Sironar-N and Sironar-S Shutter swap possible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matted

I may be wrong but I don’t think the Sironar-N covers 8x10 at infinity. According to the specs it comes up a few mm short (301mm), and I have found a thread where it was mentioned that it vignettes at infinity. The S just covers at infinity, and will have more room for movements at closer working distances.

A helpful forum member pointed me towards the 210mm Sironar (W) lens that has considerably more coverage. Aside from the obvious size, weight, and cost increase over the Sironar-S, are there any downsides to the 210 W? It will be used for both colour and b&w, medium to high magnification (with 4x5) and for both studio/tabletop and landscape. My plan was to sell the N lens but I suppose I could keep it as a lightweight/travel lens when I want to pack light.

---

The Apo Sironar S more then slightly covers 810. It is a 75° coverage lens. The W covers 80°.

Other the the added 5° coverage you should find the S a better performer. The S performs so well that the W was replaced by it. It is also much smaller and lighter and uses much smaller filters as well!

I have all three - N, S and W. I use the N mostly as part of a two-lens kit for 5x7 (the other lens that usually comes along is a 150 W). The S is my standard lens for whole plate (yes, it's semi-wide on that format). I haven't used the W that much, and only ever on 8x10.

I've never bothered with the 210 S on 8x10. For general field work with focus at medium to long range, the coverage is just too tight for my taste - the shorter the focal length and correspondingly wider the field of view, the more I want some wiggle room for movement, especially front rise. So if I had a routine need for 210 in 8x10 field work and had to choose between the S and W, it would be the W every time. YMMV.

Specifically re close-up work on 4x5, per Rodenstock, the N is optimized for 1:20, the S and W are optimized for 1:10. But the 210 W coverage is way overkill for 4x5. And you pay a price not just in size and weight but also in MTF for the larger image circle - within its limits the MTF of the 210 S is superior, and the S itself still has far more coverage than needed for 4x5.

So as the saying goes, horses for courses...

Thanks Leigh, Bob, and Oren for the thoughts. It’s great hearing from people that have used and/or own multiples of these lenses. The W would certainly cause a filter/holder/compendium crisis for me so there is likely more than just the initial cost over the S.

Were there any significant changes that would affect performance over the lifetime of the 210 “W” ? I seem to remember reading that the W designation was just added to help people differentiate against the N lenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matted

Were there any significant changes that would affect performance over the lifetime of the 210 “W” ?

---

I'm not aware of any, which of course proves nothing. But I think it's unlikely that you will find anyone who has data from well-controlled tests comparing W's of different production dates. I've never seen that for N's or S's either, and W's are much less common.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oren Grad

I'm not aware of any, which of course proves nothing. But I think it's unlikely that you will find anyone who has data from well-controlled tests comparing W's of different production dates. I've never seen that for N's or S's either, and W's are much less common.

---

The Sironar W became the Apo Sironar W when the Apo Sironar S was introduced. The only change was the addition of the colored stripe on the barrel. Optically the W and the Apo W are the same.

The Sironar convertible lens was replaced with the Sironar N, which was not convertible and covered a wider circle. This was replaced with the Sironar MC which added multi coating. This was replaced with the Apo Sironar N. From the Sironar N through the Apo Sironar N all covered 72°. The Sironar W covered 80° and was substantially larger and heavier. And, as noted, the Sironar N versions were corrected for 1:20 and the S and W lenses were corrected for 1:10.

Thanks again to everyone for the thoughts. I pulled the trigger on a 210 Sironar-S (in Copal shutter) so no monkeying around with shutters is necessary. I decided that the filter/compendium incompatibility is too big of an issue right now but if I know me I’ll probabku just end up with a W down the line anyways :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Salomon

The Sironar W became the Apo Sironar W when the Apo Sironar S was introduced. The only change was the addition of the colored stripe on the barrel. Optically the W and the Apo W are the same.

---

The Sironar W was originally just known as “APO Sironar”, wasn’t it? Or do I have my Sironar wires crossed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matted

The Sironar W was originally just known as “APO Sironar”, wasn’t it? Or do I have my Sironar wires crossed?

---

To be strictly correct about the nomenclature, there has never been a "Sironar-W" (nor a "Sironar-S" for that matter). But yes, the series with 80 degree coverage, originally labeled "Apo-Sironar", became "Apo-Sironar-W". The N series was originally "Sironar-N", then became "Apo-Sironar-N". The Apo-Sironar-S series has never been sold under any other name; there has never been a plain "Sironar-S".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matted

Thanks again to everyone for the thoughts. I pulled the trigger on a 210 Sironar-S (in Copal shutter) so no monkeying around with shutters is necessary. I decided that the filter/compendium incompatibility is too big of an issue right now but if I know me I’ll probabku just end up with a W down the line anyways :)


Yes, it was. Apo Sironar and then Apo Sironar W.
The Sironar W was originally just known as “APO Sironar”, wasn’t it? Or do I have my Sironar wires crossed?

---

Thanks again. I rarely type APO (especially for APO-Sironar-S since there was never any other version of the S) although reading through this I am recognizing its importance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matted

I rarely type APO (especially for APO-Sironar-S since there was never any other version of the S) although reading through this I am recognizing its importance.

---

Using full and correct product names enhances understanding by readers.

- Leigh