Schneider 210mm Apo-Symmar or Rodenstock 210mm Apo-Sironar S?

I'm about to buy my first large format lens and was wondering if

there was anyone out there who could pass along some wisdom regarding

these two lenses. Much Thanks, Sacha

Sacha, Schneider are in the process of releasing a new range of "L" lenses that are claimed to be an improvement over the existing range of Apo Symmar. Of the two you mention, some will argue that the Rodenstock is marginally better than the Schneider - though others will argue that the difference will not be seen in "real" use ie outside of the laboratory. It also depends on whether you intend buying new or used. If buying new you can choose any of them - if buying used, you are limited to whatever happens to be available at the time!! Personally I prefer Schneider lenses. But I would not claim them to be "better" than any other modern lens.

Hi Sacha

 

In thad focal lenghs 210mm is Schneider always be sharper then the Rodenstocks. Even my single coated 210 Symmar was at thad time the sharper solution then the Rodenstocks N and S but thies is only for the 210mm!!!

You can see it also here:http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

Good light!

There is no way in hell you're going to discern the difference. I'm sure you can find "techo" test charts showing one being better over the other. You'll read posts preferring one over the other. In the end (unless you can rent each and test for yourself) the choice will depend on budget and lens condition. So if you're looking at buying a used one, ensure it's in tip-top shape. Both are excellent. I own the Schneider but used the Rodenstock in the past. If your shooting technique is right, your pics will be as well, with either choice.

Sacha

 

Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, and a very large host of other great photographers never had these modern lenses, and yet if you look at their actual prints you see marvelous photographs. May I suggest that you maybe look for 2 or 3 good condition used lenses for the price of one of these new lenses and learn to make great photographs first. then if you want to you can buy a new apo lens. for 4 x 5 a 120, 210 and 300 is a good combination.

 

Kevin

"Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, and a very large host of other great

photographers never had these modern lenses"

 

That's obvious. Today's modern lenses were not available then. They had the

choice of what was then modern lenses. Fortuantly modern keeps changing.

None of them had the possibility to correspond the way you are now.

 

But then look at waht Sexton, Barnbaum, McGrath and others use today.

 

And, before you get to uptight, one uses Nikon, one uses Schneider and one

uses Rodenstock. But all use modern lenses.

To me there are only two real considereations as the performance of the

lenses in real life is virtually identical:

 

1) Waht is your budget and which lens comes closest to meetin git?

 

2) Do you need to additional coverage of the S?

"210mm is Schneider always be sharper then the Rodenstock"

 

Nonsense. Take 10 of each and test them all at the same time and you will

probably find that each brand wins about half of the tests. And then there is

always the question of are you comparing identical shots taken on the same

film, at the same time and processed the same, at the same time?

 

Or are these of different things at different times on different films?

Hi Bob

 

If I test lenses I test it under the same conditions of course!!But I had not 10 lenses! Only one from each.

And if I look at the MTFs of them then I think I`m still right!

But as I told it is only for the 210mm.

Sorry Bob!

Bob Salomon nailed it. Too many variables to make assertive

proclamations. It appears most modern lenses have technical

improvements that make the $$$ outlay worthwhile, while some

very skilled photographers will depend on this or that older lens

for a unique 'feel', or look, to a picture.

My personal bias is for new (or used latest model in 10+ shape).

Within that narrowed down grouping, I tend to select a lens

based on (1) size of image circle; (2) general reviews of that

lens within the photographic community; and (3) how much

money I'm willing to part with to procure it.

Decisions of course, are not always perfectly logical. There will

be an emotional layer, cast, or coloration, or whatever you want

to call it, that will propel the final decision into reality. In my case,

this is often caused by seeing what appears to be a striking

photographic possibility - and discovering I don't have the exact

focal length I feel is neccessary to make the picture work.

But by this time, for some unexplained reason, (serendipity,

perhaps), I've already done the technical discovery neccessary to

make an informed decision.

 

I went for the Schneider some few years ago, based partly on the

above collation. I fully expect the Rodenstock to be equally as

good. Meanwhile, does anyone know of a really good modern

manufacture 135 mm with a larger image circle than 214mm? I

have this photo in mind...:>)

Best regards,

I happen to have the Schneider (and love it), but you'd probably be just as satisfied by a good example of the Rodenstock. Although I've personally opted to use mostly Schneider lenses for color rendition consistency, both brands are generally excellent from all reports.

 

As Bob mentioned, any manufacturer will have variations from lens to lens, so it's a good idea to be sure you can test the specific lens and return it for full credit if you find that particular lens to be less than expected.

Sacha, look at the Midwest Photo Exchange website MPEX.COM. There are several used 210's listed at very reasonable prices. You may want to consider a Nikon 210W f5.6. It's comparable to the other brands, and usually sells for less. If you call, and talk to JIM, he can advise you. He ships worldwide, and offers a full money-back gurantee, if you are not completely satisfied. Tell him you saw the recommendation on this forum, and he will give you a good deal.

Thanks everyone for your input, I'll be starting my first semester at Art Center College of Design in January and from what I've heard, newbies start off doing some fairly technical exercises with the 4x5, will the extra coverage of the Rodenstock be of any advantage?.....and again, thanks to all who have contributed, every ounce of info is of great help at this point! Sacha Brown

Sacha, best of luck on your new endeavor. To answer your last question, probably not. The Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, and Fujinon 210's have enough coverage to be used as "normal" lenses on the 5X7 format. They will all cover the 4X5 format with room to spare.

What about 8x10?.....could the Rodenstock with the extra coverage be used as a wide angle?

Are there any more Rodenstock fans out there?.....I'd love to hear a little more from you guys!

Cheers,

The new lens are great no doubt, but if you want your photographs to look different in the shadow areas try some of the old Dagors, they have huge imagine circles and as long as you don't point them at the sun your shadows will have an open look to them that is just not possible with the new heavily coated lens. Just another view.

"your shadows will have an open look to them that is just not possible with the

new heavily coated lens. Just another view"

 

Why?

 

Have you tried it in a direct comparison with each of the 4 major

manufacturers with each of their designs?

Bob,

I really don't do tests per say, every shot I take is a test. Over the years I have shot enough with modern lens and enough with the 4 different dagors I have to know the traits of each lens. For the times of the day and the lenght of my exposures I am quite confident with my assesment. Steve

Steve,

 

In other words you have not made any direct comparison but are sure you

know what the results of such a comparison would be?

 

That is not a strong position to make an empirical statement from.

Hi Bob

 

Re: Open shadows even Adams speaks in one of hes books about thad point and he talkes about strong conrast situations wich sometimes is better to solve with non coated lenses!

I also prever to work with my 50 years old single coated 90mm Super Angulon then with my MC Nikkor 90mm in extrem contrasty situation!

Sacha I`m a Rodenstock fan with 3 exeptions one is the 210mm!

Good luck!

Bob,

I would offer that photographers make photographs, scientists make tests and comparisons. Steve

Steve,

 

You made a statement regarding performance. You have not explained why.

Nor have you even indicated a basis for the statement.

 

If others, not as experienced, read the claim they might think it factual. It does

not appear to be so.

 

It has nothing to do with science. Just fact.

Bob,

This entire forum is just opinion, not facts. Any tests you may have made are purely subjective as are my thoughts. As Ansel once said "there are no rules for good photographs, just good photographs"

"your shadows will have an open look to them that is just not possible with the

new heavily coated lens."

 

Seems like you are stating a fact. Instead of your opinion without a factual

basis

 

Why don'y you actually do a test and see how right or wrong your opinion is.

 

then you can make a statement factually.