Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,875   Posts: 1,520,225   Online: 1193
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    158
    Eventually, I'd like to buy a modern 150mm lens for making close-ups with my Tachihara. I'd be photographing things such as food - often at or near 1:1.

    I've heard that the Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S is better than other 150s (don't remember why, though). Is this the case, and if so, why? Would there be a noticeable difference between the Rodenstock and the Nikkor for macro photography? I'd like to get the Nikkor (cheaper), but not if it's significantly inferior for my purposes. Any help appreciated.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    If you are not locked into either a Nikkor or a Rodenstock, I use a 150 apo-symmar which is very sharp, small, light and I think is the cheapest lens Schnider has. somewhere in the $600 range new! so check it out, as a user I absolutely recommend it

  3. #3
    b.e.wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Provo, Utah
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    141
    I don't know about the particular lens to which you refer, but in general apo lenses perform better at macro distances than non-apo lenses because they are better corrected and suffer from less chromatic aberation (color fringing).

    But even apo lenses won't work as well at macro distances (focal length = lens-to-subject distance) as they will at the design distance (focal length = lens-to-film distance).

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    106
    The Rodenstock S has a greater image circle than the N version. I've seen transparencies taken on both and I couldn't see any difference in image quality - but if you want big movements then the S is the answer. If you don't need this (major movements) then the 150 Apo Symmar is awesome! But the best kept secret......the Fuji 150! What a sharp lens! With plenty of coverage and small in size! You may be interested to know that Robert White in the UK has a good sized inventory of Fuji lenses (demo stock) at CHEAP prices!!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    158
    Thanks very much, everyone!

    b.e.wilson brought up a good point about apochromatic lenses. I'm researching APO lenses now.

    paul, do you know whether or not the Fuji 150 CM-W is apochromatic?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    106
    No idea if its an apo design - although probably not! But don't dismiss a lens simply because its not of the "latest" design! The Fuji LF lenses have developed a "cult" like following!! They (apparently) have the best multicoating of any LF lens (Fuji EBC). I'm very happy with the Fuji - all my other lenses are Schneiders (all latest designs) and the Fuji is there with the best of them!

  7. #7
    b.e.wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Provo, Utah
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    141
    For Fuji lens info, refer to http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/fujinon.htm

    For Nikkor lens info, see http://homepages.tig.com.au/~cbird/nikkor/niklf.html

    These sites are up because of the paucity of info provided by the manufactureres websites.

  8. #8
    Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,547
    Blog Entries
    7
    Images
    15
    I thought Nikkor lenses must be pretty good because John Sexton uses them a lot. Then I found out he doesn't use the stock variety. He sends them back to Nikkor for custom alignment work, until they are perfect, otherwise he won't say that he uses nikkor. Seems a bit suspect. I suppose it could be a crazy rumor tho!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    158
    Thanks very much! My options are growing. One thing that I'm a bit unsure of is what to do the my filters. Right now I have three lenses (one LF, 2 35mm) that take 52mm, 67mm, and 77mm filters. Also, I have 52mm, 77mm, and 82mm filters, and a rabbit-like collection of step-up rings. I'm reluctant to part with the (hard-earned) filters in order to standardize with new ones. Any ideas on filters/holders that are high-quality and relatively inexpensive? Thanks again.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Dorset, UK
    Posts
    36
    </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (b.e.wilson @ Sep 15 2002, 05:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>... in general apo lenses perform better at macro distances than non-apo lenses because they are better corrected and suffer from less chromatic aberation (color fringing).
    </td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
    I would beg to differ here. Apochromatic correction, like the correction of any aberration, is optimized for particular distances, or equivalently magnifications. That may make them good close up, or it may not. For example the Apo-Ronars are, IIRC, apo at 1:1, as you would expect for true symmetrical process lenses.

    OTOH, the Apo-Sironars are designed for lower magnification work. The &#39;S&#39; type are optimized for 1:10, and the &#39;N&#39; type for 1:20 - again IIRC. Thus the Apo-Sironar S lenses make for better studio use, whereas the &#39;N&#39; lenses may well be better in the field. Certainly neither can be assumed to be good for macro work simply for being designated as Apo lenses - it all depends at what magnification they are apochromatically corrected.




Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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