Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

WTB: Rodenstock Apo-Sironar Digital 35mm f/4.5

4

4x5Australian

Well-known member
Will, I have an unused copy of the Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 35mm f4.5 with the green band. The Apo-Sironar 35mm f4.5 was der
 
4

4x5Australian

Well-known member
Will, I have an unused copy of the Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 35mm f4.5 with the green band. The Apo-Sironar 35mm f4.5 was derived from this lens but, based on the identical Flange Focal Length of 43.2mm stated by Rodenstock in its two specification brochures, I conclude the two lenses are optically identical, with the later lens having a additional ring inside to limit the image circle so that the outer field was not seen in the more demanding digital application. The cross-section diagrams shown for these lenses in the two brochures are identical (when one is reversed). In addition, the working apertures for both lenses is stated as f8 to f11. The image circle was diminished from 125mm in the Apo-Grandagon to 105mm in the Apo-Sironar Digital. The Apo-Grandagon 35mm was introduced in 1994 or 1996 (from memory) and I think Rodenstock did not re-calculate the design for the digital series it introduced only three or four years later.
 
Will Deleon

Will Deleon

Well-known member
4x5Australian said:
Will, I have an unused copy of the Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 35mm f4.5 with the green band. The Apo-Sironar 35mm f4.5 was derived from this lens but, based on the identical Flange Focal Length of 43.2mm stated by Rodenstock in its two specification brochures, I conclude the two lenses are optically identical, with the later lens having a additional ring inside to limit the image circle so that the outer field was not seen in the more demanding digital application. The cross-section diagrams shown for these lenses in the two brochures are identical (when one is reversed). In addition, the working apertures for both lenses is stated as f8 to f11. The image circle was diminished from 125mm in the Apo-Grandagon to 105mm in the Apo-Sironar Digital. The Apo-Grandagon 35mm was introduced in 1994 or 1996 (from memory) and I think Rodenstock did not re-calculate the design for the digital series it introduced only three or four years later.
Click to expand...
Hey there,

Do you have any sample images you can share? Some say it's a great lens, others are telling me to stay away. Would it be enough to resolve the IQ3 100mp sensor? How much movement would I get on that?

Thanks and chat soon
Will
 
Last edited:
4

4x5Australian

Well-known member
Hi Will,

I bought the lens a few years back during a period in which I was considering buying an Arca-Swiss F-Universalis and after seeing that same lens used by someone on Instagram with either an Arca-Swiss Rm3di or an Alpa XY camera and a Leaf digital back (the identity of which I forget). The resulting photograph of a modern tall office block diagonally across the street looked good at that small scale and the person responded to my specific enquiry about its resolution when shifted saying he was pleased with it. It was memorable for me because I had read someone else say that the lens is a so-so performer only days before. That photograph shared on IG demonstrated the utility of the 120mm image circle impressively.

One advantage of the F-Universalis is that lenses don't require any special mounting, and I was eager to try out a few lenses for which published reports on their performance are sketchy or conditional. I didn't go through with that purchase, so, unfortunately, my Apo-Grandagon 35mm has remained completely unused and I can't advise you on it's performance on an IQ3-100.

I was subsequently offered a 35mm Schneider 35XL in the mount I needed, which satisfied me at the time. Now I'm wondering if I can find someone with a F-Universalis to perform the test for me that I intended doing myself. That image circle would come in handy at times, even if it images sky above the subject.
 
D

DanPhoto

New member
4x5Australian said:
Hi Will,

I bought the lens a few years back during a period in which I was considering buying an Arca-Swiss F-Universalis and after seeing that same lens used by someone on Instagram with either an Arca-Swiss Rm3di or an Alpa XY camera and a Leaf digital back (the identity of which I forget). The resulting photograph of a modern tall office block diagonally across the street looked good at that small scale and the person responded to my specific enquiry about its resolution when shifted saying he was pleased with it. It was memorable for me because I had read someone else say that the lens is a so-so performer only days before. That photograph shared on IG demonstrated the utility of the 120mm image circle impressively.

One advantage of the F-Universalis is that lenses don't require any special mounting, and I was eager to try out a few lenses for which published reports on their performance are sketchy or conditional. I didn't go through with that purchase, so, unfortunately, my Apo-Grandagon 35mm has remained completely unused and I can't advise you on it's performance on an IQ3-100.

I was subsequently offered a 35mm Schneider 35XL in the mount I needed, which satisfied me at the time. Now I'm wondering if I can find someone with a F-Universalis to perform the test for me that I intended doing myself. That image circle would come in handy at times, even if it images sky above the subject.
Click to expand...
I'm getting this lens soon to be used with my Hassy cfv 50c back. I've heard that there is magenta vignetting issue with this lens. Do you have any insights on it? Thanks in advance.
 
4

4x5Australian

Well-known member
DanPhoto said:
I'm getting this lens soon to be used with my Hassy cfv 50c back. I've heard that there is magenta vignetting issue with this lens. Do you have any insights on it? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Hi Dan.

I did eventually get to test my Apo-Grandagon 35mm on my IQ4. As evidenced by the identical FFD, this is the same lens as the Apo-Sironar digital 35mm, with the only change being a forward extension of the housing, presumably to reduce the excessive image circle and accompanying flare.

I wanted the Apo-Grandagon 35mm to perform well because (a) I already owned it and could mount it using spare mounting bits at no cost; (b) it looks beautiful (even my non-photographic partner, without me prompting her, said so) and (c) its MTF graphs suggested it would perform well enough. Rodenstock had displayed the MTF graphs as exemplars of its family in two successive technical brochures.

Initially I mounted it on my Arca-Swiss Rm3di using spare rings. A year later I tried it again on my Cambo WRS 1200 using a mount from another lens.

I tested it twice on two successive camera set-ups because I didn't quite believe how badly it performed the first time. On the IQ4, the images from the unshifted frame were nicely sharp in the centre and mid-field, but the outer field and margins were soft. With 5mm of rear fall applied, the additional image that came into view at the top of the frame was obviously soft. I didn't notice any 'magenta vignetting', but that wasn't the issue.

The SK Apo-Digitar 35 XL is a much, much better lens for current digital sensors. On the IQ4, I can shift my copy 15mm with excellent results.

Rod
 
Last edited:
Steve Hendrix

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
4x5Australian said:
Hi Dan.

I did eventually get to test my Apo-Grandagon 35mm on my IQ4. As evidenced by the identical FFD, this is the same lens as the Apo-Sironar digital 35mm, with the only change being a forward extension of the housing, presumably to reduce the excessive image circle and accompanying flare.

I wanted the Apo-Grandagon 35mm to perform well because (a) I already owned it and could mount it using spare mounting bits at no cost; (b) it looks beautiful (even my non-photographic partner, without me prompting her, said so) and (c) its MTF graphs suggested it would perform well enough. Rodenstock had displayed the MTF graphs as exemplars of its family in two successive technical brochures.

Initially I mounted it on my Arca-Swiss Rm3di using spare rings. A year later I tried it again on my Cambo WRS 1200 using a mount from another lens.

I tested it twice on two successive camera set-ups because I didn't quite believe how badly it performed the first time. On the IQ4, the images from the unshifted frame were nicely sharp in the centre and mid-field, but the outer field and margins were soft. With 5mm of rear fall applied, the additional image that came into view at the top of the frame was obviously soft. I didn't notice any 'magenta vignetting', but that wasn't the issue.

The SK Apo-Digitar 35 XL is a much, much better lens for current digital sensors. On the IQ4, I can shift my copy 15mm with excellent results.

Rod
Click to expand...

On the Rodenstock 35/4.5 (either vintage), my experience as well.


Steve Hendrix/CI
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top