Rodenstock 138mm HR Digaron-Float - Beauty Shots

[Bianca Ranciato]

Credits to our Technical Expert Brad Kaye for blessing us with these beauty shots of the WRX-138SB Wide-RS 138 mm HR Digaron-Float / Short Barrel + WRST-2048 (WRS Macro Tilt Adapter 48 mm Extension) on WRS-1600 (first image) with IQ4-150 Digital Back.

Feel free to post any reviews or questions regarding Rodenstock Lenses.

& Enjoy!

Ps. Images Taken from Article - Rodenstock 138mm HR Digaron-Float Now Available In Phase One X-Shutter

 

[kdphotography]

That's the XT in the images. No matter---I'd still want the HR 138 on a WRS 1600

 

[Bianca Ranciato]

That's the XT in the images. No matter---I'd still want the HR 138 on a WRS 1600

The first image is on a WRS 1600 and the second is on the XT. But a good point, I see how the order of the images makes that confusing! Ill move the text to the top

 

[Paul Spinnler]

The end-all tele!

That lens I think replaces anything above 90 up to and incl the 180mm given its superior resolving power and IC.

Fantastic optics!

 

[Ben730]

I think the Schneider digitar 180 mm can't be replaced by this lens.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Apparently Greiner pitted the 138 against the 180 digitar and could discern details with the 138 you could not see with the 180. I suppose (but cannot confirm first hand) one needs to go to the 210 to have a justifiable difference. Of course would be nice if someone owning the SK or RS 180 could pit the lenses against the 138. Could well be that the 138 is all one needs ...

But then again, let's not forget, it is a 17k USD lens ... with x shutter. That buys you the 90 and 180 ...

 

[vjbelle]

Can't imagine spending the money to put that lens in an X shutter and have to have a connection to the DB AND not have meta data. May as well just buy the lens mounted in the native mount of your choice and use the 4100 as the shutter.... unless you just have to have flash with the 138 float.

With that said I have found that there is no other lens that matches the 138 float and I also own the 180mm Schneider. It's heavy but it's beautiful and a joy to work with. My two lens combo is 60XL and 138 but if I can manage the weight then three lenses - 60XL, 90SW, 138 + my Actus on the short rail.

Victor B.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Victor, compared to the 60 XL - is the 180 Schneider as sharp, ie is it sharp as all the late gen SK lenses? It is rare to hear people with first hand experience on the 180 / 210 digitars ... Thanks a lot for your views

 

[Ray Harrison]

Can't imagine spending the money to put that lens in an X shutter and have to have a connection to the DB AND not have meta data. May as well just buy the lens mounted in the native mount of your choice and use the 4100 as the shutter.... unless you just have to have flash with the 138 float.

With that said I have found that there is no other lens that matches the 138 float and I also own the 180mm Schneider. It's heavy but it's beautiful and a joy to work with. My two lens combo is 60XL and 138 but if I can manage the weight then three lenses - 60XL, 90SW, 138 + my Actus on the short rail.

Victor B.

I believe the only metadata you don't get is the x/y shift and tilt. The cable provides everythig else, I think. Obviously, I'd love the ability to enter those elements directly in the back while shooting. I'm sure along with mine there are plenty of requests in to Phase for that capability. I have a couple of other lenses in X-shutter on a WRS-1600 and love the metadata capture. Capture One itself is a little flaky at using this appropriately and a bit fiddly. But that's another feature request with the folks "across the hall" in København

 

[4x5Australian]

Apparently Greiner pitted the 138 against the 180 digitar and could discern details with the 138 you could not see with the 180. I suppose (but cannot confirm first hand) one needs to go to the 210 to have a justifiable difference. Of course would be nice if someone owning the SK or RS 180 could pit the lenses against the 138. Could well be that the 138 is all one needs ...

But then again, let's not forget, it is a 17k USD lens ... with x shutter. That buys you the 90 and 180 ...

Paul, do you know whether Greiner made the comparison with the focus set at the infinity stop, or at a near subject distance using careful focusing on the live view at 100%?

Any comparison made on a distant subject with the focus set at the infinity stop is potentially, and dare I say, likely to be, misleading.

 

[vjbelle]

Victor, compared to the 60 XL - is the 180 Schneider as sharp, ie is it sharp as all the late gen SK lenses? It is rare to hear people with first hand experience on the 180 / 210 digitars ... Thanks a lot for your views

The 180mm Schneider is a very unique lens. I have often thought of replacing it with the Rody but I don't think I would gain anything 'except' for shooting wide open. The Rody is more than likely sharper wide open then the Schneider which from my experience is an unusable aperture - even for focus. However, the Schneider just Snaps to attention at f8. It becomes a very different lens as compared to f5.6. At f8 I would match it to any lens in that focal length. Very sharp with a very large image circle for those that need lots of shifting room. I don't usually shift beyond 10mm horizontally but the Schneider 180 can shift way beyond my camera's abilities.

I found the MTF graphs very informative for both the Rody and Schneider lenses. The Schneider shows poor performance at f5.6 but improves dramatically at f8 and my observations have proven that to be true. At that aperture the Rody and Schneider are about identical. The Schneider has the real advantage of being much lighter then the Rody and at my age every ounce matters.

As compared to the 60XL it certainly is as sharp or sharper. The 60XL is at the limit of my wide end as I would much prefer to shift the 60XL to achieve a wider FOV than use a wider dedicated lens. That is just my POV but I find wide lenses to be far inferior in almost all respects to medium/long lenses with regards to sharpness and distortion. Even with lenses that can't be shifted I would almost rather try to pan a longer lens to achieve the same FOV if it were possible.

Victor B.

 

[vjbelle]

I believe the only metadata you don't get is the x/y shift and tilt. The cable provides everythig else, I think. Obviously, I'd love the ability to enter those elements directly in the back while shooting. I'm sure along with mine there are plenty of requests in to Phase for that capability. I have a couple of other lenses in X-shutter on a WRS-1600 and love the metadata capture. Capture One itself is a little flaky at using this appropriately and a bit fiddly. But that's another feature request with the folks "across the hall" in København

I may be a little harsh with my criticism but X/Y and tilt was/is supposed to be the real plus of the X shutter (Plus no cable) and it's not available for the 138 and more than likely never will be. So why pay the extra money? YYMV but for me it just isn't worth it. Not trying to take away anyones enjoyment of the X system..... am only speaking for myself and my needs.

Victor B.

 

[Ray Harrison]

I may be a little harsh with my criticism but X/Y and tilt was/is supposed to be the real plus of the X shutter (Plus no cable) and it's not available for the 138 and more than likely never will be. So why pay the extra money? YYMV but for me it just isn't worth it. Not trying to take away anyones enjoyment of the X system..... am only speaking for myself and my needs.

Victor B.

Totally! I only wanted to be clear on what a non XT-based X-shutter lens can and can’t do. I don’t find the cable onerous per se, but that’s just me. I don’t know if I’d buy X-shutter based lenses again though, to be honest, as I also have an IQ3 Achro back which can’t drive them. I have to set the aperture via the IQ4 and then go shoot so it’s not as flexible, for sure. My feature request to Phase to build a device to drive aperture on X-shutter based lenses without needing an IQ4 was met with the trombone of sadness, as I’m sure you can imagine.

 

[buildbot]

Totally! I only wanted to be clear on what a non XT-based X-shutter lens can and can’t do. I don’t find the cable onerous per se, but that’s just me. I don’t know if I’d buy X-shutter based lenses again though, to be honest, as I also have an IQ3 Achro back which can’t drive them. I have to set the aperture via the IQ4 and then go shoot so it’s not as flexible, for sure. My feature request to Phase to build a device to drive aperture on X-shutter based lenses without needing an IQ4 was met with the trombone of sadness, as I’m sure you can imagine.

This is basically rumor and tangential, but it sort of existed at one point as a usb driven shutter - the Rollei hs1000 shutter, 0n which the XT is alleged to be based: https://rolleiflex.us/products/hs-1...rolleiflex-dhw-usb-controlled-shutter-copal-0

If someone wants to sponsor an XT lens and IQ4, I’ll happily reverse engineer it for them

 

[Paul Spinnler]

This is basically rumor and tangential, but it sort of existed at one point as a usb driven shutter - the Rollei hs1000 shutter, 0n which the XT is alleged to be based: https://rolleiflex.us/products/hs-1...rolleiflex-dhw-usb-controlled-shutter-copal-0

If someone wants to sponsor an XT lens and IQ4, I’ll happily reverse engineer it for them

How do you hear all this! This is super interesting! I thought the X shutter was some sort of an in-house development ... but it looks like they just finished the development having more financial means to do so and direct applications in the aerial , later in the consumer segment.

 

[ThdeDude]

the Rollei hs1000 shutter, 0n which the XT is alleged to be based: https://rolleiflex.us/products/hs-1...rolleiflex-dhw-usb-controlled-shutter-copal-0

Very interesting, P1's X-shutter might be related to the Rollei/Schneider/Rodenstock eShutter!

Would be a nice option if a future version of the P1's X-shutter could be controlled wireless and that also through a smartphone app.

 

[buildbot]

How do you hear all this! This is super interesting! I thought the X shutter was some sort of an in-house development ... but it looks like they just finished the development having more financial means to do so and direct applications in the aerial , later in the consumer segment.

I just spend too much time on search engines... the history of these very high end photographic companies is interesting to me! That's the only source for the Rollei Shutter -> HS1000->XT shutter evolutionary path, I don't know if it is true. I know Rollei(metric) worked a lot with phase one over the years - they made this fascinating aerial camera: https://ggs-speyer.de/pics/fotos/1/files/P45.pdf
And a newer version with an IQ180 even:

 

[buildbot]

Very interesting, P1's X-shutter might be related to the Rollei/Schneider/Rodenstock eShutter!

Would be a nice option if a future version of the P1's X-shutter could be controlled wireless and that also through a smartphone app.

It really would be.

Though low volume manufacturing is getting so cheap these days it may be faster to design your own and have it made!

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Paul, do you know whether Greiner made the comparison with the focus set at the infinity stop, or at a near subject distance using careful focusing on the live view at 100%?

Any comparison made on a distant subject with the focus set at the infinity stop is potentially, and dare I say, likely to be, misleading.

He mentioned something on the horizon (eg some kind of tower) with some minute details seen on the 138, but not on the 180. Maybe comparable to when you can discern an individual letter in a distant sign in a larger scene with a monochrome sensor and then with the colour sensor it is a bit blurred …

If you look at the FOV Alpa viewfinder thread in the simulated cutouts you can see that 138 and 180 are not that far apart.

This is why it would be interesting to validate whether effectively the 138 can cover everything after 90mm more or less; below 138 via stitching and the 180 by sheer brute force resolving power meaning it is almost the same to shoot something with the 138 and uprez it’s to the size of the 180 frame.

But then again - the 138 is the newest design and costs 15-17k and the 180 is a Digaron S which came out a decade if not more earlier than the 138.

Indeed, the the 60 XL and the 138 would cover a lot of ground in a two lens kit; never thought about this combo …

 

[SCHWARZZEIT]

He mentioned something on the horizon (eg some kind of tower) with some minute details seen on the 138, but not on the 180. Maybe comparable to when you can discern an individual letter in a distant sign in a larger scene with a monochrome sensor and then with the colour sensor it is a bit blurred …

If you look at the FOV Alpa viewfinder thread in the simulated cutouts you can see that 138 and 180 are not that far apart.

This is why it would be interesting to validate whether effectively the 138 can cover everything after 90mm more or less; below 138 via stitching and the 180 by sheer brute force resolving power meaning it is almost the same to shoot something with the 138 and uprez it’s to the size of the 180 frame.

But then again - the 138 is the newest design and costs 15-17k and the 180 is a Digaron S which came out a decade if not more earlier than the 138.

Based on the published MTF diagrams the 138 is better corrected and sharper than the 180 Digaron-S. The 138’s on-axis performance is diffraction limited at f/6.5. The datasheet of the 180 doesn’t provide the MTF for f/6.5. But it tells that the lens is sharper at f/5.6 than f/8 which indicates that it likely has its best on-axis performance between those f-stops.
While the 138 is sharper than the 180 the absolute resolution limit (by diffraction) of the arial image of both lenses is likely to be very similar at about 1.7 microns on the image side for infinity focus and 550nm light. Both lenses can easily outresolve a 3.76 micron pixel pitch sensor.
The 180 renders details at lower contrast than the 138. But given the longer focal length the 180 will be able to pick up finer details from the same distance with an IQ4 150MP back if the atmosphere permits. That said, if your subject has very low contrast details the more contrasty rendering of the 138 might be able to offset its shorter focal length and effectively have similar reach as the 180 for such low contrast details. But for higher object contrast in clear atmosphere the 180 should have more reach if properly focused.