Which 150mm?

[gmed]

Which is a better lens? Rodenstck 150 5.6 or Nikon 150mm 5.6?

Both have similar image circles at f/22.

[Gem Singer]

Rodenstock made (makes) several types of f5.6 150 lenses. Which one are you referring to?

What do you mean by "better lens"?

[Sevo]

Neither is a very good door stop - these are quite tiny, you may have to go for a 600mm for that purpose. Or what were you thinking of?

[gmed]

The N version. Not the S. I know the S a sharper lens.

What I mean is if you had a choice, which one would you buy?

[John Kasaian]

The one in the best condition. If identical, then the cheapest.

[IanG]

The Rodenstock 150mm Sironar N, I went for it and 25 years later I've no regrets :D Still just as good.

Ian

[Sevo]

The one in the best condition. If identical, then the cheapest.

Agreed (and the same goes for the Symmar S MC). Provided that the OP intends to use it for 4x5 with regular movements - larger formats or architecture/industry work with extreme movements would need a different lens type with more coverage...

[gmed]

Thank you John and Ian.

If I needed a door stop, I would spend $0.25 on a brick!

[gmed]

This is going on a Chamonix 4x5. I intend on using it for Landscape mainly. I use nikon on digital and know their reputation, but Rodenstock is completely new to me. this is the reason I ask.

Btw, thank you Sevo.

[Gem Singer]

The Rodenstock Sironar N, or the newer Rodenstock Apo Sironar N?

If I had to choose between two lenses , I would select the newest one that I could purchase at the best price. All of the big four lens manufacturers make (made) excellent lenses.

Personally, I own/use the Nikon/Nikkor f5.6 150W. I prefer Nikon lenses. However, that's a personal choice.

[John NYC]

Rodenstock, Schneider, Nikon and Fuji (a.k.a. the big four) all have steller reputations for LF lenses.

[gmed]

It is the Apo-Sironar-N.

Then I'll get which ever is less expensive.

[Greg Y]

Though not on your list.....for landscapes....I'm a big fan of the G-Claron 150....tiny, inexpensive, sharp. I use it on both 4x5 and 5x7...

[Leigh]

The Rodenstock Sironar N, or the newer Rodenstock Apo Sironar N?
Or the Rodenstock 150 Apo-Sironar-S, which I have.

Newer than the Apo-Sironar-N, and an absolutely superb lens.

BTW, don't get confused by the Sinaron name, which is Sinar's rebrand of the Rodenstock lenses.
The Sinar Apo-Sinaron-S is the Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-N, not the Apo-Sironar-S.

- Leigh

[gmed]

Agreed (and the same goes for the Symmar S MC). Provided that the OP intends to use it for 4x5 with regular movements - larger formats or architecture/industry work with extreme movements would need a different lens type with more coverage...

by different, do you mean different 150 with larger image circle or 120 or 90mm?

I dont plan on doing a whole lot of architectural. mainly landscape.

[Duane Polcou]

I used to have a Rodenstock Apo Sironar S ED, which is absolutely breathtaking at infinity. The sharpest, most 3-dimensional lens I've ever used. But when focused close, I found sharpness to be a tad off. I now use a 150mm Schneider Symmar-S MC, and at mid range stops (11, 16, 22) it's sharpness and resolution are nearly as amazing. Not too shabby focused closer, as well, although no substitute for a true macro.

[Ole Tjugen]

by different, do you mean different 150 with larger image circle or 120 or 90mm?

I dont plan on doing a whole lot of architectural. mainly landscape.

Just as stated - a different lens type with greater angle of coverage.

"Standard" lenses are more or less all Plasmat-type, with a couple of Dagors and Tessars added. Tessar-type lenses have least coverage, Dagors more, and Plasmats (generally) most. If you were to pick a lens for lots of movements, you would need something like a Super-Symmar XL which is a completely different lens design with a lot more coverage.

[Kirk Fry]

The plain old Sironars had lens separation problems. I'd get the Nikon. KFry

[jwanerman]

I have used a Caltar 150mm ( nee Rodenstock-N ) F: 5.6 since I purchased it new in 1988. So far, the lens and copal shutter have performed flawlessly. Both Rodenstock and Nikon products at this focal length should give superb results.

[E. von Hoegh]

FWIW, you might be surprised how nice an old convertible Symmar can be. Converted to 265, it makes a nice portrait lens.