Graflex.org

rtphotos · Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 10 Location: Hawaii

My recently ebay-acquired 152 Kodak Ektar w/supermatic shutter has proven to be unreliable, even after a CLA. I'm in search of a new lens - possibly a more modern design (and hopefully one that is more reliable).

I saw this one listed at a reputable shop:

"135 f5.6 Rodenstock Sironar (Sinaron S)in copal 0 shutter".

I am a LF newbie. Does anyone wish to share comments on this particular lens? I am guessing that this is an earlier design than the current "APO version" offered by Rodenstock? Is that right?

My concerns, aside from reliability, are - improvement in sharpness/contrast over the 152mm Ektar, will I have enough image coverage using my crown graphic 4x5, and whether or not the lens will fit with my Crown body closed.

Thank you very much for your comments.

worldphoto · Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:27 pm Post subject:

No I don't have or use the mentioned 135mm lens but do own and have used the 152mm Ektar lens for thirty years. It was unreliable then and it is still unreliable. Want a reliable lens, buy a modern lens.
Harry

t.r.sanford · Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:27 pm Post subject:

The "Sironar" lenses are quite modern, from a very well-regarded maker. The 135mm. f:5.6 almost certainly will cover 4x5 with a bit to spare (I've seen image circle diameter figures for the 135mm. f:5.6 "Sironar" ranging from 175 to 200mm; you want about 160mm. minimum).

The "Sironar" also almost certainly will outperform the classic lenses of this focal length, if only because modern designers have access to a wider variety of glasses and computer ray tracing programs, and their lenses are multicoated.

But "Ektars" are formidable lenses, and continue to hold their own, if they have remained intact.

Dave · Joined: 05 Dec 2003 Posts: 78 Location: Canada

Yup, what t.r. said. The Sironar's a plasmat-type design, similar or identical to Schneider's Symmar. I assume if this one's badged 'Sinaron', it must be a version that was sold with Sinar cameras, yes?

Lots of coverage, and you'll run out of movements before you run out of image circle. I think it should come in a #0 shutter, so you should be able to close it in your Crown. In old literature I had, Rodenstock recommended Sironars be used at f/16 or f/22 (or, in a pinch, at f/11 or f/32 as well). But the Aperture Police aren't going to bust you if you use it wide open.

I don't know how old this version is. If you know the serial number, there is a table of Schneider and Rodenstock dates at http://www.bigshotz.co.nz/schneider.html The Sironar-N was around in the 1980s, and I think the Apo-Sironars were later. (Rodenstock has a reputation for being casual with the prefix 'Apo', so I don't know if the Apo-Sironar is really apochromatic, but that's a different topic.)

There's a bunch of lensporn for Rodenstock lenses on the Paul Butzi site at http://www.butzi.net/rodenstock/rodenstock.htm

Let us know what you end up doing and how it works.

[ This Message was edited by: Dave on 2004-03-04 20:24 ]

rtphotos · Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 10 Location: Hawaii

Thank you very much t.r., Harry, and Dave for your comments. I've ordered the lens/shutter and will let you know how it turns out. Harry, was it the (supermatic?) shutter that has proven to be problematic for you?

Dave shared two helpful Rodenstock websites, and here's more info that I've come across in my own research. For any newbies out there considering Rodenstock lenses:

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/future.htm
[Kerry L. Thalmann's article on future classic lenses]

Rodenstock Lenses: Past and Present, by K. Thalmann, _View Camera_, Sept./Oct. 2002, vol. 15, no.5.
[good historical overview of the Rodenstock lenses, his personal recommendations for older and newer Rodenstock lenses, and a good "timeline chart", too]

Thanks again!

worldphoto · Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2004 7:53 pm Post subject:

Yes, it is the No.3 Kodak Supermatic. I kept saying lens but meant shutter.
I shook the apple tree and some fruit fell.
Harry

t.r.sanford · Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2004 8:38 pm Post subject:

The "Supermatics" are not to everyone's taste, and seem to have acquired the reputation of being less reliable than "Rapax" shutters. I've had very good luck with one bearing an old 203mm. f:7.7 "Ektar," but there is no lack of complaints about them in general, and this is by no means a new phenomenon.

rtphotos · Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 10 Location: Hawaii

Greetings again,

This is a follow-up mainly for any other newbies who might be going thru a similar shutter situation.

In hopes of obtaining a reliable lens/shutter replacement for my Crown Graphic that came with a lens with a sticky Supermatic shutter, I purchased a 135mm f5.6 lens from Midwest Camera Exchange.

I got, I believe, a good deal on the near-mint lens and shutter. The lens is a Sinaron-S (re-badged Rodenstock) on a Copal 0 shutter. Excellent service and communications with the staff of Midwest.

I find the lens to be sharp and contrasty (f16-32) for the table-top work I've been doing these last couple of months.

The Copal shutter works fine, although somewhat more loud than the Supermatic. An additional benefit of the Copal shutter is the direct screw-in cable release. It works better than the body release on my Crown.

Midwest also provided and installed the lens on a "new" graphic lens board for an additional $30.

The 135mm Sinaron is a very compact lens and fits fine on the Crown. With lens attached, the body closes up with room to spare.

In the meantime, the Kodak 152mm Ektar w/Supermatic shutter just came back a SECOND time from an un-named local repair place. It worked well for a few minutes before the shutter began sticking AGAIN. I'm about to give up on this shutter - AND this local repair place.

I'm tempted at times to trade-in this Kodak Ektar/Supermatic, but I keep looking at this one 11x14 image that I printed up before the shutter went bonkers on me, and I find the "creaminess" of the out-of-focus areas to be somehow very pleasing.

There is something about the softness and glow in the print that is very different from what I've so far seen in the Sinaron. Some folks over at the Leica Forum, I think, refer to this attribute as "bokeh", a term referring to the pleasant out-of-focus fingerprint on some lenses.

Anyway, that is my story till now. Bottom line is that the more modern 135mm f5.6 Sinaron-S is working fine on the Crown Graphic, but I may be looking for a replacement press shutter for the Kodak Ektar lens, while the Supermatic will make a fine and interesting paper-weight for my desk.

Thanks again to all who provided their input and opinions.

rt

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2144 Location: New Jersey

Rangemaster · Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 3:59 pm Post subject:

I agree, Grimes shop is the only way to go, I have several supermatics taht I have sent to this shop and all of them worked great and continue to work great after service from them, I have found that there are very few shops in the country that really know how to CLA older large format shutters and have them work right.

Dave

worldphoto · Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 4:17 pm Post subject:

rt
Thanks for the update. So many of these threads are just left hanging. It is going to get me to reinstall my 152mm Ektar on the Crown and switch cams for the rangefinder. My Supermatic seems to be working fine now that it is stored in a heated and AC'd space. I live in San Diego, so our weather isn't too different from yours. Dan's idea to send it to SKGrimes sure sounds good!
Good Luck, Harry
My lens I'm using now is a 135mm f/4.7 Schneider-Kreuznach with a Synchro- Compur- P shutter.
rt
Just a thought.... The repair people may have been a little too aggressive with the oiling. You might try removing the elements and VERY CAREFULLY with a clean lint free cloth wipe down the leafs (both sides) several times after working the shutter through ALL speed settings. That's what I've had to do after I've messed with the shutter.

[ This Message was edited by: worldphoto on 2004-05-10 09:21 ]

[ This Message was edited by: worldphoto on 2004-05-10 09:24 ]

[ This Message was edited by: worldphoto on 2004-05-10 09:50 ]

[ This Message was edited by: worldphoto on 2004-05-12 08:16 ]

45PSS · Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 6:36 pm Post subject:

rtphotos/worldphoto,
The problem of the shutter only working for a short while after return from the shop or works great when the temperture/hummidity is correct is=the lubericant/grease is the consistency of dried contact cement and acts like it when cold, hot, or dry. The shutter(s) may need to be fully disassembled (every thing not rivited in removed!), each part cleaned and reassembled. This is the type of shutter that got the famed "Soak" going.
Charles

_________________
The best camera ever made is the one that YOU enjoy using and produces the image quality that satifies YOU.

rtphotos · Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 10 Location: Hawaii

Greetings again, all!

Thank you for the additional comments. I will try carefully wiping down the leafs, as suggested by Harry. I've got nothing to lose. I will leave other home repairs such as the "soak" to other folks who don't have three thumbs.

I know I should have sent it to SKGrimes in the first place after reading so many good things about them, but decided to "support the local economy". It unfortunately back fired this time.

When my finances recover, I will certainly consider sending it to SKGrimes to get this repair/CLA done right, or perhaps to have them install a refurbished shutter.

Thanks again for the assist, everyone!

rt

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2144 Location: New Jersey

berrybd · Joined: 06 Dec 2004 Posts: 6 Location: Florida

A few years back I was working with a 150 f5.6 Rodenstock of "plasmat" design, this specimen made before the S designation. It appeared to have a brown-purple coating, like multicoating, but nobody was talking about that when this lens was made. The Rodenstock Sironar was MUCH sharper than an old 5.6 Symmar of 150mm, with better contrast and color, which I also used regularly.

Side by side pictures in a variety of situations told the story. I also had a 152 Ektar at the same time, and did some side by sides too, to compare it to the Rodenstock. Results: slightly less sharp, slightly less contrasty, significantly less coverage of course, and like all Tessars, likely to give a bowl-shaped field of best focus at the film plane, at least until f22. But this lens easily made first-class 11x14 prints, the biggest I could make dependably with my Durst enlarger at the time. If you stuck your nose into the print emulsion you MIGHT see a difference but it wasn't worth mentioning.

THE BEST PART was that creaminess and three-dimensional quality you mention. It made the Ektar the lens to use for portraits on 6x7, and I am not talking about soft-focus effects. I am talking instead about a three-mensional quality, also quite free of flare, with beautiful open shadows...the same quality that people use Commercial Ektars for. Glass? Coating? I don't know, but side-by-side, you could really see it compared to the Rodenstock. Forget the old Symmar (not an S--that is a different story. Great at f8, the old Symmar was, but contrast and sharpness nosedived after f11.) I loved the Ektar for rocks and trees as well as people. That quality showed up...I used it on 3x4, a Graphic back on a Cambo, and it was super. Buse the Ektar around 16 because if you stop down farther, the lovely three dimensional quality just disappears.

Finally, the shutter on the Ektar simply did not repeat reliably. I used a dark slide most of the time, consequently, and I was more dependable at a 5th or an 8th than that shutter was.

The one time I used the 135mm Rodenstock f5.6 it looked exactly like the 150mm in regard to sharpness, contrast, and color. Not much room to move, though: at infinity, and f16, the corners began to go with only 10mm rise. This was on a Sinar board but it was not marked Sinaron, who knows why?