180/5.6 Sironar vs. 180/5.6 Symmar-S MC

[jmooney]

Hi All,

I'm trying to decide between these two lenses for use on 5x7:

180/5.6 Sironar (Plain ole' Sironar)

or

180/5.6 Symmar-S MC

I shoot 99.9% B&W. I've searched the archives and cannot find anything to really set one apart from the other. Both seem to have excellent coverage #'s for 5x7 so short of flipping a coin or resorting to reading tea leaves can anyone recommend one over the other

 

[Ian Grant]

I've answered here

 

[cdholden]

I picked up my Symmar-S for about $150 on the auction site. If you can't tell the difference, grab the one that is cheaper and/or more readily available... whatever moves you past that next obstacle.

 

[kirkfry]

I would avoid the plain old Sironar, this vintage of lens (1970's) had lens separation problems due the fancy new glue they used. K

 

[edtbjon]

I've seen separation on a Rodenstock lens too of that vintage. While being an enlarger lens, i.e. a Rodagon, the lens cannot be used for a full size negative. On the Schneider side, Schneideritis is only a cosmetical issue. But apart from the separation issues with the Rodie, there is really nothing to tell these lenses apart in terms of performance, apart from finding the best specimen.
Given the results from your polls here and at lfphoto.info, I recon the answer is pretty unanimous.

//Björn