Rodenstock's iconic lenses

[neil poulsen]

A related question that might provide some insight into the original question is, where has Rodenstock established a new direction or standard in their lenses?

[Bernice Loui]

Rodenstock..

Imagon.

200mm Grandagon.

APO Ronar.


Bernice

[Bernice Loui]

Zeiss pretty much gave up on the general photography market years ago and focused on other industries that are far more profitable. Have a look at Zeiss optical microscope offerings for medicine, industry and.. This is just one of the many other markets Zeiss has focused on in place of general photography..

Zeiss has a highly regarded reputation and brand identity among many photographers, yet based on my experience with Zeiss photographic lenses, they are good, but no better than many of the other competitors who offerer similar products in the same price range. This brand identity stereotype has driven market values for Zeiss photographic optics to IMO, silly numbers.

While Zeiss made their name, brand identity and reputation very early on in the photographic optics game, times and technologies have moved on and they are faced with the same issues, problems as any other optics manufacture today.


Bernice

[Oren Grad]

A related question that might provide some insight into the original question is, where has Rodenstock established a new direction or standard in their lenses?

Apo-Sironar-S established 75-degree coverage as a benchmark for standard plasmats. Schneider didn't get there until the Apo-Symmar L series, and when they did they left out key focal lengths (135, 240) where the extra coverage actually matters.

[patrickjames]

Thanks for the link Ian.

[paulr]

A few years ago at Photokina and at PMA Rodenstock showed three lenses for SLR cameras including tilt shift. However they would have been too expensive and were shelved. We did show them to a few dealers in the USA after the PMA show but that was the extent of it.

I wonder if the market has changed enough since then to reconsider these lenses. Now that top end 35mm cameras are becoming alternatives to medium format digital, $3K and $4K lenses don't seem as absurd as they once did.

Any sense of what one of the Rodenstock t/s lenses might have cost if produced?

I realize this is still a very small market, and the margins are probably quite low as well. But Rodenstock does seem to be the company that has the right optical designs just waiting to be put in a new enclosure.

[Bob Salomon]

I wonder if the market has changed enough since then to reconsider these lenses. Now that top end 35mm cameras are becoming alternatives to medium format digital, $3K and $4K lenses don't seem as absurd as they once did.

Any sense of what one of the Rodenstock t/s lenses might have cost if produced?

I realize this is still a very small market, and the margins are probably quite low as well. But Rodenstock does seem to be the company that has the right optical designs just waiting to be put in a new enclosure.

We asked them during our meetings at Photokina last year. No they are not interested. As for cost at retail? Mid to high 4 figures when they were shown. Would be approaching or passing 5 figures now.

[EdSawyer]

apo symmar (non L) and apo sironar s have basically the same coverage, despite whatever one might claim. This was born out in various discussions here comparing the MTF and hence the falloff/angle of coverage.

-Ed

Apo-Sironar-S established 75-degree coverage as a benchmark for standard plasmats. Schneider didn't get there until the Apo-Symmar L series, and when they did they left out key focal lengths (135, 240) where the extra coverage actually matters.

[Jody_S]

I don't have any real comment on this thread except that I own a quite early RR from Rodenstock that is apparently worthless compared to Voigtlander and Dallmeyer period offerings, and I have never had a bad Rodenstock lens. Every single one I have used has been a superb performer. I think they get a bad rap from collectors.

[Oren Grad]

apo symmar (non L) and apo sironar s have basically the same coverage, despite whatever one might claim. This was born out in various discussions here comparing the MTF and hence the falloff/angle of coverage.

So I went rummaging through my literature collection, dug up MTFs for the Apo-Symmar and Apo-Sironar-S series, and picked a couple of focal lengths - 135 and 210 - for close comparison. Taking care to match working apertures and magnifications, they are indeed difficult to tell apart.