Rumor: Schneider leaving large format both analog and digital

[torger]

I've heard from someone (supposedly in contact with someone from a tech cam manufacturer) that Schneider will soon stop making Digitar tech cam lenses and also the analog large format glass. Rodenstock stays in the business though.

Anyone else heard the same thing?

Due to the popularity of the Rodenstock Digaron series I guess sales of Digitar lenses may have stalled a bit, but the SK60XL seems to be popular still. Personally I love the Digitar series thanks to the nice tradeoff between resolving power and complexity and it would be sad if they disappear from the market. But with these type of low volume products they will exist long time after discontinuation anyway, just like the Copal shutter which was discontinued a while ago. If this rumors is true that is, hopefully it's not...

[voidshatter]

Two questions:

a) If Schneider quits, can I still send my Schneider lenses (alpa mount) to them for re-alignment should there be any problem in the future?

b) If Schneider quits, is it good to try to buy the (discontinued) 250mm lens now?

[torger]

I can't imagine realignment should be an issue, I think in foreseeable time the only issue would be to buy new lenses. I'm guessing you'd use the same equipment to realign a Schneider lens as you do when realigning a Rodenstock lens. We've seen a number of cases in medium format where discontinued equipment gets actively used and (repaired) long after manufacturing has ceased.

The longest lens in the Digitar line is 210mm, and it's indeed discontinued but it's sort of unrelated to this. Individual lenses in the Digitar line has been discontinued before. The 210 can be hard to buy new, Linhof Studio had some remaining stock a while back I don't know if they still have it. (There's one currently in the for sale forum too, I'd buy it if I had space in my backpack...)

[Paul2660]

Sad news if true. Schneider makes great glass.  May also have an effect on the price of the Rodenstock glass since they will be the only one left.

Schneider never brought their 100mm to market which was going to be a great lens. 

I love the 60XL amd 120APO. 

Paul

[Enda Cavanagh]

Sad news indeed if it's true. I did hear over a year ago that they were not going to invest in new wide angle lenses which would overcome the issues on many of the latest digital backs due to the high cost of such lenses.

[torger]

Sad news indeed if it's true. I did hear over a year ago that they were not going to invest in new wide angle lenses which would overcome the issues on many of the latest digital backs due to the high cost of such lenses.

That's a good strategy, because it's really the sensor makers that needs shaping up, not the lens makers

Problem is that the tiny tech cam segment won't be able to dictate how sensors should be designed. Rodenstock adapted and won popularity, Schneider didn't and lost (except for the few of us using Kodaks). Rodenstock may need to adapt once more though as the new Sony CMOS is even tougher than the Dalsa CCDs on the wides.

I think the future of tech cams has never been this unclear, it seems like it can go in any direction. The dream is a CMOS back with wide angular response. Cambo Actus with such a back and Schneider Digitar lenses, incredible portability, flexibility and performance, the 4x5" field camera revived in a compact digital and user-friendly form.

The nightmare is same as current CMOS with higher pixel density and thus even worse angular response making also current Rodenstock wide angle line obsolete.

I think both scenarios are about equally likely.

[Doug Peterson]

I think the future of tech cams has never been this unclear, it seems like it can go in any direction. The dream is a CMOS back with wide angular response. Cambo Actus with such a back and Schneider Digitar lenses, incredible portability, flexibility and performance, the 4x5" field camera revived in a compact digital and user-friendly form.

Rumors aside, I think the future of tech cams has never been so bright.

More users, more options, and more attention than at any time that I've been around for.

[torger]

Rumors aside, I think the future of tech cams has never been so bright.

More users, more options, and more attention than at any time that I've been around for.

We need manufacturer interest, not just user interest. We need sensor maker interest most of all, which I think is the hardest to get. The problem is that even with huge increase of user interest the tech cam is still a small niche segment and will as such need to have its advocates when manufacturer business decisions are made.

What happens if Phase One comes out with a full-frame 120MP CMOS back which is incompatible with Rodenstock Digarons? That would not be nice, but it could happen. Even if Phase One wants to support tech wides they might not be able to convince Sony to invest in developing such technology, which other customers like Pentax won't need. We've only seen the first CMOS sensor yet, and I would call the future "unclear" rather than "bright" until we know where CMOS tech is taking MFD. (I think CCD is dead, it just doesn't know it yet).

What also could happen is that we get more competition with more CMOS players in MFD, and we see BSI type of designs with very wide angular response, and that would be fantastic. Then Digitar wides could start selling again and Schneider might rethink.

[JoeKitchen]

About three or four years ago I heard from a Schneider rep that they were not going to invest any more into tech camera lenses, so this rumor does not surprise me.  However, if it is true, it still is sad even though I use mostly Rodenstock lenses.  The lenses are great and it does us well to have competition.  

Optimally though, it might be good for the company.  Schneider is very large and produces optics for a very large array of applications.  The tech camera department must be very small for the overall company.  In retrospect Rodenstock only manufactures tech camera lenses (I believe), which I always found kind of odd.  They could do so good in other areas. 

The odd thing though is that I bought an used Sinar branded Rodenstock lens about a year ago from Peartree in London.  The lens was mounted to the Sinar electric shutter and needed to be switched to a Copal instead.  Peartree initially reached out to Rodentsock for the swap but found out they do not mount shutters to lenses that have already left the factory.  So he had to send it to Schneider to get mounted.  This kind of contradicts this a little.  

[buckshot]

Oh great, even less choice, when what’s needed is more, though sadly, that doesn’t appear to be the way the sector is headed - at least, in terms of lenses and DBs. There's a lot of choice for the mechanical bits in-between (Alpa etc.)

Whilst symmetrical design WA lenses don’t play well with shifts on the current generation of DBs, I still much prefer them over retrofocus design lenses. Less distortion, less flare, better bokeh, beautiful rendering, lighter weight.

It’s crazy to expect lens manufacturers to come out with a whole new generation of lenses to match each generation of DBs. If the tech in the IQ150/250/CFV-50c was scaled up to full frame (~120MP), even the current R/S wides would struggle when shifted. Then what, a whole new generation of even stronger retrofocus lenses? The current R/S 32 is over $8k unmounted. What will the next iteration be $10k? $12k? $15k. I guess if they’re the only player in town, they can charge what they like. Whether or not there's anyone left to pay it ...

Rollei gone, Bronica gone, Contax gone, Fuji ‘gone’ (from MF), Mamiya ‘gone’ (absorbed by P1), Leaf ‘gone’ (absorbed by P1), and now S/K on the way.

Overall then, nuts.

[voidshatter]

Rumors aside, I think the future of tech cams has never been so bright.

More users, more options, and more attention than at any time that I've been around for.

Could you elaborate why there is a bright future please?

To open another performance gap between the 135 format and the 645 format, Phase One would need to announce something like a 120 MP digital back. If it's a Sony CMOS I see no good chance for the current Rodenstock wide angles to survive.

What could be called a bright future if all our (expensive) current Rodenstock and Schneider lenses become obsolete and depreciate drastically? Of course if Rodenstock keeps making new lenses in bigger size at higher price it would be a good thing for the dealers, but I see a dark future for current users - what's the fun of having to sell all current lenses bought by hard-earned cash? Such loss can easily cover the cost of making a swap between Canon and Nikon telephotos. It is no fun.

Yes, for dealers and the rich hobbyists it may be a bright future, but for me not so likely.

[voidshatter]

We need manufacturer interest, not just user interest. We need sensor maker interest most of all, which I think is the hardest to get. The problem is that even with huge increase of user interest the tech cam is still a small niche segment and will as such need to have its advocates when manufacturer business decisions are made.

What happens if Phase One comes out with a full-frame 120MP CMOS back which is incompatible with Rodenstock Digarons? That would not be nice, but it could happen. Even if Phase One wants to support tech wides they might not be able to convince Sony to invest in developing such technology, which other customers like Pentax won't need. We've only seen the first CMOS sensor yet, and I would call the future "unclear" rather than "bright" until we know where CMOS tech is taking MFD. (I think CCD is dead, it just doesn't know it yet).

What also could happen is that we get more competition with more CMOS players in MFD, and we see BSI type of designs with very wide angular response, and that would be fantastic. Then Digitar wides could start selling again and Schneider might rethink.

It took 2 years from D7000 to D800, and another 2 years from D800 to IQ250.

If Samsung were to make bigger chips then it's 2 years from now until NX1 gets fullframe 135 format, and another 2 years to reach 44x33 or bigger. However I don't think Samsung would invest into that, as the demand is too weak and the profit margin is not worth their bother. Even if they bother to make bigger sensors, it's still a long way. If Schneider quits soon, then these nice symmetric wide angles would disappear far before BSI appears in MFDB.

I personally would speculate that multi-layer technology would thrive in the 135 format due to the lag for new technology to scale up to 645 format.

[gazwas]

Can this section of the LL forums get any more depressing and downbeat?

Of late, not a good time to be getting into MFD and finding this forum..... 

[BernardLanguillier]

I don't think it makes sense to spread such sector threatening rumors.

Schneider is unlikely to give up on MF lenses production. Their running costs are likely to be fairly low by now.

Cheers,
Bernard

[torger]

I don't think it makes sense to spread such sector threatening rumors.

Schneider is unlikely to give up on MF lenses production. Their running costs are likely to be fairly low by now.

It's not MF lenses in general, it's the "large format digital" (=MF of course) Digitar series and the large format analog glass which is rumored to not see any further development and eventually no further production leaving Rodenstock alone in this segment. I know more about the source than I say so I think it's credible, but if it happens in two months or three years the source had no information on. If they would stop production today sales volumes are so low that probably noone would notice for a year or two anyway until stock is fully depleted, and then there's still a healthy second hand market.

It has nothing to do with Phase One's 645DF Schneider Kreuznach lenses.

The boring part is that future tech cam systems may lose the elegance of symmetrical large format design. If the only reason to buy a tech cam will be resolving power, and sensors are designed for longer flange distances, Rodenstock is up for a huge optical design challenge. A 645DF wide is digitally corrected reducing optical complexity while a tech cam lens must perform better with larger image circle and without digital correction. I don't think it's impossible to do, you just need to add more optical elements and have high precision manufacturing. There's a risk that in the tech cam future the Rodenstock HR32 will look both light and cheap though.

I'd love to have two parallel tech cam systems like we have today, one "resolving power is what it's all about" with the associated cost weight etc, and one which factors in cost, compactness and weight and appreciates the rendering of classic symmetrical designs (which still is very high performance) which is great for field cameras. It seems like we may be losing the latter.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Anders,

Just a few comments.

The way I see it, the reason that 645DF wide lenses work new digital backs are not digital corrections but two simple facts:

• The 645DF is a DSLR, needing the space for the mirror box, thus forcing retrofocus designs on wide angles.
• The lack of tilt and shift

It would be possible to design a modern CMOS sensor optimised for large beam angles. Leica has done that with their CMOSIS designed sensor. I guess it is just a question market size, design and manufacturing costs and targetable sales price.

Best regards
Erik

It's not MF lenses in general, it's the "large format digital" (=MF of course) Digitar series and the large format analog glass which is rumored to not see any further development and eventually no further production leaving Rodenstock alone in this segment. I know more about the source than I say so I think it's credible, but if it happens in two months or three years the source had no information on. If they would stop production today sales volumes are so low that probably noone would notice for a year or two anyway until stock is fully depleted, and then there's still a healthy second hand market.

It has nothing to do with Phase One's 645DF Schneider Kreuznach lenses.

The boring part is that future tech cam systems may lose the elegance of symmetrical large format design. If the only reason to buy a tech cam will be resolving power, and sensors are designed for longer flange distances, Rodenstock is up for a huge optical design challenge. A 645DF wide is digitally corrected reducing optical complexity while a tech cam lens must perform better with larger image circle and without digital correction. I don't think it's impossible to do, you just need to add more optical elements and have high precision manufacturing. There's a risk that in the tech cam future the Rodenstock HR32 will look both light and cheap though.

I'd love to have two parallel tech cam systems like we have today, one "resolving power is what it's all about" with the associated cost weight etc, and one which factors in cost, compactness and weight and appreciates the rendering of classic symmetrical designs (which still is very high performance) which is great for field cameras. It seems like we may be losing the latter.

[voidshatter]

It would be possible to design a modern CMOS sensor optimised for large beam angles. Leica has done that with their CMOSIS designed sensor. I guess it is just a question market size, design and manufacturing costs and targetable sales price.

Best regards
Erik

Hi,

I believe there's still going to be a compromise. If you want dynamic range and high ISO performance then the light well has to be deep, making it less tolerable to extreme wide angle beams. Of course BSI (e.g. Samsung NX1) may be a good thing to balance between symmetric Schneider and dynamic range but I see little chance of that getting into MF.

[torger]

Hi,

I believe there's still going to be a compromise. If you want dynamic range and high ISO performance then the light well has to be deep, making it less tolerable to extreme wide angle beams. Of course BSI (e.g. Samsung NX1) may be a good thing to balance between symmetric Schneider and dynamic range but I see little chance of that getting into MF.

"Deep light well" refers to full well capacity and has nothing to do with pixel stack height which is the "deepness" that hurt angular response. The problem is the long distance from surface of microlens to surface of photodiode seen relative to the pixel pitch, and then the crosstalk due to lack of light shields between pixels.

I think the current Sony CMOS design with a light shield and possibly microlenses removed would perform very well, with say one stop reduced ISO sensitivity (ISO50 instead of 100) but not with reduced DR.

I think however as long as >95% of the customers of Sony's MF sensors don't need wide angular response even the simplest design alternatives won't be implemented. The only realistic chance is that we get it as a side effect, BSI increases sensitivity which everyone wants and as a side effect you get wider angular response. To avoid tech cams becoming just a bulkier A7r with higher resolving power and fantasy prices we need that type of sensor soon, preferably before Schneider throws in the towel on the Digitar range.

One of the advantages of the larger format size is that you can have both larger pixels and higher pixel count at the same time. With the larger pixels you can achieve wider angular response and with wider angular response comes the possibility with optical designs not feasible in a smaller format. It's sad to see that the trend goes towards removing this unique factor.