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

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 »

16-9 wrote:
Mon Jun 20, 2022 1:18 pm
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.
RE: Apo-Rodagon 50/2.8

I find with Rodenstock lenses (esp. with the Apo-Rodagon 50/2.8 ) it makes more sense to ignore the APO label. Thinking of a APO-Rodagon as a simple Rodagon is more accurate. There are tests on my site of Rodenstock APO labeled lenses that have the weakest chromatic aberration correction of all the lenses in the test even at the Rodenstock rated magnification #-o
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.
Yes, link is fine and appreciated.
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.
Yes, I agree it would be good to share info whenever possible. I've mentioned this to Johannes a few times to work at keeping the two of us at least updated with any new interesting data and of course any good leads!

You are right about SK (Schneider) over the last couple of years. There was a time before Schneider Optics division in California downsized when I was introduced to the CEO as one of my good friends best and oldest friends only to have the CEO retire and start his own company the next year #-o But then I got lucky again, Schneider noticed a blog post where I thanked their customer service and the new CEO (worldwide) sent me a personal email and we remain in touch but over the years, at least 5 years maybe, that resource has become a little worn out :-k
The CEO has now handed me off to a head tech rep but its not the same since the CEO was an optical designer for over 30 years and was the former Chief Technical Officer of Schneider Optics Inc. Sometimes the tech still has to refer to the CEO anyway on the hard questions.

I'll try to think of a way to highlight the errors when I skimmed over the info posted, without spending too much time on it.
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.
Yes, I agree on most points. I was referring to the spec listing. The problem is a lot of what Schneider marketing creates isn't true or the facts are not easy to find.

The reason I started my site was to provide real world information on macro lenses, the Rodenstock APO lenses not being APO corrected is a perfect example, to go against the seemly endless deluge of online "tests" that are just regurgitated information from the manufacturer, more mis-information just to get clicks and even worse get viewers to click on affiliate links. If you have never seen this gem, take a look when you get a chance:

https://www.closeuphotography.com/irix-150mm-macro-lens

The world class marketing on this lens is actually hilarious if it wasn't such a sad commentary of how bad things have become today. Take a look:
Claimed vs facts
Irix is a Swiss company - not a Swiss company, they use a PO box for a Swiss address. They are a Polish company.
Irix are Swiss made - Irix are made in Korea
APO correction - not at all, maybe at infinity
1x Optimization - No!
Zero distortion (0.1 %) - measures 6% at 1x
150mm focal length - measures 68mm at 1x

The problem is I was not able to find one single test or review online that refuted any one of these facts!

Even the worlds biggest site, DPReview fell for the official company misinformation campaign.

So any help you can give sharing good solid information on your site is always appreciated!

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.
Sounds great. I've had to use my SK contact a few times for late serials.

Best,

Robert

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic