'll be able to spend hours reviewing all the other threads where people asked a question like yours and were also condescended to. Buried within those results will be a small number of useful answers from posters whose credibility you can ascertain from their posting history. A lot of work, but usually worth it.


...Look, we're all friends here...There's an old saying in Washington, D.C.: "If you want a friend, get a dog." That might be useful here too. :D

Dan Fromm
10-Mar-2019, 08:00
I see no need to buy both lenses and sell the one I like least.

Less, not least.

You know your tastes and preferences. You know what pleases you and what doesn't. To the extent that you have artistic vision you know what it is. No one else can read your mind and know these things.

That's why I suggested that you buy and try. You can't let other people make important decisions for you.

In blind tests, people skilled in the art have great difficulty telling which lens took a shot. That's why I told you that it doesn't matter which recent generation lens you get. They're all much better than good enough. What part of good enough don't you understand?

Telling you that you're unique is not shooting an arrow. Neither is telling you that good enough means just that.

Bob Salomon
10-Mar-2019, 08:08
Look, you know your tastes and preferences. You know what pleases you and what doesn't. To the extent that you have artistic vision you know what it is. No one else can read your mind and know these things.

That's why I suggested that you buy and try. You can't let other people make important decisions for you.

In my opinion, based on blind tests, people skilled in the art have great difficulty telling which lens took a shot. That's why I told you that it doesn't matter which recent generation lens you get. They're all much better than good enough. What part of good enough don't you understand.

Were those blind tests done of the same subject, same lighting, same image ratio, same exposure, same processing? If not, they are not blind tests!

I have seen blind tests done under those same conditions, once at a very major catalog studio doing color catalog photography, once at a camera manufacturer, once at a major manufacturer and under identical controlled conditions you certainly could see a difference between lenses from different manufacturers and within a specific manufacturers lens types.

rdeloe
10-Mar-2019, 08:15
Mike, one thing that hasn't been mentioned yet as you make your choice (and which you may not care about!) is the mechanical controls.

Fujinon controls the aperture from a lever on the bottom of the shutter, while Rodenstock has a lever on top. I try to work by muscle memory as much as I can, and my memory (both muscle and regular!) is only getting worse, so I like controls in the same spot. I started with Fujinon so I'm sticking with that line as long as I can as I add lenses. It's also for this reason that I don't have any Nikon lenses. The aperture works in the opposite direction to Fujinon.



I'm in the market for an entry level 150mm lens, and found two equally priced options in fine condition, as follows:


Rodenstock APO-Symmar S f/5.6 with an image circle of 210

Fujinon W 150mm f/5.6 with an image circle of 245


I like the Fujinon's larger image circle, but I've read that Fujinons are super sharp - perhaps too sharp for some tastes. I'm wondering if there are differences in contrast.

Thoughts, experience?

rdeloe
10-Mar-2019, 08:17
I'm sorry, but I just have to say that I'm continually baffled by posts that do not answer an OP's original question, both in this instance and in other threads. I appreciate when people explore tangents, but only after they address the question originally asked. Honestly, there are times when I think we should change the name from LPF forum to ADD forum. Think about it... I researched a number of purchasing options, narrowed it down to two, and wanted to know if anyone had an opinion about the contrast between the two lenses in question, based on their experience. That was my topic. If you don't believe me, go back and look at Post #1.

Then someone has the nerve to presumptuously ask me how many sheets of film I've exposed, all because I asked if there was a difference in contrast between two different lenses. Really? That kind of post often makes me ask myself why I bother posting questions and looking for friendly help in this forum. I feel like St. Sebastian tied to a tree and pierced by half a dozen arrows just for seeking advice.

Look, we're all friends here, and conversations tend to take twists and turns, but honestly, it doesn't sit well with me when someone makes a dig at me without knowing anything about me, my background as a photographer, or having viewed my work. I'm simply interested in answers to the topic I raised (e.g., contrast between two specific lenses) than condescending questions that reflect upon the person who asked them, not me. For those who can shed light on the original topic, I am extremely grateful for your insights (Eric, for example, among others). If you are unable to address the question I raised, resist the temptation to offer a non-response and move along to another thread.

Thank you.

Yeah... I had a technical question I needed an answer to yesterday. I was going to post it on this forum, but decided to ask someone I know to be very knowledgeable directly because the question was guaranteed -- absolutely guaranteed -- to turn into a long thread full of dominance games and pontificating. And my question would not have been answered. Happily, I have my answer from my friend over email, and it's technically sound and it makes sense.

Bob Salomon
10-Mar-2019, 08:25
Mike, one thing that hasn't been mentioned yet as you make your choice (and which you may not care about!) is the mechanical controls.

Fujinon controls the aperture from a lever on the bottom of the shutter, while Rodenstock has a lever on top. I try to work by muscle memory as much as I can, and my memory (both muscle and regular!) is only getting worse, so I like controls in the same spot. I started with Fujinon so I'm sticking with that line as long as I can as I add lenses. It's also for this reason that I don't have any Nikon lenses. The aperture works in the opposite direction to Fujinon.

The lens doesn’t have an aperture control lever, the shutter does. Put all lenses in that shutter and they all have that aperture lever.
However that shutter haven’t been made for decades now!

Bob Salomon
10-Mar-2019, 08:27
Yeah... I had a technical question I needed an answer to yesterday. I was going to post it on this forum, but decided to ask someone I know to be very knowledgeable directly because the question was guaranteed -- absolutely guaranteed -- to turn into a long thread full of dominance games and pontificating. And my question would not have been answered. Happily, I have my answer from my friend over email, and it's technically sound and it makes sense.

But how do you know that it is the correct or the only answer?

Photography isn’t arithmetic, there can be multiple correct answers.

A very good friend decided that he wanted to learn darkroom and especially printing. So he signed up for a darkroom course at our local community college back in NJ. The course was being taught by a local pro photographer.
He was taught that the normal paper grade for printing was 5!!! And no amount of discussion could convince him that this was wrong! Primarily because he learned it from a knowledgeable instructor!

Mike in NY
10-Mar-2019, 08:37
188631

Dan Fromm
10-Mar-2019, 08:53
Were those blind tests done of the same subject, same lighting, same image ratio, same exposure, same processing? If not, they are not blind tests!

Some yes, others no. Both ways, blind is blind. The subjects couldn't associate lenses with shots.

Dan Fromm
10-Mar-2019, 08:54
188631

Exactly. Welcome to the club.

Luis-F-S
10-Mar-2019, 09:35
Trying to understand, why do you think I would probably do that?

Because most people's tastes change with time and as they learn.

Most lenses are better than most photographers!

Bernice Loui
10-Mar-2019, 09:43
Precisely, or why one lens that meets the needs of one image maker is completely wrong for another image maker.

These individual preferences can and do change over the course of creative image making. Consider those who began with digital cameras then moved into film cameras or those who began with film then moved to digital cameras.


Bernice



Because most people's tastes change with time and as they learn.

Most lenses are better than most photographers!

MultiFormat Shooter
10-Mar-2019, 10:05
He was taught that the normal paper grade for printing was 5!!!

That's the first time I ever heard of someone being taught that. Wow!! 😲🤮

Mike in NY
10-Mar-2019, 10:41
I made my decision and purchased the Schneider Apo-Symmar in a Copal No. 0. As a bonus, it even came with a lens shade (I'm not going to say what kind, for fear of starting another contest.)

Thanks to everyone who shared their personal knowledge, experience, and opinions. I value opinions for exactly what they are, and understand that they are neither truth nor a substitute for arriving at my own conclusions. I make my living in qualitative research and quantitative data analysis. I routinely manage international surveys conducted in ten different languages in 70 countries. I spend my time reading and analyzing literally thousands of individual perspectives on complex matters, and performing regression analysis of opinions held with multiple variables. I'm probably as aware as anybody that highly competent professionals of all stripes can hold widely different opinions about the same topic. No one needs to worry that I'll let someone on this forum make a decision for me, but I'll always be grateful to those who inform my decision by sharing their own perspectives. That's why I come here.

Vaughn
10-Mar-2019, 10:57
You asked for "thoughts, experiences" and in true LF fashion, you got them!

Sal Santamaura
10-Mar-2019, 11:11
I was referring to the Rodenstock Apo Sironar S.


...The 150mm Rodenstock Apo Sironar S was specified to have an image circle of 231mm, not 210mm. I'm still not certain which lens you're referring to; note that neither a 150mm Schneider Apo Symmar nor 150mm Apo Symmar L had image circles of 210mm. For the moment I'll answer assuming your second alternative is a Rodenstock Apo Sironar S...If price and condition of your two alternative samples are comparable, I wouldn't hesitate for a microsecond to purchase the Rodenstock...


I made my decision and purchased the Schneider Apo-Symmar in a Copal No. 0...Now that you've clearly indicated which lens you purchased, and assuming it's a 150mm Apo Symmar (not an Apo Symmar L), know that it will have an image circle of 220mm, contrast slightly less than an Apo Sironar S would have but slightly more than the Fujinon you were considering, and be less sharp than the Apo Sironar S but slightly sharper than that Fujinon. Again, this assumes all lenses are in the same condition they left their respective factories. I wouldn't have hesitated to purchase an Apo Symmar vs that Fujinon either.

Speaking only for myself, unless something I post starts with the phrase "in my opinion," only facts are presented.

Mike in NY
10-Mar-2019, 11:36
Thanks Sal. I wish I could have afforded the APO Sironar S, but it was three times as expensive, so I had to rule that one out. I'm sorry I got my lens nomenclature and models mixed up; it was the combination of antihistimines and looking at a spreadsheet full of Symmars, Sironars, and Sinarons. I always tell my staff, don't make spreadsheets when you're on cold medicine. I should have followed my own advice.

Bob Salomon
10-Mar-2019, 11:47
I made my decision and purchased the Schneider Apo-Symmar in a Copal No. 0. As a bonus, it even came with a lens shade (I'm not going to say what kind, for fear of starting another contest.)

Thanks to everyone who shared their personal knowledge, experience, and opinions. I value opinions for exactly what they are, and understand that they are neither truth nor a substitute for arriving at my own conclusions. I make my living in qualitative research and quantitative data analysis. I routinely manage international surveys conducted in ten different languages in 70 countries. I spend my time reading and analyzing literally thousands of individual perspectives on complex matters, and performing regression analysis of opinions held with multiple variables. I'm probably as aware as anybody that highly competent professionals of all stripes can hold widely different opinions about the same topic. No one needs to worry that I'll let someone on this forum make a decision for me, but I'll always be grateful to those who inform my decision by sharing their own perspectives. That's why I come here.
Careful with a lens shade on large format if you use movements!

Peter De Smidt
10-Mar-2019, 11:54
Careful, Bob. You're telling him something he didn't ask about. He might become unhappy that you're so helpful.

Luis-F-S
10-Mar-2019, 11:55
Thanks Sal. I wish I could have afforded the APO Sironar S, but it was three times as expensive, so I had to rule that one out. I'm sorry I got my lens nomenclature and models mixed up; it was the combination of antihistimines and looking at a spreadsheet full of Symmars, Sironars, and Sinarons. I always tell my staff, don't make spreadsheets when you're on cold medicine. I should have followed my own advice.

A lot of money for a 6” lens. Only 6” lenses I own are a Golden Dagor (got the cells for free) a G-Claron (Dagor design) and a WA Dagor.

Bob Salomon
10-Mar-2019, 12:59
Careful, Bob. You're telling him something he didn't ask about. He might become unhappy that you're so helpful.

Maybe he won’t be too surprised!

pepeguitarra
10-Mar-2019, 13:16
I found that Bob is right almost 100% of the time.

Bob Salomon
10-Mar-2019, 13:18
I found that Bob is right almost 100% of the time.

Thanks, but define almost!

Mike in NY
10-Mar-2019, 20:03
Peter, just have to get those digs in no matter what, eh? It's OK, 'cause it's no reflection on me, only on you, so knock yourself out.

pepeguitarra
10-Mar-2019, 20:24
Thanks, but define almost!. I meant it from the half full position, you read it from the half empty position. ;)

Peter De Smidt
10-Mar-2019, 20:25
It is a reflection on you. You asked for advice. People gave it. It wasn't what you wanted. People with experience tried to explain why you couldn't be given what you wanted, and they suggested reasonable alternatives for you. You took offense because someone asked if you were a newbie, as you seemed to have trouble with what people were telling you. Being a newbie is not a problem. You took it as in insult, though, and you publicly chastised the people who were doing you the honor to take the time to give you advice. To me, that's ungracious.

Mike in NY
10-Mar-2019, 21:25
Well, Peter, I thought the post asking me how many sheets of film I had developed was obnoxious and was intended to be demeaning... just as I thought your comment to Bob about me above was a transparent effort to provoke me. I'm weary of that kind of online behavior... it's all keyboard courage in my opinion.

I'm no newbie to film or to this forum, and even if I'm newer to LF than MF, I don't need to justify my questions about the contrast between lenses by keeping a score of how many sheets of film I've developed. Good grief; is that really the level of discourse anyone is interested in on this forum? My grandfather had a saying that comes to mind: "I'd rather sandpaper a bobcat's ass in a phone booth than talk to him." Or her.

When I started in LF seven years ago, I had my occasional moments of self-doubt. But those doubts can't compare to the discouragement I've witnessed from rude and condescending members of this forum. So I just tell myself that whatever (or whoever) doesn’t kill my interest will only make it stronger. So for that much, I'll thank you, Peter, but for little else.

Now that I've made my purchase decision, I'll bow out from this thread by once again thanking the helpful members who shared their experience, humor, friendship, and private emails encouraging me to look past the antagonizers on this thread. As for the rest, well... continue pontificating without me... I suspect you'll do just that.

Bernice Loui
10-Mar-2019, 22:43
The Schneider APO-Symmar is as good as any of the other choices...

LF lens choices are very much a personal preference and should NOT be driven by survey data, group consensus or collection of data based in cognitive bias of individuals who are involved with LF.

*This is why you got the, "how many sheets of film have you burned to date." question. It was specifically intended to deny and prevent group think and suppress data collection allowing what is belief to be the ideal lens based on this group experience with the choice of Schneider or Fujinon or.... miracle lens.

As for Statistical analysis of collected data, "Garbage IN _ Garbage OUT."

Human creativity and individual expression of how any given individual shares their vision of the world is very much an individual thing_identical to Lens choice, Camera choice, Film choice, Development chemistry choice, Sheet film processing choice, means to a finished print choice... This does not even begin to touch on image subject matter.

What is Fact, making LOTs of sheet film images will prompt the experience and awareness of the entire LF experience. When this is coupled with developing points of artistic reference based on the art history over the duration of human history can provide some idea and sense of artistic expression within the visual context.

To an effective photographer is to have the ability to communicate to others your experience of this world and how it can be shared visually. Again, this means of visual expression is absolutely unique to each and every image maker. This is what MUST be developed to be effective as an artist, photographer and to become more human.


:)
Bernice





I made my decision and purchased the Schneider Apo-Symmar in a Copal No. 0. As a bonus, it even came with a lens shade (I'm not going to say what kind, for fear of starting another contest.)

Thanks to everyone who shared their personal knowledge, experience, and opinions. I value opinions for exactly what they are, and understand that they are neither truth nor a substitute for arriving at my own conclusions. I make my living in qualitative research and quantitative data analysis. I routinely manage international surveys conducted in ten different languages in 70 countries. I spend my time reading and analyzing literally thousands of individual perspectives on complex matters, and performing regression analysis of opinions held with multiple variables. I'm probably as aware as anybody that highly competent professionals of all stripes can hold widely different opinions about the same topic. No one needs to worry that I'll let someone on this forum make a decision for me, but I'll always be grateful to those who inform my decision by sharing their own perspectives. That's why I come here.

Corran
11-Mar-2019, 13:10
There's some real poor attitudes on both sides in this thread and I would encourage some members to re-evaluate your approach to "helpful" posts. I can personally attest that many, many people have stopped posting here, or never signed up, due to antagonizing posts such as some seen on this thread. Even some folks I quite respect seem to be posting rather rude things.

Everyone knows that the best way to find something out is to do all the work yourself - buy lenses, shoot film, etc. etc. You don't need to tell anyone that, it is obvious. Sometimes a question and discussion is just that, and is worth exactly what anyone pays for it. This forum is a written discussion area and so imperfect in many ways, but it seems like some would prefer if the forum was nothing more than a single post that says "JUST TRY IT YOURSELF DUMMY."

Peter De Smidt
11-Mar-2019, 13:59
Well, I don't think that all advice should devolve to that, which I hope I've demonstrated over the years. Some questions are fairly easily answered. Ask Bob a question about Rodenstock, for example. Other questions are not so simple. And there are many examples of people who wrangle about stuff for days when a simple test would've given them the best answer. For example, suppose someone asks, "How long should I develop my film for?" At best the reports of others can only be a, likely confusing, guideline. There are too many variables involved. Pointing those out, outlining how to do a test, and then recommending doing it is not an unhelpful or dismissive answer. If the imaginary poster replied, "But that's not what I asked! I wanted the best time! You people suck! I am like a martyr being killed by arrows!" Well, that would be ungracious.

Corran
11-Mar-2019, 14:31
Peter, I generally agree. As we all know though, amassing all the various options in lenses today can be difficult, both in terms of time, cost, etc., so some general thoughts from people who may have had some experience could be helpful to some. Of course the general advice of "any modern lens from the big 4 will be good" is also valid and should be given. The piling on displayed here, and yes after the huffy if not understandable response, is the issue I refer to. I feel like it needed to be said, that this atmosphere, often from those who were able to "test" for themselves when there were local camera stores everywhere stocked with every lens you could want and film was cheap, is what causes people to move on from this forum or stagnates membership.

I am reminded of some of the threads I've made in the Darkroom subforum. In every last one of them, someone comes in and says "just test for yourself!" in the first post or two, as if I didn't think of that already. This is a non-answer and one that is both unhelpful and rude. Of course I planned on testing, but also like to hear from others their experience. Once the conversation is steered to specific things and the discussion becomes fruitful, often I and many others learn something. I have even received emails thanking me for starting such a thread and specifically mentioned the poor start from those who simply needed to post the "try it yourself" drumbeat.

Again, that is an obvious answer, and while a reminder occasionally is fine, I think some could stop posting nothing but "try it yourself" and "no one can tell you but you" and blah blah blah. Even if there is plenty of truth to that, it's also not that helpful in many situations.

Jac@stafford.net
11-Mar-2019, 14:39
Just get one, it probably won't make that much difference [...]

Indeed, nobody could tell the difference between either unless he were more interested in forensics than in picture-making. Don't fuss. Do work and if you are self-conscious about 'making the right choice', never mention the lens. Nobody cares. Enjoy.

Vaughn
11-Mar-2019, 14:39
The OP's rather general comparison question about two lenses got an array of answers. Nothing surprising about that. But generally the OP got good usable answers. For better communication, it is important to know the knowledge level of the person you are communicating with. Having given no clue on his experience or technical expertise except that he wanted an entry-level lens (and no great knowledge demonstrated by his confusion about lens manufactures and lens names), the OP was asked about his experience level (how many sheets has he burned through). I am sorry the OP took offense to that -- but Bernice is not to blame for the OP's reaction.

I thought I showed great restraint by not posting that a Caltar IIN 150/5.6 was the go-to lens for the buck...since he was not asking about other lenses.:cool:

dang...I just did...

Luis-F-S
11-Mar-2019, 15:04
Indeed, nobody could tell the difference between either unless he were more interested in forensics than in picture-making. Don't fuss. Do work and if you are self-conscious about 'making the right choice', never mention the lens. Nobody cares. Enjoy.

It probably won’t. It’s said that Weston used a $5 lens to make some of his wonderful images in Mexico and some felt that he paid too much for it. Like a more expensive lens will make you a better photographer. Yeah right!! Just get a lens and work with it. If you don’t like it sell it and get a different one. The ‘right choice’ is probably elusive and a matter of personal preference. The right choice for me probably won’t be the right choice for you!

BrianShaw
11-Mar-2019, 15:18
... but wasn’t that when five bucks was still worth something? Today, what’s a fin but a Starbucks Grande Cappachino?

Vaughn
11-Mar-2019, 15:25
... but wasn’t that when five bucks was still worth something? Today, what’s a fin but a Starbucks Grande Cappachino?
About a hundred bucks ($93).

BrianShaw
11-Mar-2019, 15:32
Ahhhh... thanks. A lot less than I thought.

Vaughn
11-Mar-2019, 16:23
Ahhhh... thanks. A lot less than I thought.

Actually less than that...I used 1935 for the inflation calculater...using 1925 (closer to the date he bought the lens), $5 bucks then is $73 now. The depression must have affected the dollar value.

Drew Wiley
11-Mar-2019, 19:34
More likely, that five buck lens is now all battered up and listed as "Rare and Collectible" on the auction site for $3000. What I can't stand, however, is that "if it was good enough for Edward Weston"... He was a contact printer. Ever seen some of those "immaculate" images enlarged a little? Rather fuzzy by modern standards. And there's little doubt that if he could have afforded a "better" lens, he would have used it instead. But in this case Fuji vs Rodenstock; Ford vs Chevy. It won't make any difference with lenses of similar vintage, aperture, and focal length.

Bernice Loui
11-Mar-2019, 21:10
“I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only make them think”

― Socrates


Decades ago the first view camera outfit was a 4x5 Sinar F1 with a 210mm Rodenstock Sironar N, 90mm f5.6 Schneider Super Angulon and 190mm WF ektar. That 210mm Sironar N was the lens most used struggling up the LF learning curve. That Rodenstock lens being in an accurate Copal Shutter allowed focusing on learning VC basics from setting up to camera movements and a lot more. There was LOT of color transparency film burned as it was the way to get fast results due to The New Lab being a short drive away. The routine became go to one of the camera stores get a few boxes of color transparency film, load up all ten film holders, burn film ( LOTs of mistakes were made... LOTs), drop the film off at TNL, pick up the processed film a few hours later and be surprised good or bad. Most un-nerving were seeing the stunning color transparencies from working photographers that were "light years better than me". I would ask them about their images and most were more than willing to share how they were done.. Thank them much for sharing.

-Learned a LOT, burned LOTs of film, wasted countless sheets of film, got discouraged, got encouraged.... Stuck with it.

At some point due to influences by working photographers in the posse at that time, they encouraged me to try different lenses. Disconcerting at the time as that Sironar N became an old reliable friend. Loaner lenses made lens trials easy. The burning of color transparency film continued. Much to my surprise, there WERE differences in image rendition from different lenses.. That was the point when the photo posse put choices to me as to what the visual differences were and if they are better or worst. There is NO absolute one lens better than the other, there was only what image results appeals to me most..

That was the moment when the hard lesson of lens choice is completely dependent on the image maker and their specific needs and image results required was learned. It takes time and a whole lot of effort to reach a place on the LF learning curve to truly appreciate this reality. It also demands that the image maker-photographer disconnect from external influences of marketing, posse, group think and all that as lens choice is a very personal one.

Cost and condition of the preferred lens is another lesser in the overall as the most beat-up, lowly regard lens could be the ideal choice for a given image maker. One of examples of this is a 12" Commercial Ektar in barrel where the front element looks like a well-used ice skating ring.. yet it severed as the one of the most often used lenses for years on the 5x7 with more than acceptable to exceptional results.

Information, knowledge, wisdom cannot be properly utilized by an individual when they are not ready for what has or is being presented. All one can do is share what their knowledge, information and wisdom might be with others and allow them to take it in any way they decide.

None of this blather has even begun to touch on using the camera, items related to the camera, film choices, film processing choices, printing, print mounting and all that. The lens is only one facet of the much larger gem.


:)
Bernice

Kiwi7475
11-Mar-2019, 23:00
Bernice, thank you for writing this, I find it very inspiring.

Rainymac
11-Mar-2019, 23:54
+1 from me to Bernice and the numerous members who contributed sage advice to this thread. So it wasn't what the OP wanted but there are others like me who are newbies who have gleaned valuable information from the generosity of others.

For what it's worth I also struggled with the same question posed by the OP. Large format is a different beast to 35mm and medium format where I choose to use dedicated brand lenses. I have purchased Schneider and Nikon but for my 3rd lens it will be Rodenstock. Go figure! My decision was based on research I gleaned from this forum. Clearly I have a different set of criteria to others but importantly I know that if I buy good glass (not necessarily the top of the range glass) at a reasonable price and within my budget, I can sell if I don't like the results I get. I doubt that my photographic skills will be let down by the quality of the lenses. I can only wish that that might happen. Thanks everyone.

Two23
12-Mar-2019, 07:15
Geepers, this thread has already gone eight pages! Just think if the guy was considering THREE lenses!


Kent in SD

Luis-F-S
12-Mar-2019, 13:25
Too much research will only tend to confuse you!