Rodenstock Aperture only Option

[dchew]

Got mine today. I will report back once I have a few images to share. Went out with it this afternoon and it looks pretty good. We were a bit rushed so not anything like a robust test. Everything I shot today was at f/16. Helical has a good feel, I did a stitch 18mm +- in horizontal rise/fall, which is close to the stated image circle.

Dave

 

[Paul2660]

Hi Dave,

How heavy is the 90? Compared to other lenses you have?

Can you post a few pictures? I am curious what the lens looks like without a copal. And how the aperture adjustment is made.

Thanks
Paul C

 

[dchew]

Hi Dave,

How heavy is the 90? Compared to other lenses you have?

Can you post a few pictures? I am curious what the lens looks like without a copal. And how the aperture adjustment is made.

Thanks
Paul C

Sorry Paul, I meant the Schneider 90mm. I got confused on which thread was which. I will post info in the other thread that is more on-topic w/ Schneider.

Dave

 

[Paul2660]

Thanks Dave,

I believe I was the one who got confused. I considered the Schneider 90mm but was not really able to locate one. I guess Paula had one? The Rodenstock HRSW is a gem also, but so much more massive.

If its as well designed as their 120mm it should be an excellent lens.

Paul C

 

[narikin]

Thanks Dave,

I believe I was the one who got confused. I considered the Schneider 90mm but was not really able to locate one. I guess Paula had one? The Rodenstock HRSW is a gem also, but so much more massive.

If its as well designed as their 120mm it should be an excellent lens.

Paul C

There seems to be some confusion here. The Schneider 90mm is not a new design at all. It has been around for 3 or 4 decades, as a taking and enlarging lens. This reissue is the enlarging lens mount. Useful for Alpa to get it in an affordable aperture only option, but they had this same lens in their original lens lineup over 12 years ago, in a copal mount.

The Rodenstock HRSW of not 'a gem also', but a clearly superior lens in both coverage and resolution, especially in the edges/corners. It is on another level altogether, but so is it's price and it's weight.

No wish to spoil anyone's party, just saying how it is, as someone who has owned both.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

There seems to be some confusion here. The Schneider 90mm is not a new design at all. It has been around for 3 or 4 decades, as a taking and enlarging lens. This reissue is the enlarging lens mount. Useful for Alpa to get it in an affordable aperture only option, but they had this same lens in their original lens lineup over 12 years ago, in a copal mount.

The Rodenstock HRSW of not 'a gem also', but a clearly superior lens in both coverage and resolution, especially in the edges/corners. It is on another level altogether, but so is it's price and it's weight.

No wish to spoil anyone's party, just saying how it is, as someone who has owned both.

To add clarity to your clarity - this lens is the Schneider 90mm/4.5 N APO Digitar, not the Componon version.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Paul2660]

There seems to be some confusion here. The Schneider 90mm is not a new design at all. It has been around for 3 or 4 decades, as a taking and enlarging lens. This reissue is the enlarging lens mount. Useful for Alpa to get it in an affordable aperture only option, but they had this same lens in their original lens lineup over 12 years ago, in a copal mount.

The Rodenstock HRSW of not 'a gem also', but a clearly superior lens in both coverage and resolution, especially in the edges/corners. It is on another level altogether, but so is it's price and it's weight.

No wish to spoil anyone's party, just saying how it is, as someone who has owned both.

I guess I am confused by your quote of my post. If there is a superior lens in the tech camera in 90mm to the Rodenstock HRSW, which lens would it be? I am not familiar with anything else, besides older Rodenstocks, HR (pink ring), and HR-W (blue ring). Not spoiling any party for me, just curious which lens for a tech camera would be better than the 90mm HRSW? You appear to have owned the Schneider and Rodenstock. I have owned neither, but have read enough about the HRSW to feel it for now is the best available for a tech camera, thus I called it a "gem". It's obviously not light in weight, and the R mount, required a back extension unlike the older Rodenstock 90mm lenses.

Paul C

 

[Steve Hendrix]

I guess I am confused by your quote of my post. If there is a superior lens in the tech camera in 90mm to the Rodenstock HRSW, which lens would it be? I am not familiar with anything else, besides older Rodenstocks, HR (pink ring), and HR-W (blue ring). Not spoiling any party for me, just curious which lens for a tech camera would be better than the 90mm HRSW? You appear to have owned the Schneider and Rodenstock. I have owned neither, but have read enough about the HRSW to feel it for now is the best available for a tech camera, thus I called it a "gem". It's obviously not light in weight, and the R mount, required a back extension unlike the older Rodenstock 90mm lenses.

Paul C

If I may say so, I believe you are both speaking on the same page but with different syntax (not typos, but some inserted words that produce an perceived conflict).

90-HRSW = Best 90mm Lens for Tech Camera, and I believe both of you are saying that, though it may not appear to be so.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[narikin]

If I may say so, I believe you are both speaking on the same page but with different syntax (not typos, but some inserted words that produce an perceived conflict).

90-HRSW = Best 90mm Lens for Tech Camera, and I believe both of you are saying that, though it may not appear to be so.


Steve Hendrix/CI

Exactly. When you describe something as "a gem also" to me that implies they are comparable equals... which they are not - the HRSW is very much the superior lens, as everyone, I believe including yourself, agrees. That's all.

Maybe just me taking it that way, but nothing wrong with with adding a bit of clarity!

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Exactly. When you describe something as "a gem also" to me that implies they are comparable equals... which they are not - the HRSW is very much the superior lens, as everyone, I believe including yourself, agrees. That's all.

Maybe just me taking it that way, but nothing wrong with with adding a bit of clarity!

Very good, as I thought - and to be clear, the gem comment was coming from Paul. I think everyone is on board with the 90 HR-SW being the best (optically). But you and Paul can hash out the ramifications of the phrase "gem also". I do know that if I describe one of my cats in comparison to the other and I say that she is a "gem also", she gives me a dirty look.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[RLB]

Exactly. When you describe something as "a gem also" to me that implies they are comparable equals... which they are not - the HRSW is very much the superior lens, as everyone, I believe including yourself, agrees. That's all.

Maybe just me taking it that way, but nothing wrong with with adding a bit of clarity!

Another lens that I discovered in the 90mm focal length that is really good option for a Tech camera and was not discussed is Rodenstock's 90mm HR APO-Sironar Digital / AKA 90mm "HR-W". I recently tested it on a IQ4 and Arca Factum with excellent results and shifting from 15 to 20 degrees. This lens was the previous 90mm Rode offering, prior to the current HR-SW. While its not quite as sharp at the outside edges as HR-SW (but damn close) the lens is much smaller, 60% of the weight and 1/4th the price, AND has a slightly larger image circle (125mm vs 120mm for the newer design), and a Copal 0 for those that need it. The only place I was able to see any loss of perfect sharpness is at extreme edges, and with a bit of C1 that can be addressed. The center and inside 3/4's are fantastic from F8-F11. There just happens to be one for sale in the Buy/Sell Forum in pristine condition...

R

 

[Paul2660]

I always was under the impression that the HR-W, (blue ring) needed a small back extension. Arca mounts the HR (pink ring) with only the helical rings, puts a bit of weight out front, due to 4 separate rings. The HR-W was short lived as you point out and very hard to find if at all due to the short run, quickly replaced by the HR-SW yellow ring. I guess that is the last new lens Rodenstock has made in a while as I don't know of anything else in the HR-W or HR-SW line up.

The HR (pink band) I agree is a good lens, lighter and quite sharp, however I did start to see sharpness fall off by around 15mm with the one I had.

Paul C

 

[vjbelle]

Just to add to this thread..... I almost purchased the Schneider 90mm 5 years ago and was talked out of it by the dealer who said I would be much happier with the 100mm. I took his advice and have not been disappointed with the 100. I have no difficulty shifting 10mm in any direction on a 54X40 sensor but combinations would be limiting. I would even say that 15mm is doable but edges may need some attention (very little). It is a lens that I've seen very little info about from users but I've found it to be a lightweight little gem. I'm not in any way saying anything negative about the 90mm since I've never used it.

The 90 HSRW coming my way will be a welcome addition regardless of weight and will be able to be shifted to extremes on a 44X33 sensor. This focal length range is in the sweet spot for many of my images.

Victor

 

[RLB]

I always was under the impression that the HR-W, (blue ring) needed a small back extension. Arca mounts the HR (pink ring) with only the helical rings, puts a bit of weight out front, due to 4 separate rings. The HR-W was short lived as you point out and very hard to find if at all due to the short run, quickly replaced by the HR-SW yellow ring. I guess that is the last new lens Rodenstock has made in a while as I don't know of anything else in the HR-W or HR-SW line up.

The HR (pink band) I agree is a good lens, lighter and quite sharp, however I did start to see sharpness fall off by around 15mm with the one I had.

Paul C

Hi Paul,

I don't think I've ever seen a blue ring HR-W 90mm...I was under the impression from what Rodenstock told me that they simply added a blue ring to APO-Sironar Digital and "renamed/rebranded" it as the HR-W but its as illusive as Bigfoot. I think the reason for that was it was a good lens and they were deep into the HR-SW development and knew it would be out soon. Its not uncommon for companies to do this...but they don't often want to admit the "new" product is the same as the old one.

The APO-Sironar Digital weighs in at 14.5 oz the HR-SW at 24 oz. The Arca mount adds 6 oz to either and is a front only extension on the R cameras. I believe once you get past the 90mm the rear extension is added. The SDK 120mm ASP we have uses a similar front and smaller rear extension that I had Arca make custom for us to balance the camera better with DB on it since that lens is relatively small.

 

[stngoldberg]

I always was under the impression that the HR-W, (blue ring) needed a small back extension. Arca mounts the HR (pink ring) with only the helical rings, puts a bit of weight out front, due to 4 separate rings. The HR-W was short lived as you point out and very hard to find if at all due to the short run, quickly replaced by the HR-SW yellow ring. I guess that is the last new lens Rodenstock has made in a while as I don't know of anything else in the HR-W or HR-SW line up.

The HR (pink band) I agree is a good lens, lighter and quite sharp, however I did start to see sharpness fall off by around 15mm with the one I had.

Paul C

I have the purple (maybe dark pink) Apo-Sironar digital 1:5.6 90mm Rodie on an Arca mount. My lens doesn’t require an extension; it is very sharp to 15mm which is essentially the edge on my Rm3di.
Stanley

 

[narikin]

Another lens that I discovered in the 90mm focal length that is really good option for a Tech camera and was not discussed is Rodenstock's 90mm HR APO-Sironar Digital / AKA 90mm "HR-W". I recently tested it on a IQ4 and Arca Factum with excellent results and shifting from 15 to 20 degrees. This lens was the previous 90mm Rode offering, prior to the current HR-SW. While its not quite as sharp at the outside edges as HR-SW (but damn close) the lens is much smaller, 60% of the weight and 1/4th the price, AND has a slightly larger image circle (125mm vs 120mm for the newer design), and a Copal 0 for those that need it. The only place I was able to see any loss of perfect sharpness is at extreme edges, and with a bit of C1 that can be addressed. The center and inside 3/4's are fantastic from F8-F11. There just happens to be one for sale in the Buy/Sell Forum in pristine condition...

R

Sorry, but I don't agree. The original blue ring 90mm Rodenstock is very poor compared to either of the other two 90 mm options. That is why Rodenstock went to the bother of making an entirely new design 90mm: the Yellow band HRSW. That new lens is considered by many to be the finest available to MF digital users.

The blue ring one is to be avoided IMHO. Maybe it's acceptable in the very center, but I got rid of my copy as soon as I could. The 90mm SK is far superior, and the HRSW is the ultimate in it's focal length.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Well no wonder people get confused.

Blue Rings, Magenta Rings, Yellow Rings, Gold Rings ...

Rodenstocks, Sinarons, Sironars, Alpagons.... HR's, "Digital's" ....

It's true, some legacy lenses are as good as new ones. Some new ones are just re-badged previous gen. Maybe new lens coatings sometimes ...

But not always.

This is not unique to Rodenstock, but it helps to know.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[RLB]

Well no wonder people get confused.

Blue Rings, Magenta Rings, Yellow Rings, Gold Rings ...


The elusive Blue ring 90mm Rode HR-W...there has been a white deer sighting in the wild!


R

 

[RLB]

Sorry, but I don't agree. The original blue ring 90mm Rodenstock is very poor compared to either of the other two 90 mm options. That is why Rodenstock went to the bother of making an entirely new design 90mm: the Yellow band HRSW. That new lens is considered by many to be the finest available to MF digital users.

The blue ring one is to be avoided IMHO. Maybe it's acceptable in the very center, but I got rid of my copy as soon as I could. The 90mm SK is far superior, and the HRSW is the ultimate in it's focal length.

Narkin, sounds like you may have had a bad or misaligned copy of the 90mm Blue ring? Kubrick would systematically buy 10 identical lenses and only keep 2 after testing them. There is absolutely production variance even today with so much computer aided polishing. While the manufacturers would not like to make that public, one needs to look no futher than the data and testing from Roger at Lensrentals.com and his bench testing to confirm this is the case.

We've done extensive testing with with two copies of the Magenta band HR-Digital Sironar with a reference object level target and found it's LPMM resolution with an IQ4 DB very much on par with the current 70mm HR-R and the 72mm SDK, both excellent optics. Keep in mind that the IQ4 FSI sensor may be helping this equation especially when shifting, but for sure the acuity of the 90mm Rode Magenta ring (a good copy of one) is very high.

The yellow/gold band is certainly better, but the Magenta band offers some options who are willing to settle for slightly less performance, 40% less weight and 1/4 of the cost if you can find a clean, sharp example.

 

[MrSmith]

Shame there is not an economical way to turn all those digital DB sinar lenses into ‘dumb’ lenses with a manual aperture, there’s loads out there that could be used with mirrorless bodies