Apo Symmar 120 "L" and "non L" differences

[Matus Kalisky]

Hi, I am going to bother you again.
Apo Symmar 120 is high on my list and just recently I realised that there might be some differences between the current "L" version and the previous "non L" version. At least the coverage of the "L" is according to Schneider webpage 189mm and the coverage of the previous model is supposed to be 179mm.
So, - is there really a technical difference between these two lenses or just Schneider realised that they underrated the coverage (according to some fo the users) of this lens and just updated the specifications?

Matus

[Oren Grad]

Matus, it's a new design. When the L series came out, Schneider's stated excuse for the redesign was that certain glass types had been phased out for environmental reasons. Since they were forced to make a change anyway, they took advantage of the opportunity to tweak the performance in other ways, most notably by increasing the coverage of the shorter focal lengths.

[Jack Flesher]

FWIW, I had a non-L and sold it when I got a 110SSXL -- a decision I very soon regretted. It covered 4x5 with more room than spec'd, though some corner softness was visible after about 20mm of rise. I recently acquired a 120L and could not be happier -- and in fact I have sold my 110. Anyway, it does appear to offer a bit more coverage than the non-L, though I have not measured it.

[Steve Hamley]

The "non-L" was a 72 degree lens and the "L" is a 75 degree lens, in addition to the glass changes mentioned. IIRC, The MTF curves would suggest that the "non-L" is a little sharper further out in the circle than the "L", although I doubt you'd ever see any difference. I have the "non-L" 120mm and wouldn't mind having the "L", but I don't want to pay the difference for a new one!

Steve