Rodenstock Rodagon WA 40mm f4 Test Ex IQ and bargain price

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Sun Jun 16, 2019 2:12 pm

Came across this lens on eBay last month and honestly I couldn't pass on this lens due to the price of $45 with free shipping (the seller has upped the price since selling a few recently). The lens turned out to be a nice surprise!

For with more images and for details on mounting the lens, see the full test on my site, don't forget to sign up for my free macro newsletter:

https://www.closeuphotography.com/roden ... -lens-test

RODENSTOCK RODAGON WA 1:4 F=40MM QUICK REVIEW

-Excellent used price online

-Full frame sensor coverage, 45mm image circle

-All-metal barrel and mount

-Good chromatic aberration control

-Consistent sharpness across the frame

-Highly recommended

2.5X TEST: RODENSTOCK RODAGON WA 40MM F/4 LINE SCAN LENS VS APO-COMPONON 2.8/40 LINE SCAN LENS VS BOGEN WA 3.5/40 ENLARGER LENS

For the best sharpness possible I tested these 3 lenses in a stacked configuration using a Schneider 5.6/100 as a rear lens.

The APO-Componon 2.8/40 lens was best at f/4, the Bogen, f/4.5.

Camera: Sony A6300, model # ILCE-6300
Sensor size: APS-C 23.5 × 15.6 mm. 28.21 mm diagonal. 3.92 micron sensor pitch
Flash: Godox TT350s wireless flash x 2 with one Godox X1s 2.4G wireless flash transmitter
Vertical stand: Nikon MM-11 with a Nikon focus block

For this test I ran a stack of images in 4 micron steps for each aperture. The sharpest frame was then chosen using Photoshop at 100% actual pixel view. Separate images were selected for center, edge, and corner if needed. Each image was processed in PS CC with identical settings with all noise reduction and lens correction turned off, all settings were zeroed out (true zero) and the same settings were used for all of the images.

Left to right; Bogen WA 40mm f3.5, Rodagon WA 40mm f4, Schneider APO-Componon 2.8/40 Makro Iris mount V-mount lens.

Full uncropped image resized showing crop areas. Click on any image here to see a larger version.

Center at 100% view.

Corner crops at 100% view.

Final Verdict: Highly recommended. The Rodagon performed slightly better overall than the Schneider and despite lack of the APO label, the Rodenstock CA control was great in this test.
If thats not enough the Rodagon is about 1/4 to 1/8th the price of the Schneider.

The seller did have more than 10 but they are selling quickly. Tip, tell the seller to ship the lens only to save on shipping cost. Also see the full test on my site for notes about the lens filter and mounting.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Schaeffer-Kirc ... 3138874430?

Questions and comments welcome.

Robert

dickb · Post by **dickb** » Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:48 pm

Thanks for sharing. The cameras / lenses aren't on offer anymore as far as I can see. I may well have a WA Rodagon or two lying around somewhere, not sure whether it is the 40, 60 or 80mm, so that is yet another addition to my list of lenses I should test. Is there a specific reasoning behind choosing the Schneider 100/5.6 as a tube lens, rather than the 120mm Makro Symmar or the 90mm tube lens you used with the Xenoplan 23/1.4? To get the desired magnification? Using different tube lenses you get a lot of permutations for lens testing..

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Sun Jun 16, 2019 4:53 pm

dickb wrote:Thanks for sharing.

Glad someone found it interesting.

The cameras / lenses aren't on offer anymore as far as I can see.

That was fast. This morning it was 6 sold, 4 available! thats a shame. Might be worth it for someone to ask if he has more. The seller told me he had this ad up for 1 year, until I bough the first two, then he was even more curious when I told him to keep the camera and just send the lens. I felt bad for the seller, free shipping to the US for free, for $45 each? I told him to save his money and just send the lens, which he did.

I may well have a WA Rodagon or two lying around somewhere, not sure whether it is the 40, 60 or 80mm, so that is yet another addition to my list of lenses I should test.

WA lenses are definitely different than a normal EL lens, more complex designs. Better CA control from what I have seen.

I had a SK WA 4/40, not too good and my unit had a tilted element causing a sharp drop off in sharpness on one side. Also tried a SK WA 5.6/60, nice CA control but not the sharpest.

Is there a specific reasoning behind choosing the Schneider 100/5.6 as a tube lens, rather than the 120mm Makro Symmar

For one thing the 5.6/100 has has some super sharp results in the center with some lenses. I'm still trying combinations to find that magic pair. Also they are very reasonably priced. I paid $25 for one, $18 for another.

Interesting note on the 5.6/100 CNP, I'm told that the CNP 5.6/100 is the same optically as the Leica Focotar II 5.6/100. Those sell for $600-1000 if you can even find one for sale.

Also I wanted to keep the magnification down. Originally I wanted to run both extension and stacked setups side by side but the extension results were not so good so I ran with stacking only for the tests.

the 90mm tube lens you used with the Xenoplan 23/1.4?

That mejiro 5.6/90 so far has given me the best stacked results so far, but the field is curved more than I would like.

I really like that 1.4/23, I need to spend more time on all the XNP lenses.

To get the desired magnification? Using different tube lenses you get a lot of permutations for lens testing..

Yes. After a lot time spent working on that, I now have 80mm (CNP-S), 90mm (Mejiro), 100 (CNP), 135mm (CNP-S), 150 (CNP-S), 200 (Thorlabs), and now that Yasaron 200-240mm to give me 2.3x, 2.6x, 2.9x, 3.9x, 4.3x, and 5.7x with a 4/35 CNP for example. But it took a lot of time to figure that out. My Thorlabs tubes and adapters are definitely showing signs of wear.

Best,

Robert

dickb · Post by **dickb** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:17 am

RobertOToole wrote:For one thing the 5.6/100 has has some super sharp results in the center with some lenses. I'm still trying combinations to find that magic pair. Also they are very reasonably priced. I paid $25 for one, $18 for another.

Interesting note on the 5.6/100 CNP, I'm told that the CNP 5.6/100 is the same optically as the Leica Focotar II 5.6/100. Those sell for $600-1000 if you can even find one for sale.

I've heard conflicting stories about that. The Focotar II 100/5.6 was made by Schneider, but whether it is optically the same I couldn't say.

After a lot time spent working on that, I now have 80mm (CNP-S), 90mm (Mejiro), 100 (CNP), 135mm (CNP-S), 150 (CNP-S), 200 (Thorlabs), and now that Yasaron 200-240mm to give me 2.3x, 2.6x, 2.9x, 3.9x, 4.3x, and 5.7x with a 4/35 CNP for example. But it took a lot of time to figure that out. My Thorlabs tubes and adapters are definitely showing signs of wear.

So this is the optimal series of tube lenses you have found for that specific lens, or does it hold for most of the lenses you have tested? There are many potentially interesting lenses for use as tube lens in my and your collection. Some of the ones you used (say Makro Symmar 120/5.6 or 5.9) are not optimized for infinity focus. Have you tried the Rayfact VL1.4x by any chance?

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:30 am

dickb wrote:
After a lot time spent working on that, I now have 80mm (CNP-S), 90mm (Mejiro), 100 (CNP), 135mm (CNP-S), 150 (CNP-S), 200 (Thorlabs), and now that Yasaron 200-240mm to give me 2.3x, 2.6x, 2.9x, 3.9x, 4.3x, and 5.7x with a 4/35 CNP for example. But it took a lot of time to figure that out. My Thorlabs tubes and adapters are definitely showing signs of wear.
So this is the optimal series of tube lenses you have found for that specific lens, or does it hold for most of the lenses you have tested? There are many potentially interesting lenses for use as tube lens in my and your collection. Some of the ones you used (say Makro Symmar 120/5.6 or 5.9) are not optimized for infinity focus. Have you tried the Rayfact VL1.4x by any chance?

This is my preferred tube lens list.

Lat night I found that the WA 4/40 works much better on the SR-120 Makro Symmar so I may pull the 5.6/100 off my preferred list, although it does work very well with some other lenses.

Currently I'm working on a 135mm TL test with 6 lenses, the results might change my preferred list also.

Thanks for the interest in this Dick.

Best,

Robert

mawyatt · Post by **mawyatt** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:23 am

Robert,

This is an area I'm weak in, between ~1.5 and 3X. Got the PN105 for 1 and 1.4 with converter, and Mitutoyo for 5X and down to 3.3X with Raynox 250.

Have a Canon 35mm Macro and Lomo 3.7 to cover this range but don't think they produce the IQ of some of the combos you've should. Would appreciate your assessment of this "guess" on my part.

I've got to pay attention and jump on the bargain lens you find!! Been too much into the motor control part

To put these controllers into perspective, pun intended

, they are like Mitutoyo's at Amscope prices

Thanks for all the hard work do you for us here on PM.

Best,

Mike

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:41 am

Hi Mike,

mawyatt wrote:Robert,

This is an area I'm weak in, between ~1.5 and 3X. Got the PN105 for 1 and 1.4 with converter, and Mitutoyo for 5X and down to 3.3X with Raynox 250.

Have a Canon 35mm Macro and Lomo 3.7 to cover this range but don't think they produce the IQ of some of the combos you've should. Would appreciate your assessment of this "guess" on my part.

A couple things on the L3.7. I prefer the Lomo on a tube lens and I've had nice results down to a 90mm TL, that gave me something like 3x.

But, the field is really curved so that might be an issue.

FYI. The MP35 does not work with a TL.

I've got to pay attention and jump on the bargain lens you find!! Been too much into the motor control part To put these controllers into perspective, pun intended , they are like Mitutoyo's at Amscope prices

Your project is really interesting. But, that kind of work is something I'm trying to avoid so my time doesn't disappear down a black hole, before I know it, 2020 will be here if I'm not careful

Thanks for all the hard work do you for us here on PM.

Glad you find the tests interesting.

Best,

Robert

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 11:10 am

Big Update!

Yesterday I spent quite a bit of time trying rear lenses with the WA 4/40. None of the results were anything special until the last one, the Schneider Makro Symmar 5.6/120 and results are fantastic.

Rodagon WA 4/40 + Schneider 5.6/120 Makro Symmar, at 3X and 100% view

The image is better all around on the MS120. The field is flatter and the corner sharpness level is very close to the center.

Amazing!

Robert

typestar · Post by **typestar** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:19 pm

RobertOToole wrote:Big Update!

....None of the results were anything special until the last one, the Schneider Makro Symmar 5.6/120 and results are fantastic.

Rodagon WA 4/40 + Schneider 5.6/120 Makro Symmar, at 3X and 100% view... The image is better all around on the MS120. The field is flatter and the corner sharpness level is very close to the center.
Amazing!

Hi Robert, Thankyou for your further testings and the recent big update -- it's great to know the power of the MacroSymmar 5.6/120 and this combination --
But: what about the MacroSymmar 5.9/120mm -- which -- I believe -- you preferred so much..., last year... ?

btw: The hungarian seller of the WA4/40 quadrupled the original price -- and all are sold now today, it seems ...

I am curious about your 135 mm tube-lens-test

All the best for your testing and the huge amount of time...

Christian

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Mon Jun 17, 2019 3:07 pm

typestar wrote:
RobertOToole wrote:Big Update!

....None of the results were anything special until the last one, the Schneider Makro Symmar 5.6/120 and results are fantastic.

Sorry, Typo! Thank you for being so observant.

The lens is the Schneider Makro Symmar SR 5.9/120-0059

I just shot a new test now at 3x all on the Makro Symmar SR 5.9/120-0059

-Rodagon WA 4/40
-Scheider CNP 4/40
-Copal 4/40
-SK APO-CNP 2.8/40
-Canon MP-35
-Mitutoyo 5x pushed down to 3x

I left off the bogen WA this time since it was not in the same class of lens as the others.

btw: The hungarian seller of the WA4/40 quadrupled the original price -- and all are sold now today, it seems ...
He sent me a message to say thanks and that he sold out. Sorry about that. He told me those Rodagon-WAs were sitting online for one year without any bids until I found them!

Email me Christian. I have a spare unit.

I am curious about your 135 mm tube-lens-test

All the best for your testing and the huge amount of time...

Christian

Thanks for the interest.

The 135 test is going, a little slowly, but its coming along. A couple of nice surprises already.

Best,

Robert

chris_ma · Post by **chris_ma** » Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:47 am

Hi Robert,

thanks a lot for he tests and all the details, it's all very interesting to me (even the tests that are outside of my intended mag since I just love lenses)

RobertOToole wrote:I just shot a new test now at 3x all on the Makro Symmar SR 5.9/120-0059

-Rodagon WA 4/40
-Scheider CNP 4/40
-Copal 4/40
-SK APO-CNP 2.8/40
-Canon MP-35
-Mitutoyo 5x pushed down to 3x

tell us, tell us

one question:
Is there a special reason you're still doing the tests on a APS sized sensor even though I think you have a D850 now?
actually two:
and did you consider switching over to a pixel shift camera to eliminate aliasing (I seem to remember you tested a sony alpha 7 at some point, but can't find the thread anymore)

all the best
chris

Lou Jost · Post by **Lou Jost** » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:38 am

Is there a special reason you're still doing the tests on a APS sized sensor even though I think you have a D850 now?

That reminds me, If you could shift your APS camera slightly, your tests would be valid for FF cameras and APS cameras, without any extra work.

RobertOToole · Post by **RobertOToole** » Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:26 pm

chris_ma wrote:Hi Robert,

thanks a lot for he tests and all the details, it's all very interesting to me (even the tests that are outside of my intended mag since I just love lenses)

one question:
Is there a special reason you're still doing the tests on a APS sized sensor even though I think you have a D850 now?

For my day job I shoot mostly full frame and I dont see much gain to FF for this work but I do see the all the negatives like more vignetting and more frames to stack to get sharp corners. The only reason I would move to a FF body now for this work is pixel shift mode on the Sony A7R3.

I do prefer FF for normal macro 1/3-1x hand held flash macro photography.

APS-C just makes life easier with this work especially working with XNP type small format lenses and objectives.

actually two:
and did you consider switching over to a pixel shift camera to eliminate aliasing (I seem to remember you tested a sony alpha 7 at some point, but can't find the thread anymore)

Yes, good memory, thanks, I did plan to buy an A7RIII but I got side-tracked earlier this month!

Best,

Robert