Sharper Lens ? Which do you like ?

Discussion in 'Large Format' started by dennismcarbo, Aug 7, 2008.

  1. Hi All,

    My ancient Polaroid Prontor shutter with a spotty 127mm lens froze SHUT this morning on a shoot...feels and
    sounds like something nasty and mechanical. YEY ! now I have a reason to replace it and can justify it to the
    wife !LOL

    Anyway ..For cityscapes/landscape/outdoor stuff which do you all think is a better choice

    NIKON NIKKOR W 135MM F5.6 IN COPAL #0 SHUTTER


    135MM SCHNEIDER LENS IN COPAL #0 SHUTTER

    Both are used for 350 - 375 dollars. Any advice or opinions welcome !

    Regards and Happy Shooting!

    Dennis
     
  2. Most likely both are excellent and sharp. But you haven't uniquely identified the Schneider lens -- Schneider has made improvements to their plasmat lenses over the years: Symmar, Symmar-S, Apo-Symmar, Apo-Symmar-L. The later models have more coverage.
     
  3. Ooops Right you are !

    135MM SCHNEIDER COMPONON S LENS , FACTORY MOUNTED BY SCHNEIDER IN A COPAL #0
     
  4. The Componon S is an enlarging lens not a taking lens. It may have been reversed mounted for use as a duplicating lens.

    It is not a taking lens for landscapes. The Nikon is. The sharpest of the bunch is the Rodenstock Apo Sironar S but you will
    not find that at your price point. You might find the Apo Sironar N.
     
  5. What is that 127? Tominon? Wollensak? Ektar?
    I am thinking it is an old tessar with barely coverage stopped for 4x5.
    IF you want sharp but not worried about coverage, the Nikkor W is overkill, and a good 135 Tessar like a Xenar or Optar should out-perform the 127 for anywhere from 50 to 125 bucks in a decent shutter.
     
  6. Both lenses are grossly overpriced, but the Componon price is really ridiculous.
     
  7. I would take the Nikkor because it does not get schneideritis!

    Armin
     
  8. Armin......I am afraid to ask...LOL
     
  9. Here the 135mm Schneider Componon is used with a Phase One digital scan back(s) of 35 and 50 megapixel and works well at repro distances. Its technically NOT corrected at infinity; its performance is down since thats not the distance the lens was corrected for; it is not a dog at infinity either as most preach. At a moderate enlargement with an infinity shot a better lens will not even matter. Most all 127mm lenses for large format are press lenses of a Tessar design; no matter what the brand. Decent un messed with samples are often tack sharp on axis; with performacne way down at the edges of a 4x5 piece of film; since they are really a 3x4 lens. In Kodak Ektars here I have measured some as 85 line pairs per mm on axis; with numbers in the teens at the corners of a 4x5 frame. Thus one can still make a fine 16x20 print off a 4x5 negative with a 4.5 x enlargement; IF one doesnt have any movements. <BR><BR>The reason that an enlarging lens in shutter commands a higher price it that a radical subset were ever made. MOST were hawked thru the graphics arts marketplace; ie to printers for their copy cameras and process cameras. Many of us printers used 105, 135, 150, 210 Componons in shutter for greyscale work at odd times using Kodak Pro copy films; BUT the darn beasts often where for months left on the bulb setting for the typical lith work; with timed lights being used for the exposure. Thus these enlarging lenses in shutter often got "STUCK" when one did a greyscale copy job the shutter got all the nasties from the stray fixer/stop/dev gasses in the air. A used enlarging lens in shutter often will require a CLA.<BR><BR> The Nikkor in shutter would be a better choice.
     
  10. Here is what a 135mm F5.6 Schneider Componon shot at infinity at between F8 to F11 shot looks like; with a 35 megapixel scan back on a 4x5 Speed Graphic: Its not a "coke bottle" at infinity as preached by some. The condos across the lake are about 3 km away. :<BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/scanback/ThruWindow135mmF56atF81ISO800f.jpg?t=1218306947"><BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/scanback/ThruWindow135mmF56atF81ISO800MEDIUMf.jpg?t=1218306894"><BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/scanback/ThruWindow135mmF56atF81ISO800DETAIL.jpg?t=1218306649"><BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/scanback/tripods-389.jpg?t=1218307177">
     
  11. Here is what a shot with an infinity corrected lens; the old ww2 bombing 178mm F2.5 Kodak Aerial camera lens; shot at F11 in infrared with the same scan back with better lighting,<BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/scanback/SpeedGraphicF11AEdetail.jpg?t=1218307328">
     
  12. I used a 135mm Schneider Componon S in a Copal 0 shutter for a couple of years until my 125 Fujinon came along and replaced it in my heart of hearts. I love the Fuji but the Schneider was no slouch by any standard. $350 is WAY too much though. $185 would be a fair buy for the Schneider. If a guy had both shutter and barrel for one you could shoot with it as a taking lens then screw the elements into a waiting barrel on the enlarger and use it for that too.
     
  13. Hi Dennis,

    over 300 $$$ is way too much! I've used a Componon for near and far with good results but on the pic I can't see a shutter. Get a Ysarex which is sharp enough and much cheaper.
     
  14. Dennis, others have answered your questions about the lens. I just want to say nice work on getting that old shutter to freeze up and justifying a well deserved purchase of a new lens. If you could share with us how you did it, it would be greatly appreciated. One question -- will the shutter problem resolve itself shortly after you purchase the new lens?
     
  15. Michael....Shhhhhh it unstuck when I got home ! But uhhh I just cant risk it ...this is how I make a living...so I'd better replace it or it will cost me in the future!......


    How was that..did I rush it..I felt like I rushed it...anyone buying it ?

    Ty for all the responses !
     
  16. why don't you just get the shutter cla'd ?
     

Share This Page

1111