sinaron se and apo sironar s are they really the same?

[Songyun]

I know that Sinaron, Caltar are all made by Rodenstock.
I have this question because yesterday I look at a 150 sinaron se(111XXXXX) and a 135 rodenstock apo sironar s(114XXXXX) side by side, and find out that the coating on the apo sironar s is much warmer than the sinaron se, both front cell and rear cell. Is it because of usage or something else?

[A Charles]

Probably the manufacturing process. I had 2 150mm Sironar-s lenses side by side and the coatings were completely different. The same thing with 2 90mm f8 SW Nikkor lenses that I had.

[thedeep]

I was talking with a commercial photog once, and he said that at some point he was buying a case of sinaron lenses direct because they promised that they would be consistent wrt color---so yea, it's probably the variations in production.

[davidb]

I hope so. I just got a Sinar SE 150mm.

[naturephoto1]

As far as I know they are one in the same. Bob Salomon of HP should step in here. But, be aware that the Apo Sironar S f5.6 150mm lens have been in production for quite some time now. Mine dates back to as I recall 1994 so there has probably been some tweaking to the lens and the coatings during this long period of time.

Rich

[Brian K]

The Sinaron SE is bascially a cherry picked and individually tested Sironar-S. I own several Sinaron SE lenses and they came with their own MTF charts, that is the MTF chart for the actual lens I bought. So basically what they are doing is eliminating product variability and setting a higher quality acceptance level.

[Bob Salomon]

The Sinaron SE is bascially a cherry picked and individually tested Sironar-S. I own several Sinaron SE lenses and they came with their own MTF charts, that is the MTF chart for the actual lens I bought. So basically what they are doing is eliminating product variability and setting a higher quality acceptance level.

No they aren't. They use the same Rodenstock Siemens Star projector that is used at the Rodenstock factory for QC. The results are identical.

The only unique thing Sinar did was to properly center the lens on the Sinar board. They did nothing to test the lens other then what Linhof and Rodenstock does.

[Bob Salomon]

I was talking with a commercial photog once, and he said that at some point he was buying a case of sinaron lenses direct because they promised that they would be consistent wrt color---so yea, it's probably the variations in production.

We have delivered both Rodenstock and Schneider lenses to studios that were color matched at each factory, not a big deal if the user requests it at the time of purchase. It will take longer to deliver and will probably cost more due to today's rate of exchange since they would not be in current inventory.

[Songyun]

No they aren't. They use the same Rodenstock Siemens Star projector that is used at the Rodenstock factory for QC. The results are identical.

The only unique thing Sinar did was to properly center the lens on the Sinar board. They did nothing to test the lens other then what Linhof and Rodenstock does.

Bob, that was what I thought. But how about the different coating? One is clearly warmer than the other one.

[Brian K]

No they aren't. They use the same Rodenstock Siemens Star projector that is used at the Rodenstock factory for QC. The results are identical.

The only unique thing Sinar did was to properly center the lens on the Sinar board. They did nothing to test the lens other then what Linhof and Rodenstock does.

Bob, the Sinaron lenses I own came with a rather extensive series of MTF charts, the serial number on the mtf charts matched the serial numbers on each lens. Does Rodenstock supply MTF charts of each lens they sell? because with the other Rodenstock lenses I own not one of them came with it's own test chart. While Sinar may use the same testing equipment, they can also choose to select and sell lenses that fall within tighter specifications, that is less lens to lens variation.

[Bob Salomon]

No Rodenstock charges for individual testing. But the Sinaron is produced and made and speced no differently then any equivalent Rodenstock lens.

Since 1988 I can't think of 3 lenses that have ever been returned from a user as not performing as expected. In fact, I am pretty sure that we only had two. And they both exhibited impact damage, probably from shipping damage.

Under performing lenses simply don't occur.

[Bob Salomon]

Bob, that was what I thought. But how about the different coating? One is clearly warmer than the other one.

Coatings vary depending on the glass used. It is very possible to have two different focal lengths that have different colored coatings. But coating color are not indicative of the color of the lens. Film, exposure and processing will have more effect on the color.

[Ron Marshall]

No Rodenstock charges for individual testing. But the Sinaron is produced and made and speced no differently then any equivalent Rodenstock lens.

Since 1988 I can't think of 3 lenses that have ever been returned from a user as not performing as expected. In fact, I am pretty sure that we only had two. And they both exhibited impact damage, probably from shipping damage.

Under performing lenses simply don't occur.

Bob are you saying that all of the lenses that leave the Rodenstock factory perform to exactly the same standard, or is there a tolerance range, with some performing slightly better than others?

[Bob Salomon]

Bob are you saying that all of the lenses that leave the Rodenstock factory perform to exactly the same standard, or is there a tolerance range, with some performing slightly better than others?

All manufactured products have a tolerance range.

[Frank Petronio]

Of course every precision item like a lens has a tolerance range, no problem with that.

So is Rodenstock's minimum tolerance is still as high or equal to Sinar and Linhof's minimum tolerances?

That would be the deciding factor...

[JPlomley]

Under performing lenses simply don't occur.

I've now got 6 Rodenstock lenses (55 APO Grandagon, 75/4.5-N, 90/4.5-N, 135 Apo Sironar-S, 210 APO Sironar-S, 300 APO Sironar-S) and there is not a bad one in the bunch. All are stellar performers. I really don't care what the MTF chart says. What I care about is how that print looks at 30x40, and the Rodies are top drawer.

[Brian K]

Just in Rodenstock I have 17 lenses:
65mm Grandagon -N
90mm Grandagon MC
115mm Grandagon-N ( the Sinar version)
120mm Sironar-N
135mm Sironar-S
150mm Sironar-S (Sinaron- sinar version)
180mm macro Sironar (Sinaron- sinar version)
180mm Sironar-S
180mm Sironar-N (sinaron-Sinar version)
210mm Sironar-S (Sinaron-Sinar version)
240 mm Apo Ronar (Sinar version)
250mm Imagon
300mm APO Ronar
300mm macro Sironar
360mm Sironar-S (Sinar version)
360mm APO Ronar
480mm APO Ronar (Sinar version)

I too don't have a bad lens in the bunch, then again I tested and returned any lenses that didn't perform well, not many. Having used so many Rodenstock lenses, some for as long as 3 decades, I'm pretty familiar with their qualities and the build quality of their lenses.

The most recent head to head testing I did between Rodie lenses of the same focal length was of the 180mm sironar N, the Sinar versus the non sinar versions. These were both used lenses so as a predictor of new v new it may not be valid, but in this case the Sinar version was definitely sharper. Testing was done with film, both lenses aimed at the same subject under the same lighting,focused with an 8x schneider loupe, same roll of film. The negative examined under a microscope.

Also another recent test, a used 120mm sironar-N, bought from an APUG/LF forum member, tested better than a new 120mm Schneider Symmar -L.

For those who doubt the variability of lenses, check out Chris Perez's test chart of LF lenses, you'll see that multiples of the same lens can test very differently.

[Ron Marshall]

All manufactured products have a tolerance range.

Are the Sinar and Linhof branded lenses selected from the top of the range, or are they selected randomly?

[Brian K]

Are the Sinar and Linhof branded lenses selected from the top of the range, or are they selected randomly?

They are supposedly from the top of the range, that's why you pay a premium for them.

[Ron Marshall]

They are supposedly from the top of the range, that's why you pay a premium for them.

Supposedly, but is that really the case, or is it a case of clever marketing?

[Brian K]

Supposedly, but is that really the case, or is it a case of clever marketing?

You might want to read what was already written in this thread but to repeat what I already wrote, every sinar version lens i bought came with it's own mtf test chart of the actual lens I bought. Sinar and Linhof state that they select and test the lenses. From my own experience all the sinar version lenses have been excellent. Where I have tested a sinar versus a non sinar version, the sinar version has been better.

[Ron Marshall]

You might want to read what was already written in this thread but to repeat what I already wrote, every sinar version lens i bought came with it's own mtf test chart of the actual lens I bought. Sinar and Linhof state that they select and test the lenses. From my own experience all the sinar version lenses have been excellent. Where I have tested a sinar versus a non sinar version, the sinar version has been better.

So if a lens doesn't come with an MTF chart it is inferior? That may be just clever marketing, as I was saying. Perhaps you might want to read what was already written.

[Brian K]

Ron I've read what's already been written. I also own a huge amount of rodenstock and sinar rodenstock lenses and test them extensively and analyze the negatives with a 40x Leica stereo microscope. From my own tests the Sinar versions perform the best. Not that the regular rodies perform poorly, it's just more likely that with the Sinar lenses you are getting the pick of the litter. And as Bob stated there's a range of acceptable tolerances. Sinar and Linhof use a tighter range.

The fact that Sinar tests each lens and then sends you the results of how your lens tested is in itself significant. The time and effort is in the testing, not in telling Rodenstock that 20 out of the 30 lenses met their specification and that they are returning the ones that didn't. Sinar and linhof also state that they test and select the best of the lens batches and only sell the best. Chris Perez's extensive lens testing charts shows that there can be a huge range of variation between each lens batch. Among professional photographers I know, and from my own past practices, multiples of the same lens would be bought, tested and the pick of the litter kept while the others would be returned.

[Ron Marshall]

Sinar and linhof also state that they test and select the best of the lens batches and only sell the best.

They state that, but is it true or is it merely marketing hype. I am not saying that it is not true, I am merely curious. That is why I asked Bob. I imagine that it is true, as Linhof and Sinar both have good reputations.

[Oren Grad]

Sinar and linhof also state that they test and select the best of the lens batches and only sell the best.

Can you point to such a statement in writing anywhere?

The Sinar literature that I have says this:

Sinar supplies lenses under its own trademark Sinaron that are designed specifically for its camera system and manufactured by the Rodenstock Precision Optics Works. These lenses are subjected to strict inspection controls at Sinar and then mounted with exacting care on lens boards

These words don't say that they reject samples more frequently than Rodenstock does.

Edit:

Linhof says this on their website:

For optimum professional results, mechanical and optical precision and performance Linhof thoroughly examines all lenses before transferring them to the production departments for final assembly or to the client with the Linhof label engraved for double quality guarantee.

Same deal - you can read things into it, but they don't actually say that their rejection rate is higher.

[Brian K]

Can you point to such a statement in writing anywhere?

The Sinar literature that I have says this:

Sinar supplies lenses under its own trademark Sinaron that are designed specifically for its camera system and manufactured by the Rodenstock Precision Optics Works. These lenses are subjected to strict inspection controls at Sinar and then mounted with exacting care on lens boards

These words don't say that they reject samples more frequently than Rodenstock does.

Edit:

Linhof says this on their website:

For optimum professional results, mechanical and optical precision and performance Linhof thoroughly examines all lenses before transferring them to the production departments for final assembly or to the client with the Linhof label engraved for double quality guarantee.

Same deal - you can read things into it, but they don't actually say that their rejection rate is higher.


Oren, what they say now, and what they said 10-20 years ago in their brochures/ promotional materials and at trade shows can be very different.

What they say now does sound pretty clear to me that they "subject them to strict inspection controls". This is already AFTER they passed Rodenstocks own QC! So what does Sinar or Linof do when a lens doesn't pass their "strict inspection"? Just send them to the buyer anyway? If thats the case why take the time, effort and expense to re-inspect and mtf test lenses already inspected and approved by Rodenstock and then send the MTF results of their own testing along to the buyer? I have those MTF's for the actual lenses I own.

I've done extensive lens testing, and I've said my piece, at this point I'd rather not continue to beat this dead horse.

[Bob Salomon]

So what does Sinar or Linof do when a lens doesn't pass their "strict inspection"? Just send them to the buyer anyway?

In the case of Linhof they return them to the factory. And most lenses fail because of dirt that is in the optical system. They are returned to thye factory for cleaning.

As for what Sinar stated 20 years ago. The Rodenstock factory had them retract it as it was a distortion of the facts.

Sinar is a mechanical house. They simply mounted the Sinar branded lenses exactly on the center of their boards. Nothing more.

[Oren Grad]

The bottom line is that you've tested lenses for yourself and determined which ones meet your requirements. Anyone whose work requires a guarantee of the highest achievable standard of performance must do the same, regardless of what the promotional copy or the salespeople say or what documentation comes in the box. That's all.

[Brian K]

And Sinar branded Rodenstock lenses are a competing brand for HP marketed Linhof Rodenstock lenses and generic rodenstock lenses. "and most lenses fail because of dirt in the optical system" then why do they pass the initial Rodenstock inspection?

I own Sinar version lenses that came on DB boards and in copal shutters without boards, those lenses have tested better. And the MTF charts, with the Sinar logo and brand on them, with the serial numbers of the actual lens I bought is just a fabrication on the part of Sinar?

Oren, I agree with you, that is why I test everything.

[Bob Salomon]

The bottom line is that you've tested lenses for yourself and determined which ones meet your requirements. Anyone whose work requires a guarantee of the highest achievable standard of performance must do the same, regardless of what the promotional copy or the salespeople say or what documentation comes in the box. That's all.

Amen, Between shipping from the lens factory to the camera factory to the local distributor for the camera in country to the retailer to the customer who buys the lens anything can occur. And, if the lens is grey market their are at least two additional shipments involved in the sale.

It is how the lens performs for the job that you need it for. That is the final test.

[davidb]

So the Rodenstock Apo Sironar S (red stripe) is the same lens as the Sinar Sinaron SE (red stripe) ?