Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Rontrus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:29 am
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Rontrus »

Hello,
I would appreciate if anybody could say something meaningful (or even better: post some telling images) regarding image quality differences between the Apo-version of the Rodagon 2.8/50 and the non-Apo-version (which I bought recently) in the magnification range between 1x and 5x on a bellows. The Rodagon should fill the gap in my equipment until I can afford the Mitutoyo Apo M 5x, but maybe the Apo-Rodagon will do perfectly instead? Actually I find the non-Apo-version not that bad, although I am not sure by now if it is really better to use it reversed.

Best regards from Frankfurt, Germany
Rontrus

chris_ma
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 2:23 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by chris_ma »

I dont have first hand experience with those lenses in macro use (only on enlargers).

I'm pretty confident that corner performance on 5x will be better reversed though.

Also the Schneider Componon-S 50mm is worth looking into because it matches the Rodagon APO at lower price.
chris

Rontrus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:29 am
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Rontrus »

chris_ma wrote:
Mon Jun 13, 2022 1:45 pm
Also the Schneider Componon-S 50mm is worth looking into because it matches the Rodagon APO at lower price.
Thank you for your swift answer. I will keep eyes open for a Componon-S.
I read somewhere in this forum your announcement to post the (impressing) result of a test regarding a Mitutoyo-clone (presumably 5x), but I could not find yet the result itself. Can you share a link with me and/or any further information? Thank you.

Best regards
Rontrus

PS: Had a quick look for Componon-S 2.8/50. They fit in the same price range (used) as my non-Apo Rodagon. If they match the Apo-version qualitywise, this seems to me too good to be true ...

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Scarodactyl »

Wrong Chris.

If you're after a cheap mitutoyo 5x you can go for a mitutoyo QV 2.5x. It is a similar objective to the 5x, or maybe the same. I only tried one, liked it a lot but didn't do a head to head with a 5x. There are a couple on eBay kind of cheap.

Rontrus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:29 am
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Rontrus »

Scarodactyl wrote:
Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:41 pm
If you're after a cheap mitutoyo 5x you can go for a mitutoyo QV 2.5x. It is a similar objective to the 5x, or maybe the same. I only tried one, liked it a lot but didn't do a head to head with a 5x. There are a couple on eBay kind of cheap.
Are these QV objectives suitable for full frame?

chris_ma
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 2:23 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by chris_ma »

wrong about what, the Componon-S being a good enlarger lens?

in my tests it was very similar to the Rodagon APO on an enlarger.
I also used it around 1x on a 1/2" CCD camera and it was better then most macro lenses at the time (2004), .

it obviously will be much worse then a Mitutoyo at 5x.

the Laowa 2.5-5x might be worth a look too.
chris

simplejoy
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 12:28 am
Contact:

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by simplejoy »

chris_ma wrote:
Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:04 am
wrong about what, the Componon-S being a good enlarger lens?

in my tests it was very similar to the Rodagon APO on an enlarger.
I also used it around 1x on a 1/2" CCD camera and it was better then most macro lenses at the time (2004), .

it obviously will be much worse then a Mitutoyo at 5x.

the Laowa 2.5-5x might be worth a look too.
It's slightly complicated when it comes to the Componon-S 50 mm... because according to some recent in-depth research by Mark (whom I work with on the deltalenses.com project) there are 9 or 10 different versions of that lens:
Version 1 [10146]: Produced 1975-1981. Five-element, concave-5 aperture. Single-coated.

Version 2 [14849]: Produced 1981-1990. Optically identical to [10146] but with aperture illumination and lever. Single-coated.

Version 3 [Catalogue # unknown]: M25 mount version of [14849]

Version 4a [16828] V1: Produced 1990-1995. New six-element design with concave-5 aperture in BLV-L. Similar appearance to [14849] with crucial minor differences. Lenses produced in 1994 have the same curved-5 diaphragm as [16828] V2, but no green band. Multicoated.

Version 4b [16828] V2: Produced 1995-2008 and beyond. Same six-element design as [16828] V1 but all models have curved-5 diaphragm in BLV-L. Green identifying band. Multicoated.

Version 5 [18827]: M25 mount version of [16828].

Version 6 [14796]: V-mount version of [16828] with Makro Iris body.

Version 7 HM [Catalogue # unknown]: Produced c.1993 in unknown quantities. Likely industrial or high-magnification application.

Version 8 V2 [1097301]: Revised optical design produced from 2020-2021 and marketed as an industrial lens in V38 mount only, but equally suited to enlarger and taking application. Max aperture now f32. All metal body.

Version 9 Pyrite [1097301]: Produced 2021 to date. Rebranded version of V2.
For some images and test results you can visit the single entries here:
https://deltalenses.com/?s=componon-s+50

The archive is nowhere near finished yet, but from the tests Mark has done on the Componon-S 50 mm lenses it looks like the latest (green band) series is on par performance wise with the Apo-Rodagon N 50 mm and often available for a fraction of the price.

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Scarodactyl »

chris_ma wrote:
Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:04 am
wrong about what, the Componon-S being a good enlarger lens?
Oh sorry, I meant he was thinking of a different Chris (specirically Chris S and his upcoming mitutoyo clone test), not that you were wrong about anything. That was phrased very poorly.

Scarodactyl
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:26 am

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Scarodactyl »

Rontrus wrote:
Tue Jun 14, 2022 12:40 am
Scarodactyl wrote:
Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:41 pm
If you're after a cheap mitutoyo 5x you can go for a mitutoyo QV 2.5x. It is a similar objective to the 5x, or maybe the same. I only tried one, liked it a lot but didn't do a head to head with a 5x. There are a couple on eBay kind of cheap.
Are these QV objectives suitable for full frame?
Haven't tried it. They aren't all identical to their m plan apo equivalents, but the qv 1x seems to be exactly the same as the m plan apo 2x, and the 2.5x I tried seemed to perform just like an m plan apo 5x. The guy I set it up for uses it on full frame and likes it, but his subjects tend to be more central so I can't comment on corner quality.

Rontrus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:29 am
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Rontrus »

Scarodactyl wrote:
Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:40 am
... and the 2.5x I tried seemed to perform just like an m plan apo 5x. The guy I set it up for uses it on full frame and likes it, but his subjects tend to be more central so I can't comment on corner quality.
Thanks for the info. I think I'm more of a central-subject-guy too, so maybe I should give this 2.5X a try. :)

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by RobertOToole »

Rontrus wrote:
Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:55 am
Hello,
I would appreciate if anybody could say something meaningful (or even better: post some telling images) regarding image quality differences between the Apo-version of the Rodagon 2.8/50 and the non-Apo-version (which I bought recently) in the magnification range between 1x and 5x on a bellows. The Rodagon should fill the gap in my equipment until I can afford the Mitutoyo Apo M 5x, but maybe the Apo-Rodagon will do perfectly instead? Actually I find the non-Apo-version not that bad, although I am not sure by now if it is really better to use it reversed.

Best regards from Frankfurt, Germany
Rontrus
FYI, there is lots of test info and general info posted my site over the last 5 years on the Rodagon 2.8/50 and APO-Rodagon tested against Componon-S, and other 50mm lenses on APS-C. Reason for testing on APS-C? Corner sharpness. Most if not all EL 50mm lenses are not sharp wide open and need to be stopped down for good IQ and even stopped down image quality in the corners isn't very good, even on APS-C. In my experience 50mm EL lenses are best used in a stacked setup from 2-5x.

https://www.closeuphotography.com/

This is not a direct answer to your questions since the lens was tested in the range you ask about but almost all have been tested in a stacked configuration, not reversed and on extension as you ask about (image quality is much better 1-5x in a stacked setup).

These are just a couple tests, there are lots more.

Lenses compared in this test at 2.7x:

Rodenstock El-Omegar 50mm f/3.5 lens (3-element) M39 Leica thread mount
Rodenstock APO-Rodagon 50mm f//2.8 lens M39 Leica thread mount
Schneider Componon 50mm f/4 lens B-00 M32 x 0.5mm mount
Schneider Componon-S 50mm f/2.8 BKV-L green aperture window iris mount
Schneider Componon-S 50mm f/2.8 lens Makro-Iris B-V iris mount
Schneider Componon-S 50mm f/2.8 lens BK split circle aperture indicator iris mount
Schneider Componon-S 50mm f/4 lens preset iris mount
Schneider Xenon 50mm f/2 lens B-00 M32 x 0.5mm mount
Tominon E36 48mm f/4 lens M39 Leica thread mount

Link: https://www.closeuphotography.com/schne ... mm-v-mount




Rodenstock Rogonar-S 3.5/50 (a lens that cost me $5 new) vs Rodenstock APO-Rodagon-N 2.8/50 (cost me more than $5) tested at 3x:

Link: https://www.closeuphotography.com/rogon ... -lens-test




I could go on and on with more links but I'm not sure there would be any interested in any case so at least the links above can get someone started if they are interested.

Best,

Robert

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by RobertOToole »

simplejoy wrote:
Tue Jun 14, 2022 5:17 am

It's slightly complicated when it comes to the Componon-S 50 mm... because according to some recent in-depth research by Mark (whom I work with on the deltalenses.com project) there are 9 or 10 different versions of that lens
I already have tons of data from Schneider and from testing the 50mm Componon-S (CPN) lenses + more on my site since 2017. No reason to re-invent something that already exists.

There are two basic Componon 50mm designs, the 5 element and the 6 element. Out of all all the versions I've ever tested the Macro-Iris version is easily the best performer. This is due to a couple of reasons (see my site).

Schneider gets tons of mileage out of their designs, its been talked about it here on this forum at least 5 times. The exact same 6 element design for the 50mm CPN is used on at least 5 different lenses that I've bothered to look up; The Componon-S Makro Iris, PYRITE 2.8/50 V38, Componon-S (CPN-S), Xenoplan (XNP), and APO-Xenoplan (APO-XNP). See my site for more info: https://www.closeuphotography.com/schne ... mm-v-mount
Version 1 [10146]: Produced 1975-1981. Five-element, concave-5 aperture. Single-coated.

Version 2 [14849]: Produced 1981-1990. Optically identical to [10146] but with aperture illumination and lever. Single-coated.

Version 3 [Catalogue # unknown]: M25 mount version of [14849]

Version 4a [16828] V1: Produced 1990-1995. New six-element design with concave-5 aperture in BLV-L. Similar appearance to [14849] with crucial minor differences. Lenses produced in 1994 have the same curved-5 diaphragm as [16828] V2, but no green band. Multicoated.

Version 4b [16828] V2: Produced 1995-2008 and beyond. Same six-element design as [16828] V1 but all models have curved-5 diaphragm in BLV-L. Green identifying band. Multicoated.

Version 5 [18827]: M25 mount version of [16828].

Version 6 [14796]: V-mount version of [16828] with Makro Iris body.

Version 7 HM [Catalogue # unknown]: Produced c.1993 in unknown quantities. Likely industrial or high-magnification application.

Version 8 V2 [1097301]: Revised optical design produced from 2020-2021 and marketed as an industrial lens in V38 mount only, but equally suited to enlarger and taking application. Max aperture now f32. All metal body.

Version 9 Pyrite [1097301]: Produced 2021 to date. Rebranded version of V2.

With a quick scan I can see quite a bit of mis-information and incorrect data/comments posted above. Also at least one piece of artwork was "borrowed" from my site without credit. At least this means the site owner's in-depth research means he ran a google search and found my my site =D>

FYI, with Schneider, changes from Ver 01 to 02 with a particular lens, Macro Varon 4.5/85 -0001 CAS to Macro Varon 4.5/85 -0002 CAS for example, usually means nothing for the consumer/end-user, its just for internal use. It's not as important or significant as you would guess. How do I know this? CEO of Schneider got sick and tired if getting emails from me asking for detailed changes for different version numbers, time after time, year after year! #-o
The archive is nowhere near finished yet, but from the tests Mark has done on the Componon-S 50 mm lenses it looks like the latest (green band) series is on par performance wise with the Apo-Rodagon N 50 mm and often available for a fraction of the price.
As I've mentioned previously the Schneider Componon-S 50mm f/2.8 lens Makro-Iris B-V iris mount is easily the best at low magnification, 2-4x after testing some embarrassingly impossible number of 50mm lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock using extension and stacked. On a serious note, after that 50mm test, I almost quite posting tests on my site!


Best regards,

Robert
Last edited by RobertOToole on Mon Jun 20, 2022 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Rontrus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:29 am
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by Rontrus »

RobertOToole wrote:
Sun Jun 19, 2022 8:37 pm
This is not a direct answer to your questions since the lens was tested in the range you ask about but almost all have been tested in a stacked configuration, not reversed and on extension as you ask about (image quality is much better 1-5x in a stacked setup).
Thanks, I read your articels about stacked lenses and tried my non-APO-Rodagon stacked onto my 180-mm-Tamron macro lens (https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... 67#p283267). I was quite pleased with the result despite of the the small image circle, but after reading your test of the Laowa 25 mm I probably will use this lens for the low magnification range.

Best regards
Rontrus

16-9
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:12 am
Location: London

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by 16-9 »

RobertOToole wrote:
Sun Jun 19, 2022 9:30 pm
With a quick scan I can see quite a bit of mis-information and incorrect data/comments posted above. Also at least one piece of artwork was "borrowed" from my site without credit. At least this means the site owner's in-depth research means he ran a google search and found my my site =D>
FYI, with Schneider, changes from Ver 01 to 02 with a particular lens, Macro Varon 4.5/85 -0001 CAS to Macro Varon 4.5/85 -0002 CAS for example, usually means nothing for the consumer/end-user, its just for internal use. It's not as important or significant as you would guess. How do I know this? CEO of Schneider got sick and tired if getting emails from me asking for detailed changes for different version numbers, time after time, year after year!
Best regards,
Robert
I don't want to sidetrack a conversation about Rodagons, because the insight in the second post that the Componon-S 50/2.8 is already at the level of the Apo-Rodagon 50/2.8* is under-publicised, and worth repeating.

However, I owe you an apology – Robert – about using an image uncredited: I had my wires crossed about an exchange you had with Johannes, and the two pictures in question have now been removed. We continue to refer users to your reviews where relevant, and if you're happy for us to use images with a linked credit, we're still happy to push traffic your way.

At some point, I was hoping to compare notes with you – I'm aware you've been able (painstakingly) to dig current information out of Schneider. It's a shame the company is now so reticent; the UK reps were politely useless at first, then not even polite. If you're referring to my statement that the V2 is a revised optical formula, I will freely admit this is an informed deduction: if you have any other specific intel that highlights mistakes in the catalogue – particularly the Componon-S 50/2.8 overview mentioned above – I'm open to constructive criticism and error correction. We're continuously updating and refining the database at this stage.

Delta's articles (and the Hall of Fame grading hundreds of lenses) don't overlap with your site – our objectives are somewhat different – but there's a natural intersection and a shared goal of informing the community about rare, forgotten and re-deployable lenses. The Archive currently majors on enlarger, projector and repro lenses, but we have begun to catalogue industrial (and cine camera) optics and I'd like there to be a useful bridge between our sites. We've no intention of doing the kind of high magnification tests you do, but they're tremendously useful and we'll continue to refer our readers to you for in-depth reviews of that type. I'm also looking for subjects with something to say in this area, to interview for our YouTube channel.

So, yes – we have spent happy hours on your site, and appreciate what you do. And if you've been able to winkle from Schneider a serial number dating scheme for lenses published since 2008 (which is more than we have) it's frankly your duty to the internet to share it.

-----------
* Depending on magnification range and sample quality (the standard caveat applicable to any such one-line summary).

16-9
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:12 am
Location: London

Re: Rodagon 2.8/50 Apo and non-Apo

Post by 16-9 »

simplejoy wrote:
Tue Jun 14, 2022 5:17 am
. . . from the tests Mark has done on the Componon-S 50 mm lenses it looks like the latest (green band) series is on par performance wise with the Apo-Rodagon N 50 mm and often available for a fraction of the price.
To clarify an important point here: our tests are made at working distances typical of enlarger lens usage – and longer – not shorter. We've not yet graded the Makro-Iris directly against the optically 'identical' [16828] and when we do, the outcome won't necessarily indicate better or worse performance for magnifications typically required by users of this forum. NOMA.

What is certain – which Robert's tests have ably shown – is that attention to detail in construction of the V38 versions yields more consistent results in lenses of this vintage: it's the fullest expression of the potential of every six-element Componon-S 50/2.8. But it's much more expensive in 2022 than it was in 2017 – thanks in no small part to Robert's test – in fact, it's usually more expensive than the Apo-Rodagon-N.

I don't begrudge that – it's priced about right now – but it's harder to recommend as a value proposition. Whereas, as a taking lens in 2022, the post-1995 convex-5 iris [16828 V2] and 1994 convex-5 iris [16828 V1] are rather excitingly undervalued relative to their performance. And if you don't care about bokeh, the pre-1994 concave-5 iris [16828 V1] is just as good.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic