Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,717   Posts: 1,483,110   Online: 1076
      
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    105

    Please urgent:Rodagon Rodenstock f2.8 or f4

    Hi my friends!
    I need an advice,it's very urgent.
    I'm going to do lith sessions in the darkroom.
    I'll work with diaphragms as f4,f5.6.
    So working with these diaphragms...which lens should be better?...Rodenstock F2.8 or Rodenstock F4?
    Please help me!

    Adiós

  2. #2
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    11,584
    Images
    59
    There will be very little difference.

    Assuming you are speaking of a 50mm lens, the f/2.8 version is probably a slightly better lens over-all.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  3. #3
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,550
    Images
    40
    What Matt said...
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,810
    What Vaughn said Matt said...
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  5. #5
    sandermarijn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Leiden, Netherlands
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    771
    Images
    11
    The lastest-version 50mm f/2.8 and f/4 Rodagons are identical optical designs. The aperture limitation in the f/4 is only there because the blades are set to stop at that point. Likely Rodenstock wanted to make an alternative to the f/2.8 against as little cost as possible.

    The above concerns the latest version, the one where you can make the aperture continuous by sliding a small, raised lever on the side of the lens. I don't know about earlier versions (the one with the red line and rubberized aperture ring, and the even older version with the silver-black, bit-like pattern on the nose).



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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