Caltar Lens info

[scott russell]

I'm looking at the 4x5 lens charts on this website and found that there is no info on any Caltar lenses. Do they go by a different name, or is there a comparable brand on this list?

[lenser]

Caltars are from Calumet and they should be able to help with info. Many are re-branded
Rodenstocks and are extremely fine performers. Some early Caltars were re-branded Ilex glass and the one that I've got is also a very fine optic. It is the 215mm which is also a convertible. It is quite sharp in all configurations.

[anchored]

Although I often read Caltars are identical in performance to Rodenstocks, I wonder if they are simply Rodenstocks that they have tested and found to be on the low-end of the performance scale during testing, and then pawned off to Calumet as a rebrand.

Reason for this wonderment: I have a Caltar II-N 150mm that came with a used Linhof, and it's a poor performer at infinity focus, while my two "real" Rodenstocks (210mm and 75mm) are extremely sharp at all distances.

I'll personally steer clear of Caltars in the future and stay with Rodenstocks.

[BrianShaw]

My memory is a bit fuzzy on this, but I seem to recall a couple of rather in-depth articles in Veiw Camera magazine on the history/heritage of Caltar lenses -- maybe two or three years ago.

[IanG]

All the later multi coated Caltars of Schneider & Rodenstock manufacture are excellent, they are no different from the equivalent Scneiders or Rodenstocks.

You're best searching online if you come across a specific Caltar to see who made it and what the original model is.

ian

[David Karp]

Although I often read Caltars are identical in performance to Rodenstocks, I wonder if they are simply Rodenstocks that they have tested and found to be on the low-end of the performance scale during testing, and then pawned off to Calumet as a rebrand.

Reason for this wonderment: I have a Caltar II-N 150mm that came with a used Linhof, and it's a poor performer at infinity focus, while my two "real" Rodenstocks (210mm and 75mm) are extremely sharp at all distances.

I'll personally steer clear of Caltars in the future and stay with Rodenstocks.

I think if you poll the forum you will find people who have purchased used examples of all brands that failed to meet their expectations. I have read here that some photographers will purchase several examples of the same focal length from the same manufacturer, and then keep the best sample.

The good thing about this sort of thought process is that it keeps the price of used Caltar lenses down so that those of us who know a Caltar can render images as sharp as any other lens don't have to pay so much for them.

Scott: Kerry Thalmann wrote an article on the history of Caltar lenses for View Camera magazine a few years ago. It is very helpful in determining which Caltars were made by which company. The Caltar II-N lenses are Rodenstock and equivalent to their APO-Sirionar-N and Grandagon-N lines (depending on the focal length in question). Caltar II-E are Rodenstock and equivalent to their Geronar line. Other Caltar lenses were made by Ilex, Schneider, and Komamura. You can order back issues of View Camera, or maybe this one is on one of their CDs.

[Louie Powell]

The most complete discussion of the history of Caltar lenses is the article by Kerry Thallmann that appeared in the May/June 2003 issue of View Camera.

If it's not archived on the View Camera member-only site, it should be. It's a classic reference.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

Although I often read Caltars are identical in performance to Rodenstocks, I wonder if they are simply Rodenstocks that they have tested and found to be on the low-end of the performance scale during testing, and then pawned off to Calumet as a rebrand.

Reason for this wonderment: I have a Caltar II-N 150mm that came with a used Linhof, and it's a poor performer at infinity focus, while my two "real" Rodenstocks (210mm and 75mm) are extremely sharp at all distances.

I'll personally steer clear of Caltars in the future and stay with Rodenstocks.

I can't disagree more with the above statement. I have a Caltar II-N 210 that is probably my sharpest lens. It's definately sharper than my 110 SS XL, and about even or a tad better than my Rodenstock 150 Apo-Sironar-S. The Caltar is also my single best buy on photo equipment- $200 in like new condition on the bay. Had I bought a new 210 Apo-Sironar-S, I would have paid over a grand more for basically the same performance.

[Glenn Thoreson]

I have a couple of 210 IIE lenses. If you look up the test specs on these, they have a resolution of 70 lpm at f/16. The human eye can not even discern that kind of sharpness. That's good enough for me. They're cheap to buy, too. New or used.

[Jan Pedersen]

I agree with Glenn , the Caltar 210 IIE is quite a performer, i paid 185$ for a like new, Illuminates 8x10 at closer distance.
In addition i also have the 305, 375 and 508 Calumet Caltars and are pleased with the performance from all 3

[Eric Woodbury]

My 210 Caltar is fine. As good as any in the lot.

[erie patsellis]

My Caltar 300 5.6 is basically a symmar in caltar clothes, and I can't tell the images apart on film between the Caltar and Symmar.


erie

[Vaughn]

I can't disagree more with the above statement. snip...

I'll agree with the you -- my Caltar-II N on my 4x5 gave me great 16x20 prints...not counting the times of operator error. My sharpest prints were at infinity and f22, but I was generally pleased closed down also.

Vaughn

Forgot to mention that mine is a 150/5.6. I bought it new from Calumet back in about 1983 for $235...$15 more than the Calumet/Gowland 4x5 Pocketview camera I bought at the same time.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I'll agree with the you -- my Caltar-II N on my 4x5 gave me great 16x20 prints...not counting the times of operator error. My sharpest prints were at infinity and f22, but I was generally pleased closed down also.

Vaughn

I agree with Brian and Vaughn. I have a Caltar II N 210 lens and it is my go to lens in 4x5. I have some fine 16x20's that I have printed that were taken with this lens. A great performer and very affordable.

Jim

[Alan Davenport]

I have a Caltar II-N 150mm f/5.6 that's extremely sharp; it is a rebadged Rodenstock. I also have a Caltar W-II 90mm f/8, which is a multicoated Schneider Super Angulon. It's also a super performer.

Suggesting that Caltars are inferior factory seconds, based on a single experience with a used lens, might be overreacting just a tad...

[anchored]

OK... perhaps my "wonderment," based on one lens, could be construed as an overreaction... but I'm not the only one I've talked to that wonders the same thing. And... if you read my words, I have not suggested Caltar to be junk... only that the one I own is. My post was a "question" and not a statement or even suggestion as "fact."

Afterall, I would think that from a marketing standpoint, Rodenstock would sell the higher performing lenses (determined after their testing) under their own name instead of subletting them out to sell for less than theirs. [not including the Linhof or Sinar marketed lenses these companies test themselves]

Perhaps there are many good Caltars out there, and I simply was unlucky. However, I have somewhere around 30 lenses counting 35mm and MF and large format collected over 37-years, all but perhaps 6 or 7 purchased used. To date there has only been two lenses providing disappointment (the Caltar 150mm and a Canon 75-300 purchased new)... so you should be able to understand my "wonderment," even considering the possibility the bulk of them perform admirably.

I'm not knocking Caltar... especially since I'm relatively new to LF cameras (but not to lenses and photography)... but personally I'll stay with lenses bearing the maker's name, even if they should cost more. Obviously others will continue to buy Caltars... and the good news for them is there is one less person trying to find the same lens they might be.

[Vaughn]

A quote from H. Lynn Jones, who worked for calumet years ago and co-designed their line of 6.3 lenses...(from the Ilford forum)

"Back in the days when Calumet was the largest purchaser of large format lenses in the world we had a very good relationship with the venerable Schneider company. I talked with the Export Manager of the company when I asked about Rollei and Linhof lenses be pre-selected by the manufacturer. To begin with, they didn't buy all that many lenses and we bought them by the hundreds at a time.

This executive would laugh and say, you want 25 lenses, we pre-select the first 25 off the line!"

Bad lenses occasionally sneak pass the manufacturers...and I imagine they could sneak past Linhof, too. A few people here have mentioned new lenses they have returned to the manufacturer due to defects...all have born the manufacturer's name. Sh*t happens. And a used lens is a crap shoot anyway...hard to tell what its history is. Placed in a different shutter (with incorrect spacing perhaps), dropped, left in the sun and heated to the point of loosening up some of the cement, or whatever. The manufacturer's name on a lens is no guarentee.

But the proof is in the tasting of the pudding...producing images is the thing!

Vaughn