Sharper lenses

[Edmund Sumner]

Hello all

After struggling with sharpness contrast etc on  the following lenses i am looking to buy some new digital lenses

I currently have

Schneider 38xl (Film) Fantastic lens no issues at all

Schneider 47xl (Film)  Just seems soft and heavy to me,

Schneider 58xl (Film)  Just seems soft and heavy to me

has anyone else had issues with the 47 58 Schneiders  ?

I am looking at the Rodenstock HR range as I have heard such good things both on this forum and speaking to other photographers

I am after the Rodenstock 28hr

the 47xl Schneider digital

can anyone let me know what the above lenses are like in comparison to my current lenses

are Rodnestocks really so much better for these lengths ?

are digital lenses really that much better ?

are they less contrasty or 'heavy' than film lenses

I am looking at the Rodenstock HR 60 to replace the 58xl but am told the coverage is not so good

what would a good digital lens around this length (bearing in mind from 72 upwards I am sorted)

has anyone used the rodenstock 55 ?

I shoot architecture with a leaf aptus on an arca swiss

many thanks

Edmund
 

[CBarrett]

Edmund,

I don't really have much experience with the Schneider Digitars, but I can offer a little input.  Testing the Rodenstock 90 HR against my old Rodenstock film 90, the difference was huge, much sharper with nicer contrast.

Also, I use the 55mm Apo Sironar Digital and am very happy with it.  Doesn't have the resolution of the 60HR but has great image circle, and I can't find any flaws with it on my P65+.

Picked up both my 90 and 55 on eBay at ridiculous savings!

On the 40ish side, you may want to wait 2-3 months and check out the forthcoming Super Digitar 43mm.  I expect it's going to surpass everything in its focal range.

-CB

[tom_l]

I had the 58XL from the pre-digital era, I sold it immediately after seeing the result with my P25. No good!

I got the Digitar 72mm now 2 days ago...haven't had the time to test it, but i have high espectations.
I don't think there is a really bad Digitar or Rodenstock HR out there. These lenses are at the very top of what's possible now.



Tom

[asf]

The 58xl wasn't known to be a good lens even for film. I had 2 copies, neither were good, which I replaced with the 55 apo-sironar which was exceptional. But even that lens wasn't good enough for digital.

I have the 28hr, 60hr and 47xl digital. All are winners. If you need more coverage in a 28 wait for the new schneider, although I'd be worried to use what I believe to be a very heavy,short, non-retrofocal lens on your f-line. So far the 28hr has enough coverage for me that I don't want to replace it (maybe when I see the schneider my opinion will change ....)

[Morgan_Moore]

If I remember rightly I tested a shneider 47 film lens and bought a Rodenstock digital one

its not that the film lenses are bad it is that they have a different design that mean the light hits the sensor at an obtuse angle making for bad digital capture

maybe the digital lenses are a little bit retrofucus

S

[John R Smith]

Could I just ask a question?

Do these new digital-optimized lenses produce a better result on film too, or just when used with a digital back? Has anyone tried a comparitive test?

John

[archivue]

when i was shooting film, i've first had 2 copies of 58XL, the second was better... then i've bought a 55 tht i've found to be sharp but i didn't like the color rendition... it tends to blue !
Then i had the opportunity to test a 58XL selected by linhof, that one was a winner !
There are excellent copies of 58 XL around !

Then, i've found a good deal on a 55 digital... i've shoot two 4x5 and wasn't able to see a difference between this two... i was preparing the buy of a digital back, so i've sold the 58 for financial reason, and didn't have a chance to test it with the MFDB !

I've made a side by side comparison with a 80 XL and a 90 sironar digital (now named Digaron)
the 80 XL was quite good, but too contrasty for digital... problems with hight light !
So i sold it (it was a good lens for film, sharp and small).

[Edmund Sumner]

when i was shooting film, i've first had 2 copies of 58XL, the second was better... then i've bought a 55 tht i've found to be sharp but i didn't like the color rendition... it tends to blue !
Then i had the opportunity to test a 58XL selected by linhof, that one was a winner !
There are excellent copies of 58 XL around !

Then, i've found a good deal on a 55 digital... i've shoot two 4x5 and wasn't able to see a difference between this two... i was preparing the buy of a digital back, so i've sold the 58 for financial reason, and didn't have a chance to test it with the MFDB !

I've made a side by side comparison with a 80 XL and a 90 sironar digital (now named Digaron)
the 80 XL was quite good, but too contrasty for digital... problems with hight light !
So i sold it (it was a good lens for film, sharp and small).

Thanks for all the feedback  this is really useful

would anyone be prepared to patch up an image taken on 28 or any of the HR lenses, id like to see this as a full size file ?

Edmund