800mm Apo Ronar CL. Any good ?

[Daniel Grenier]

I am considering a Rodenstock Apo-Ronar-CL 800mm for my 7x17. Is this lens any good ? I already have a 480 Apo Ronar so I assume it is an equal performer - right?

Also, what would those 800s go for (in barrel) these days.

Thanks

[John Jarosz]

What's the bellows extension you have available?

I have the 600mm. With the back extension on my Kodak 2D, the closest I can get to a subject is about 9 feet (the camera has maybe 31" of bellows draw). The 800 mm will need 35" of bellows length for infinity.

It would be a cool lens for that format(mine too), but the length of the camera assembly might be a little unwieldy for my taste. Performance wise, the lens should be a great additon.

John

[Armin Seeholzer]

They are sharper then any woman or man ever can be!!!

Cheers Armin

[Vaughn]

Daniel, let me know if you are interested in a 600mm version instead of the 800mm.

Vaughn

[Steve Hamley]

Be sure you know how big the 800mm CL is if you've never actually seen one.

Cheers,

Steve

[Tracy Storer]

Apo-Ronars are excellent, like Steve said, know what you're getting into size-wise. I had an A-R 800/9.....it weighed 8 pounds.
I now have an A-R 760 f/14, much more manageable. There are different versions, all great, just watch the max aperture.

[Daniel Grenier]

Apo-Ronars are excellent, like Steve said, know what you're getting into size-wise. I had an A-R 800/9.....it weighed 8 pounds.
I now have an A-R 760 f/14, much more manageable. There are different versions, all great, just watch the max aperture.

Wow ! Is that thing really 8 pounds? Didn't realize it was that heavy. Maybe I should indeed re-adjust my wants to a 760.

[Steve Hamley]

Look for a lens that has a smaller maximum aperture, like a 30" or 35" f:12.5 Artar. The smaller maximum aperture makes it much smaller and lighter, if you can even use the those words with these lenses.

BTW, I was thinking about physical size also, the 800mm A-R is probably nearly 6" across the barrel, the size of a small saucer, then add another inch for the flange.

Cheers,

Steve

[8x10 user]

I thought the apo ronars with a smaller maximum aperture were of a 6 or 8 element design and weighed more then the standard 4 element version. This is the case with my 1000mm F/16 which is heavier then my 4 element 1200mm.

[John Jarosz]

As a sidelight to this thread, check out this item# on ebay: 120333294224

1800mm Apo Ronar. I didn't know they came that big.
No affiliation, I just wanted to point out the curiosity,

I written the seller to ask the weight and diameter, but no response yet.

John

[Don7x17]

As a sidelight to this thread, check out this item# on ebay: 120333294224

1800mm Apo Ronar. I didn't know they came that big.
No affiliation, I just wanted to point out the curiosity,

I written the seller to ask the weight and diameter, but no response yet.

John

Attractively priced also ;-)

And the requirement for bellows for this would be about 1800mm for infinity focus

[Vaughn]

Six feet of bellows at infinity for that beast! Perfect for the moving-van-as-camera!

[CP Goerz]

I have an 800mm Ronar CL and it needs less than a 5" mount hole, the OD of the flange is less than 6" on the rounded ends and 5 1/3" on two other ends that have been ground to make a fit to a board.

[Really Big Cameras]

I have a very late 760mm f14 APO Ronar purchased from the gentleman who posted immediately before me. The actual weight of the lens, including the mounting flange, is 1190g. That works out to 42 oz., or 2 lb. 10 oz. in imperial units. The mounting flange diameter is 110mm. So, it easily fits on a Sinar size board without modification to the flange. It is very compact and lightweight for a lens of this focal length. Much smaller and lighter than the 800 f9 APO Ronar CL the OP asked about.

I don't have one to weigh, and unfortunately, none of the later brochures or data sheets I have on the Rodenstock process lenses list the weights. I do have an APO Ronar data sheet dated August 1, 1965 that lists the weight of the 800mm f9 APO Ronar as 7 lb. 10.5 oz. However, that may be for a lens in a brass barrel. Or, perhaps not. The mid-1960s is the time frame when Goerz switched from brass to aluminum barrels for their APO Artars. I have no idea if Rodenstock followed suit then, or switched to aluminum barrels at a later date for their process lenses.

Another lens in this focal length range that is reasonable in weight is the 760mm f11 APO Nikkor. Depending on which Nikon brochure you have, the spec says either 1350g or 1385g. The actual weight of my sample is 1280g (45 oz.). However, with a flange diameter of 145mm it's quite a bit larger than the 760mm f14 APO Ronar CL and won't fit on a Sinar board without modifying the flange. It will fit on an ARCA-SWISS lens board, and likely a 6" Toyo board with very minor modification to the flange.

Kerry Thalman
Really Big Cameras (who also has a few Really Big Lenses)

[John Jarosz]

Just to follow up on my post on the 1800mm Apo Ronar. The seller responded that the front of the lens is 6" in dia, the mounting flange is 8" in diameter. The best part is the weight: 17 pounds. So the camera bed should be the back of a pick-up truck.

John

[Jon Wilson]

Like Kerry, I too have a 760mm/30 inch Rodenstock APO-Ronar-CL f14 lens which I picked up from Dagor77. It is light lens which uses the same size flange as the one used by an APO-Nikkor 480mm f9 lens. It is handy having the same V8 board for both process lens. Jon

[Really Big Cameras]

I have a very late 760mm f14 APO Ronar ... The mounting flange diameter is 110mm. So, it easily fits on a Sinar size board without modification to the flange.

Oops that's what I get for posting from memory. The flange thread size is 90mm. The outside diameter of the flange is 121mm - which still allows it to fit on a Sinar lensboard.

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras

[Really Big Cameras]

Just to follow up on my post on the 1800mm Apo Ronar. The seller responded that the front of the lens is 6" in dia, the mounting flange is 8" in diameter. The best part is the weight: 17 pounds. So the camera bed should be the back of a pick-up truck.

John

I have data sheets from 1985 for these long APO Ronars. They don't list weights, but the the flange diameter for the 1800mm f16 APO Ronar CL is indeed 208mm (8.19"). The length is a rather modest (for a lens of this focal length) 184mm (7.24").

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras

[Really Big Cameras]

Like Kerry, I too have a 760mm/30 inch Rodenstock APO-Ronar-CL f14 lens which I picked up from Dagor77. It is light lens which uses the same size flange as the one used by an APO-Nikkor 480mm f9 lens. It is handy having the same V8 board for both process lens. Jon

My 760mm f14 APO Ronar shares a flange and board with a 520mm f9 APO Ronar CL. The lenses are so close in size and appearance I can't tell them apart unless they are side-by-side. And, even then it's difficult. The 90mm thread size seems to be fairly common among the reasonably compact long process lenses. The 480mm f9 and 485mm f9 APO Ronar CL lenses also have this same mounting size - as does the 600mm f9 APO Germinar.

In addition to the 480mm f9 APO Nikkor Jon mentioned, the 420mm f9 and 455mm f9 APO Nikkors also have a 90mm mount size. In shorter lenses, the 260mm f10 Process Nikkor and 360mm f9 Wide Angle APO Nikkor also have this same mount size.

So, it would be easy to assemble a nice set of three or four process lenses that all share a single flange/board. For example, for the 7x17 format the following 4 lens set would work very nicely:

260mm f10 Process Nikkor
360mm f9 Wide Angle APO Nikkor
520mm f9 APO Ronar CL
760mm f9 APO Ronar CL

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras

[Really Big Cameras]

I don't have one to weigh, and unfortunately, none of the later brochures or data sheets I have on the Rodenstock process lenses list the weights. I do have an APO Ronar data sheet dated August 1, 1965 that lists the weight of the 800mm f9 APO Ronar as 7 lb. 10.5 oz. However, that may be for a lens in a brass barrel. Or, perhaps not. The mid-1960s is the time frame when Goerz switched from brass to aluminum barrels for their APO Artars. I have no idea if Rodenstock followed suit then, or switched to aluminum barrels at a later date for their process lenses.

I just checked my other APO Ronar brochures an I have one from July, 1970 that lists the weight of the 800mm f9 APO Ronar as 4130g = 9.10 lb. That's one heavy lens. All by it's lonesome, it weighs more than the 4 lens set of process lenses mentioned in my previous post - and they aren't exactly what I'd consider petite.

Even my 42" f14 Red Dot Artar, my biggest general purpose ULF lens, is over 4 lb. lighter than the 800mm f9 APO Ronar CL. That f9 max. aperture carries a heavy (literally) penalty in lenses this long.

Kerry Thalman
Really Big Cameras

Edit: There may be a later, lighter, version of the 800mm f9 APO Ronar than the one listed in that July, 1970 data sheet. If anyone has a late sample, perhaps they could weight it and post the results.

[Daniel Grenier]

Thanks all for your comments. I will skip on the 800mm as the 760mm seems so much more of a logical choice in every aspect.