Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,008   Posts: 1,524,575   Online: 1020
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 47 of 47
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,851
    FYI, there is a 150 Apo N on shebay right now, looks super clean too.

  2. #42
    Rafal Lukawiecki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Co. Wicklow, Ireland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    737
    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    No; I'm not likely to ever go beyond 11x14, and probably won't even get to that size for a while. Just on the basis of specifications, I'd speculate that the latest 150mm El-Nikkor, which is optimized for 4X magnification, would be better when making 16x20s, and probably for 11x14s as well.
    Thanks, Sal. It sounds like some folks on this thread feel the Apo Rodagon N 150 is the tops of the lot (contrast, fall-off, distortion, speed?) save for the mystical and reassuringly expensive Apo El Nikkor. And I was quite happy with my plain, new-style El Nikkor 150...

    PKM-25, I saw that one, too. Bit pricey, I'd think, more than the going rate so far, but I guess they are rareish. Thanks for pointing out.
    Rafal Lukawiecki
    See rafal.net | Read rafal.net/articles

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Rafal Lukawiecki View Post
    PKM-25, I saw that one, too. Bit pricey, I'd think, more than the going rate so far, but I guess they are rareish. Thanks for pointing out.
    Actually, that is the going rate, $600-$800 especially in that condition. I paid $900 for mine in new in the box condition after looking for one for months, glad I did, money well spent. From what I understand these were about $2,300 new right before they were discontinued.

    I had no issues with my regular 150 5.6 Rodagon but the Apo-N version pretty much negates the need to ever source a Rodagon G as the N will max out Ilford's largest paper size before the lens hits it's limit....and it is *wicked* bright too....

  4. #44
    Rafal Lukawiecki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Co. Wicklow, Ireland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    737
    PKM-25, have you had a chance to compare the 150 Apo Rodagon to the newer design El Nikkor 150? I understand the superiority of the design, yet I am curious about observable differences in B&W use at these magnifications. Thank you for your thoughts about the price, much appreciated.
    Rafal Lukawiecki
    See rafal.net | Read rafal.net/articles

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,851
    Rafal, I don't have the Nikon so I can't help you there.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,516
    For black and white printing, the Apo Rodagons will give you a subtle increase in microtexture which can be quite rewarding, provided you also
    have an equal quality paper capable of responding to the difference. With color printing, a lot depends ... I might even use different lenses of
    the same focal length when printing a color neg versus a chrome, just to tweak the contrast a tad, despite having already done so by supplementary silver masking. I'll admit that I'm a bit of an enlarging lens junkie. But collecting good ones is not terribly expensive in this day
    and age, at least, if you're patient. But don't get too patient about a 150 Apo Rodagon - not many people are willing to part with them! And
    yes, in the characteristic I just described, I would rate the Apo-Rodagon above a modern El Nikkor, though that is itself a desirable lens.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,065
    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    ...Since 120 and 210 AM-ED are described as taking lenses in the Nikon booklets I have, and given that their coverage is specified at small apertures like the other taking lenses in those booklets, I assume (always a bad idea) their optical design was also calculated for use at f/16-22...
    I just came upon this page


    in which Bjørn Rørslett reports his results with the 120. The relevant quote is:

    "At f/8-f/11, the image across the frame is very good and at f/16-f/22, image quality is outstanding."

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin