Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

  1. #1

    Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    Hello everyone,

    I'm currently looking at two 210mm f/5.6 lenses and i'm unsure if paying the extra buck makes sense? The cheaper one is a Fujinon W 210mm f/5.6 and around 150 USD more expensive the Rodenstock Sironar-N 210mm f/5.6.

    Is paying more really worth it? Is the Rodenstock that much better?

    Both are in great shape and have no issues with their functionality ..

    Feedback is highly appreciated <3

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    160

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    I have an older fujinon 210 w with the writing near around the front element, its very good, covers 8x10. I have several rodenstock lenses none 210, rodenstock is very good, i prefer them over the others, but fuji is very very good also. they are probably different lenses but i think you will be fine with fuji.

    i think other things come into the equation: film, developer, technique...

    have fun!!!

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    84

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    Pick the cheaper one, your technique (focusing, development) and the lens-to-lens variation matter more.

  4. #4
    Angus Parker angusparker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Francisco, USA
    Posts
    870

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    The Fujinon W most likely has a single lens coat while the Rodenstock might have a multi coat. You can see the various versions of the Fujinon lens here: http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,565

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    Quote Originally Posted by doyoudevelop View Post
    Feedback
    Two important things to check:

    1) Both the W and the N can be found multicoated or single coated, the older ones are single coated. You may want MC or not, but SC are way cheaper and sure older.

    2) What shutter ? How in shape it is ? Some old Fujis had Seiko shutters, while excellent shutters perhaps with a Copal it would be easier to find service for it.

    As others said, both are excellent lenses and most important is your technique, but you need to know if you buy MC or SC, be aware because an SC lens is more difficult to sell and sometimes this is a bit hidden.

    Also an older SC lens is evidently more prone to require service for the shutter, simply because it may have not been lubricated in the last 40 years.

    Over the years glass manufacturing improved in QC, so also older lenses "may" have a wider quality variability, still this is seen more in lab tests than in practical photography.

  6. #6

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    So I'm not 100% sure but according to the Fuji link posted earlier it seems to be the CM-W version, so it's multicoated, it comes with a Copal 1. The Rodenstock is MC and also comes with a Copal 1. I have to say both are very minty .. so I guess getting the Fuji makes more sense as it's multicoated too?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,565

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    Quote Originally Posted by doyoudevelop View Post
    it seems to be the CM-W version
    It cannot seem it... it has to be or not to be, if it has CM stamped then it is for sure:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	s-l1600.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	26.0 KB 
ID:	186270

    If not sure then ask seller, about if it is CM and/or MC.


    https://www.largeformatphotography.i...ra-Over-a-NW-W

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,955

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    Modern { Fujinon-Rodenstock-Nikkor-Schneider } LF plasmas are more similar than different. While there are differences, they are not that significant if this your first LF lens.

    What matters more is condition of the shutter.

    For a first LF lens, the lens shutter must operate with good shutter speed accuracy and be reliable. What will cause significant grief is shutter problems, and less so problems with the lens cells. Choose the LF lens of your choice then burn LOTS of film to make prints which is much of what this is all about.



    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by doyoudevelop View Post
    Hello everyone,

    I'm currently looking at two 210mm f/5.6 lenses and i'm unsure if paying the extra buck makes sense? The cheaper one is a Fujinon W 210mm f/5.6 and around 150 USD more expensive the Rodenstock Sironar-N 210mm f/5.6.

    Is paying more really worth it? Is the Rodenstock that much better?

    Both are in great shape and have no issues with their functionality ..

    Feedback is highly appreciated <3

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    293

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    Facing the same decision, I went with the Fujinon 210/5.6. Mine is the one with the 67mm front filter thread diameter. In the 1979 Fujinon catalogue it's EBC (so multi-coated) and described as "NWS", although it's only W on the lens. Look for the writing on the outside of the barrel. On my Linhof/Wista board with Copal 1 shutter it weighs 526grams.

    I quite like these Fujinon lenses. I currently also have the 125/5.6, which is a very tiny lens with a good reputation. It only weights 260 grams with Copal 0 shutter and lens board. Together these cover my favourite focal lengths of "just a bit longer than normal" and "just a bit shorter than normal".

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Oregon now (formerly Austria)
    Posts
    2,700

    Re: Fujinon vs Rodenstock

    The differences in the two lenses you are considering is so slight, assuming that they are both in equally good condition, that other factors should determine your choice here.

    If you have money to spare (or the price difference is small enough), go ahead and spring for the Rodenstock. If you could better use the difference in price for something else (e.g., film, paper, chemicals, etc.) then go for the Fujinon.

    FWIW, 210mm f/5.6 Plasmats are too big and heavy for my style. My lenses in that range are a Fujinon 180mm f/9, an Ektar 203mm f/8 and a Fujinon L f/5.6 Tessar-design (the largest of the three). I defy anyone to look at prints made from negatives made with those lenses and find a difference in quality from similar made with a Rodenstock 210mm...

    You know, the more you get up the price scale for many things, the smaller the differences become. There's a lot of difference between a $6 and a $20 bottle of wine; not so much between that $20 bottle and a $100 bottle.

    Best,

    Doremus

Similar Threads

  1. Fujinon 250mm or 300mm for portraits on 8x10? Fujinon vs Rodenstock?
    By ryanmills in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19-Mar-2016, 15:35
  2. Fujinon 360 W 6.8 or Rodenstock 360 6.8 Sironar-N
    By bwaysteve in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-Mar-2008, 05:16

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •