Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

2 end

Archive 2009 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Several years ago, I did a project digitalizing old 35mm slides. After shifting through several options, I settled down with a Rodenstock APO-Rodagon 75/4 on Nikon PB-4 bellows and found it far superior to all other options I tried, including a C/Y 100/2.8 MP, a Leica APO 100/2.8 with APO 2x adapter, Canon 65 MP-E and a CV 125/2.5. But soon I forgot about where I placed the lens.

Today to my surprise I was able to find it in the box of my Acratech ball head. Who knows what I was thinking when I placed it. I immediately mounted it on the PB-4 and my 5D II, and took a couple of test shots. Nothing interesting in the picture, but again I was amazed by its total absent of CA and its amazing resolution at 1X lifesize.

The whole frame at about 1x lifesize:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3376/3336162870_afd92dfe47_o.jpg

and the 100% crop (out of a 21MP camera):
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3326/3336163118_f7174babc6_o.jpg

Mar 07, 2009 at 02:43 PM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Sweet.

Mar 07, 2009 at 05:17 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Very sweet.

Mar 07, 2009 at 05:39 PM

pdmphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Very nice. Perhaps the Leica would have performed better than it did if it was tested with its dedicated 1:1 adapter, instead of the 2x APO TC?

Mar 07, 2009 at 05:54 PM

JohnJ
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

I've got a Rodenstock APO-Rodagon N 80/4 that I keep meaning to try as a camera lens, stopped using it on an enlarger more than 5 years ago. I have to pull my finger out and have a crack.

Thanks.

JJ

Mar 07, 2009 at 06:04 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

pdmphoto wrote:
Very nice. Perhaps the Leica would have performed better than it did if it was tested with its dedicated 1:1 adapter, instead of the 2x APO TC?

The Contax 100/2.8 is better than the Leica at 1/2 life size, so I can assume it will be better than the Leica + 1:1 adapter at 1x lifesize, and the Rodagon is noticeably better than the Contax for 1:1 slide duplication. I don't think there are many lenses that can resolve the 85lp/mm at life size to match a 21 MP sensor.

The pencil in the above picture is with glossy finish. If it had any texture or was with matt finish, the details would have been even more mind-blowing. Also the bellows was tilt by several degrees, so the frame is already away from the center sweet spot. Hope I will have time to take some pictures with it tomorrow and I will post back.

I got mine new for under $300. For that price, it very hard to beat. The lens comes with standard M39 thread, so it is relatively easy to adapt to various bellows. Be careful though, because there are two versions of the same lens, one with aperture mechanism and another with only fixed aperture (I have both). The latter obviously will have very limited use without being able to stop down.

I haven't tried it for regular photography, since the lens is optimized for 1:1, I almost always use it at around that magnification.

B.T.W., I tried a pentax M42 100/4 bellows macro lens with the same compostion. The CA is so out of control and I do not even bother to convert the RAW file.

Mar 07, 2009 at 11:02 PM

thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Cinstance wrote:
The Contax 100/2.8 is better than the Leica at 1/2 life size, so I can assume it will be better than the Leica + 1:1 adapter at 1x lifesize, and the Rodagon is noticeably better than the Contax for 1:1 slide duplication. I don't think there are many lenses that can resolve the 85lp/mm at life size to match a 21 MP sensor.

You said in the Contax 100 vs Leica 100 thread that the Contax wasn't that sharp?

Cinstance wrote:
I use my Leica 100/2.8 mainly for portrait. On Zeiss side, my favorite portrait lens is the C/Y 100/2. The Zeiss 100/2.8 (both the c/y and the N) are not very sharp at f2.8, and I found I seldom used them for anything other than macro (now both were sold).

Or is that just wide open and it exceeds the performance of the Leica once stopped down?

The Rodagon definitely looks good, similar apo performance to my CV 180/4 APO Lanthar, wonder how that lens would go on bellows or an extension tube...

Mar 08, 2009 at 12:03 AM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

thrice wrote:
You said in the Contax 100 vs Leica 100 thread that the Contax wasn't that sharp?

Or is that just wide open and it exceeds the performance of the Leica once stopped down?

The Rodagon definitely looks good, similar apo performance to my CV 180/4 APO Lanthar, wonder how that lens would go on bellows or an extension tube...

Beyond f5.6, there really isn't any difference in resolution between the Leica and Zeiss for normal photography, actually the Zeiss might has slight advantage beyond f8. But for macro of 1/4x life size or higher magnification, the Zeiss is better than the Leica in resolution but is worse in CA, which I also stated in several of my previous threads.

When I did the slide duplication, I just looked at the reproduction of the dust particles on the slides, the Rodenstock is the only one that had clearly defined dust edges. All other options showed blured edges and need significantly more sharpening to bring out the edge definition.

Mar 08, 2009 at 10:55 AM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Just had a series of test at 1/2x, 2/3x, 1x and 2x lifesize. The lens seems to perform very good at all these magnifications, but diffraction seems to kick in very early due to the effective aperture been small at large magnifications.

All the samples post below are standard 5D Mark II raw files, processed in DPP to 8 bit TIFF with default settings and no adjustment of any kind, then cropped in photoshop and directly saved for web as 80% quality jpgs. No shrapening applied to any of the files after conversion from Raw files.

Beginning with the 1/2x life-size series. The whole frame:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3542/3338790394_52ca6e0202_o.jpg
100% crops at various apertures. At this magnification, diffraction does not really kick in until F11.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3337955183_4489cc0311_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3614/3337955449_0a894f81e1_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3390/3338787860_5efa745147_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3640/3338788004_edd6fd4bd1_o.jpg

More to follow ...

Edited on Mar 08, 2009 at 02:14 PM · View previous versions

Mar 08, 2009 at 01:15 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

At 2/3 lifesize, Even at F8 diffraction effect is visible at 100% crop, but the sharpness is very good all the way to F11.

The whole frame:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3318/3337958209_0ab9cf68ae_o.jpg

100% crop at various apertures:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3301/3338788164_b44893aa60_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3320/3337956071_61fd5b89db_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3299/3338788462_fbf4818c41_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3578/3338788666_4fb4e513f4_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3352/3338788842_3acc056229_o.jpg

Mar 08, 2009 at 01:51 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

At 1x life-size, the story is similar to 2/3 x.

The whole frame:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3631/3337958331_d70e459013_o.jpg

100% crop at various apertures:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3401/3337956715_5119797dd4_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3632/3338789092_cf28a797af_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3645/3338789234_d9eaf30b5f_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3412/3338789378_491d2c153f_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3555/3337957285_6b95b8e55f_o.jpg

Mar 08, 2009 at 01:59 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

At last here comes the 2x life-size...

Whole frame:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3542/3337958461_8f215ef8bb_o.jpg
100%crops at various apertures. The DOF is razor thin, unfortunately stop down did not help either, because diffraction severely limits the sharpness even at f8.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3656/3337957401_ee58d8b8dd_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3405/3338789826_97e2ae4807_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3555/3338789986_2717c846a8_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3343/3337957789_364cbc7c7b_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3626/3338790216_3f3be19c66_o.jpg

Overall, I am really impressed by the lack of CA and the sharpness across the board. Its sharpness at f4 and f5.6 are outstanding. The image field also seems to be very flat, so it should be very good at copy jobs for flat 2-D objects. Coupled with a bellows that can do swing and shift, it should also be very useful for flower or insect pictures.

Edited on Mar 08, 2009 at 02:19 PM · View previous versions

Mar 08, 2009 at 02:05 PM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Can't help but be impressed.

Can you give some more details on your set-up, any hoops you had to jump thru to get the rig put together?

Mar 08, 2009 at 02:15 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Conner999 wrote:
Can't help but be impressed.

Can you give some more details on your set-up, any hoops you had to jump thru to get the rig put together?

The set-up is very easy. Since I have a Nikon PB-4 bellows, all I need are a L-F (M39 to Nikon F) adapter, and a Nikon F to Canon EF adapter.

To use a M42 mount bellows should be even easier. M39 to M42 adapter costs only $2 and is widely available.

Here is the set up I used, in the front are the two adapters I needed for 5D II, from left to right, the L-F adapter, and a one-piece Nikon-EOS adapter. From the picture you can see how tiny the lens is:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3361/3339070324_fb8ffa2a2b_o.jpg

Mar 08, 2009 at 02:39 PM

Conner999
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Perfect - thanks. Not overly familiar with enlarging lenses/mounts.

Mar 08, 2009 at 03:09 PM

DanPBrown
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Did you compare the mpe65 and Rodenstock at 2X? How does the Rodenstock handle higher magnifications like 4X?
Thanks,
Dan
www.danbrownphotography.com

Mar 08, 2009 at 03:14 PM

David Clapp
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

I use the APO 90mm Rodogon on my Zork MFS tilt tube. I have just written a review of it that I will publish on my website tomorrow. It is the best macro set up I have ever used and the qualities outlined in the initial post back up my findings. Its an extraordinary lens with incredible sharpness and no CA at all.

Mar 08, 2009 at 05:21 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Conner999 wrote:
Perfect - thanks. Not overly familiar with enlarging lenses/mounts.
You are very welcome.

DanPBrown wrote:
Did you compare the mpe65 and Rodenstock at 2X? How does the Rodenstock handle higher magnifications like 4X?
Thanks,
Dan
www.danbrownphotography.com

I do not have the MP-E 65 anymore, as now I am using a couple of Canon FD macros and an Olympus 38/3.5 for high magnification works. Its twin brother, the APO Rodagon 75/4.5 D however is optimized for 2x, so I guess it will be a better lens for higher magnification than the 75/4.

Mar 08, 2009 at 08:01 PM

pdmphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

Cinstance wrote:
The Contax 100/2.8 is better than the Leica at 1/2 life size, so I can assume it will be better than the Leica + 1:1 adapter at 1x lifesize, and the Rodagon is noticeably better than the Contax for 1:1 slide duplication. I don't think there are many lenses that can resolve the 85lp/mm at life size to match a 21 MP sensor.
...

Not necessarily. Without the adapter the lens has to perform from infinity to 1/2 life size. A lens that covers that range is usually optimized for something other than 1/2 life size (usually 1/4-1/10). The adapter can be made to fine tune the lens performance for the much more limited 1/2 to 1:1 lifesizes. I know my Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 macro performed better at 1:1 with it's dedicated adapter, than at 1:2 without it. I heard the adapter performance was optimized for 1:1.

Mar 09, 2009 at 12:57 AM

phuang3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Revisit of Rodenstock APO-Rodagon

I was amazed by its total absent of CA and its amazing resolution at 1X lifesize.

Did you stop down the aperture? Most CA can be greatly reduced by small aperture. My 1st 35mm summicron almost has same CA performance as yours when shooting at f/8.0.

Mar 14, 2009 at 05:15 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.