35HR Digaron S doubts

[Bruno Gil]

Hi all,

I need your precious advises:
Next week, finally, will arrive my WRS 1200. I had a plan that was ( while saving some more money ) to use my old Schneider 47 Super Angulon ( that i sent to Cambo for retrofit ) with the WRS 1200 and my 2 DB ( Leaf Credo 40 and IQ260 ).
Yesterday i received an email from Cambo dealer ( im based in Portugal ) saying that the lens is misaligned :shocked: and its a waste of money doing it!
Solution: try to find another used lens, the quest is hard, due to budget restrictions and lens available on the market. Im gonna used this combo mainly for interiors and exteriors ( architecture ).
Today, i got a call from the dealer, saying that they found a used, but in mint condition of a 35HR Diagron S for a nice price ( €2900 ).
Due the differences regarding image circles sizes from both lenses, is the 35HR a good solution for me? For what i want to use it? If i use the Credo 40 i have more shift movements, but with the IQ260 Im done!

Anyone using the 35HR with the IQ260 or other same size sensor for architecture purposes? Any good?

Thanks for the heeeeeellllllppppppp!
Cheers

 

[narikin]

Digaron S lenses are great, really one of the best series for high resolution MF backs. I own the 35, 60 and 100 for Alpa, (+ other lenses)
They are not only very sharp, but also often a stop faster than comparables, for this format.
Rodenstock also says you don't need to use a center filter with the 35, but you will need to make LCCs and apply them (not difficult at all!)

The only issues is coverage - they do not have a huge image circle.
Rodenstock says 70mm for this lens, but in reality they are a good bit more than that.
If you want to do a lot of shifting/ tilting, be careful, or at least make sure the dealer will let you try, and accept a free return.

good luck!

 

[Bruno Gil]

Digaron S lenses are great, really one of the best series for high resolution MF backs. I own the 35, 60 and 100 for Alpa, (+ other lenses)
They are not only very sharp, but also often a stop faster than comparables, for this format.
Rodenstock also says you don't need to use a center filter with the 35, but you will need to make LCCs and apply them (not difficult at all!)

The only issues is coverage - they do not have a huge image circle.
Rodenstock says 70mm for this lens, but in reality they are a good bit more than that.
If you want to do a lot of shifting/ tilting, be careful, or at least make sure the dealer will let you try, and accept a free return.

good luck!

Thanks for the feedback!
Next week gonna try the 35 before buy it, already spoked with the dealer, lets see. What DB do you have?

 

[Alkibiades]

For your back ( Dalsa 60 mp sensor) the best solution is the Schneider Apo Digitar XL 35 mm. It have no distortion and much bigger Image circle: 90 mm against 70 mm. The sharpness of both lenses are the same. Roddy 35 HR have too small Image circle for the 4,5x6 cm sensors. Alternativ 32 mm HRW, that is really expensive. Schneider 35 xl have only issuess with microlinses of 80MP sensors, for 60 MP thay are great.

 

[Ben730]

For your back ( Dalsa 60 mp sensor) the best solution is the Schneider Apo Digitar XL 35 mm. It have no distortion and much bigger Image circle: 90 mm against 70 mm. The sharpness of both lenses are the same. Roddy 35 HR have too small Image circle for the 4,5x6 cm sensors. Alternativ 32 mm HRW, that is really expensive. Schneider 35 xl have only issuess with microlinses of 80MP sensors, for 60 MP thay are great.

The 35 HR is a lot sharper than the 35 xl.

Regards,
Ben

 

[f8orbust]

The 35 HR-S and 35XL are both great lenses, each with their own positives and negatives.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that there is a significant difference in sharpness - but as we all know there is sample variation, so if you compared a great HR-S to a pig of an XL, I'm sure it would make itself known.

Check out this old thread for some useful info on the 35XL:

https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/36800-schneider-35-xl-corner-performance.html

 

[Alkibiades]

I owned 2 Schneider 35 xl, 2 Digaron S 35 mm and 32 HRW.
The sharpest is the 32 HRW. The 35 schneider and Rodenstock are absolutly the same in sharpness at working aperture 11. Roddy 35 is only sharper wide open or at 5,6. But at this apertures the lens is not usable for landscape or Architecture.

The difference it the sharpness or at the borders depends mostly not on Quality Control but the simply fact that the lenses must be mounted in the shutter by the factory. Rodenstock lenses are build very complicated and some of them cant Change the shutter. The schneider classic design is easy to Control, so every digitars can be monuted new at schneider for best optical Performance.

 

[narikin]

The 35 HR is a lot sharper than the 35 xl.

Regards,
Ben

Agree.

 

[Ben730]

The 35 HR-S and 35XL are both great lenses, each with their own positives and negatives.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that there is a significant difference in sharpness - but as we all know there is sample variation, so if you compared a great HR-S to a pig of an XL, I'm sure it would make itself known.

Check out this old thread for some useful info on the 35XL:

https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/36800-schneider-35-xl-corner-performance.html

This thread compares the Rodenstock 35mm f/4.5 Apo-Sironar digital with the Schneider 35 XL, not the HR-S. The 35 HR-S is significantly sharper in the 70 mm circle than the Schneider 35 XL. That's at least what I realized when I worked with them. I had only one 35 HR but I used three different 35 XLs over the years. I didn't recognise sample variation between the Schneiders.
By the way, aside from edge sharpness, I liked the 35 XLs a lot.
Regards,
Ben

 

[f8orbust]

This thread compares the Rodenstock 35mm f/4.5 Apo-Sironar digital with the Schneider 35 XL, not the HR-S. The 35 HR-S is significantly sharper in the 70 mm circle than the Schneider 35 XL. That's at least what I realized when I worked with them. I had only one 35 HR but I used three different 35 XLs over the years. I didn't recognise sample variation between the Schneiders.
By the way, aside from edge sharpness, I liked the 35 XLs a lot.
Regards,
Ben

Er, yeah, I know - I simply highlighted it because there's useful info in there about the HR-S - see, for instance, the comments by Paul Caldwell (Paul2660).

I wouldn't argue that the HR-S has the edge, but there are a whole host of other things that someone should consider when looking to buy a lens - rendering, color, distortion, bokeh, flare, contrast, IC etc. - not just (*yawn*) sharpness.

Jim