paul_de_luna Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 I searched the archives and the web, but came up with nothing exclusive. People rant about the Nikkor 300M and 200M, but when it comes to the 135, the Sironar-N seems more common. I'm using these lenses for backpacking with a Toho FC-45x, so weight is of primary concern. B&H quotes the weight of the Sironar-N at 220g, but other sources say it's about 180g. Which one is it? The Nikon weighs 200g and has the same image circle (200mm) as the Sironar-N, and on the used market the prices are more or less the same as the Sironar. So, why isn't it more popular? Thanks in advance------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leonard_evens Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 See www.thalmann.com/largeformat/mid-rang.htm. Also, according to Kerry Thalmann's article about Nikon lenses in the latest View Camera Magazine, the two lenses you describe are pretty similar. Also why are you worried about a 40 gram weight difference? I know that every ounce counts, but these are all relatively light lenses, and which one you choose isn't going to make that much difference in the total weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave schlick Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 the rodenstock 135 sironar s is also in this class.. and with my gess the best of the bunch.. i have one and consider it very good. it is quite light and its resolution to edge is very good.. and i think its coverage is about 208 or 1 inch rise at f 32 3/4 at f 22 and about 1/2 inch at f16 or there abouts my memery is not great at this point on this.... you must remove the skylite filter to get these results tho.. the s also has a f64 stop that i like in some depth of fild situations.. the main reason i like it is it fits inside my closed crown grafic..edge fall off is minimal, a very good all round lens. good luck dave.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_karp Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 Here is a recent thread on this subject: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004inX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_ellis3 Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 If you scroll down about twenty five headings you'll see one from me entitled "135mm Lens - Nikon W vs. Rodenstock Apo Sironar S." While the responses there deal mostly with the S rather than the N, there are a number of comments about the Nikon. If you are interested in the Nikon, Adorama has a used one in excellent condition for $375. It may not yet be back in their inventory list but if you call Adorama and ask for Fred he will know about it I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tedharris Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 In the same thread mentioned byh Brian you will see my discussion of th Nikkor v. Apo Sironar's and Symmar's. If you want more contact me offline and I will look for the original test images. Bottom line, hard to see any difference n resolution but the Nikkor falls short in contrast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now