Rodenstock or Schneider?

[bernal]

Hello Everyone,

I'd like to know what your recommendation is. I'm planning to buy a 180mm lens to use with my TK 45. Current consideration is either a new or used Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S or Schneider Apo-Symmar L. Also, if I decide to buy used, would there be any real practical/image quality benefit on the Schneider L over the non-L?

Thank you in advance.

bernal

[john collins]

Hello bernal,

Of the two lenses you mentioned, I have used the Sironar S lenses and they are superb.
Not to say that the Schneider isn't - but you can be assured that the sironar will give you fabulous images.

[Walter Calahan]

It doesn't matter, both manufacturers make quality products.

Choice is great. Whatever floats your boat.

The mind makes the photograph not the gear.

[E. von Hoegh]

Bernal;

I'd go with the best price myself. My "modern" LF lens is a 150 convertable Symmar. It is superb. The newer lenses will only be better. They will all become about equal at f:32, due to diffraction.

[Ron Marshall]

I've owned the APO-Sironar S 135, 150 and 180. All wonderful lenses. I have not owned a Schneider in a similar focal length, but I'm sure the current Schneider 180 is just as good.

Compare the lens test results for the 150mm:

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

[Ken Lee]

You haven't mentioned what you plan to shoot, or what kind of image quality you are looking for.

If you want a razor sharp image, then both lenses will be fine, and you can compare secondary attributes like size, coverage, filter size, weight, etc. Nikon and Fujinon are also worthy of your consideration in this regard.

If you are looking for something with excellent out-of-focus rendering, or other even more intangible qualities like "warmth", then consider some of the vintage lens designs.

[Arne Croell]

Hello Everyone,

I'd like to know what your recommendation is. I'm planning to buy a 180mm lens to use with my TK 45. Current consideration is either a new or used Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S or Schneider Apo-Symmar L. Also, if I decide to buy used, would there be any real practical/image quality benefit on the Schneider L over the non-L?

Thank you in advance.

bernal
Judging from the published MTF curves, there is no real advantage of the Apo-Symmar L over the Apo-Symmar, despite the different coverage numbers. Years ago,I scanned and overlayed the 150mm versions together with the Apo-Sironar S, which can be found here:
http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/005/0054fC-12655384.jpg
(for 1:10) and just the Apo-Symmar versions at infinity:
http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/005/0055AW-12674684.jpg
The main rationale for Schneiders redesign seemed to be the switch to lead-free glasses required by RoHS. Since they also changed the mount to larger diameters, it is possible that the larger coverage number is due to reduced vignetting.

[Paul O]

Find ANY modern 180mm lens made by Fuji, Nikon, Rodenstock or Schneider and buy the one that sells for the lowest price!

[bernal]

Thanks everyone for helping me make an informed decision. Based on your advice it seems name brand is irrelevant. Rodenstock and Schneider are pretty much the same in regards to specs, weight and price and you seem to agree they are both fine optics. I will go for lowest price.

Ron and Arne, thanks for the links.

bernal

[robert amsden]

Schneider lenses are considered the gold standard for large format, ziess is the gold standard for medium format.

[Bob Salomon]

Schneider lenses are considered the gold standard for large format, ziess is the gold standard for medium format.

Nonsense. Try proving it.

[Bjorn Nilsson]

Did anyone mention filter size? That could be a decisive point, i.e. finding a lens with the same filter size as the filters and lenses you already have, regardless of what the lenses are used for (35mm, medium format or even digital).
Kerry Thalmann has extensive info on this matter on his website, in the pages on his own backpack lens kit. (Eh, mentioning Kerry, the Fuji 180A is a sweet little lens. :) )

//Björn

[Mike Herring]

Exactly right. If Schneider is the Gold Standard - Rodenstock is the Platinum Standard.
I have Rodenstocks in 55mm, 90mm, 150mm and 210mm.
I have Schneiders in 72mm, 110mm.
My 65mm and 210mm Nikkor AM lenses are also outstanding performers as is my Fuji 300mm.
All of the manufacturers make superb lenses today. Unfortunately, Nikon chose to leave the large format market.

All the best,
Mike

[Ole Tjugen]

Most of my lenses are Schneider. Some are Zeiss, Voigtländer, Fujinon, Bausch&Lomb, Busch, Bush, Suter, Hermagis, Darlot, Rodenstock, Meyer, Krauss, Steinheil, Dallmeyer, et cetera.

My conclusion is that most modern lenses are far better than most modern photographers - and the antiques are in a completely different league. So if you buy any lens made in the last 60 years or so it's going to be a very good lens - and you would need a test bench to tell the difference between one and another.

[John Kasaian]

Somewhere buried in the LF Homepage archives is an observation by one of the lens gurus (Kerry Thalmann? Chris Perez? I forget) that the differences between samples produced by the same manufacturer are as much or more of a consideration than differences between the top end manufacturers.

So if you are going to be completely anal about this, then test a sampliing of Rodenstocks as well as a sampling of Schneiders and pick the one that most closely satisifes your criteria irrespective of the manufacturer. All you need to do is find a dealer who will trust you with a dozen or so lenses until you make up your mind.

If you work for NASA or MIT you may well find that an option.

OR forget about miniscule variations in optics and get on with relying on your own vision. Neither Schneider or Rodenstock will hold you back (come to think of it, neither will a Commercial Ektar or Dagor!)

My 2 cents anyway :)

[Peter K]

Some people are busy with testing lenses, the other are taking pictures :)

[Ole Tjugen]

Some people are busy with testing lenses, the other are taking pictures :)

Judging from the pictures I've taken, the sharpest normal lens is a 1910 Hugo Meyer Aristoplan. The smoothest is a Voigtländer Heliar, the flattest field belongs to a Docter Germinar-W, the fastest is a 1926 Schneider Xenar Typ D, and the widest (=best coverage) is a1904 Emil Busch Weitwinkel-Aplanat. So of course the "normal lens" I use most is a Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar. When I'm not using a 210 f:6.1 Xenar on 5x7", or a 300mm Symmar on 8x10", or a 500mm Krauss Tessar on 30x40cm, or a 355mm G-Claron on 24x30cm, of course.

So pick a 180mm lens in a good shutter. Any lens. Whatever you choose will be good.

[bernal]

Thank you Gentlemen. Based on your experience and advise, it's pretty clear that in the real world of photography, combining vision with passion, whatever scientific difference there is in modern lenses, if any, is irrelevant. And which is better seems to depend on one's perception and loyalty to a particular manufacturer. I very much appreciate you all helping me make an informed decision. I'll go for lowest price.

Regards,

bernal

[Bjorn Nilsson]

Judging from the pictures I've taken, the sharpest normal lens is a 1910 Hugo Meyer Aristoplan. ...

Ehheh, I must be tired. I read it as "Aristocrat" and my mind went astray in a totally different direction. :) ;)

//Björn

[robert amsden]

Nonsense. Try proving it.

Who sells the most large format lenses?

[Peter K]

Who sells the most large format lenses?
Ebay :p

[Bob Salomon]

Who sells the most large format lenses?

You would not have access to either companies figures. Neither would anyone else on line.

[Bob Salomon]

Who sells the most large format lenses?

By the way, who sells the most cars? Would that make that brand the "gold standard" when you include Mercedes Benz S class? BMW 7xx class, Ferrari, Aston Martin?

Get it?

[robert amsden]

[QUOTE=Bob Salomon - HP Marketing;364911]By the way, who sells the most cars? Would that make that brand the "gold standard" when you include Mercedes Benz S class? BMW 7xx class, Ferrari, Aston Martin?

Get it?[/QUOTE Schnieder & rodenstock lenses sell for about the same price.

[Bob Salomon]

[QUOTE=Bob Salomon - HP Marketing;364911]By the way, who sells the most cars? Would that make that brand the "gold standard" when you include Mercedes Benz S class? BMW 7xx class, Ferrari, Aston Martin?

Get it?[/QUOTE Schnieder & rodenstock lenses sell for about the same price.

You might also want to factor in to total sales all those Caltar and Sinaron lenses that are also made by Rodenstock.

[Kevin Crisp]

Jim Galli?

[8x10 user]

Jeff at badger graphic told me that the Rodenstock Sironar-S is the best of the "normal" lenses, but that Schneider's wide angel, telephoto and macro lens are also extremely good. I personally love the 210mm Apo-Sironar-W for a semi wide angle; I suppose he was talking about lenses still in production.

[JPlomley]

I've got a 90/4.5 Grandagon-N and Schneider 110XL. The Schneider is a bit cooler and has a bit more microcontrast than the 90mm Grandagon. The reason I purchased the 110XL was simply for reasons of image circle. But in no way does it blow the 90mm Rodie out of the water. In fact once you've scanned/printed, any subtle differences in resolution/color between the lenses are negated in post-production.

[Jim Galli]

Jim Galli?

Damn right. I can't believe this thread is 3 pages long. Everyone knows Hermagis lenses are the Gold standard.

[Don Hutton]

Maybe Foto4 will be called Bretton Woods 2....