300mm f5.6 Rodenstock Rodagon

John Wiegerink · Feb 24, 2010

I just bought one of these in near perfect condition and was wondering if I can use it for anything besides enlarging/printing. I have 4x5 and an 8x10 cameras, but before I go through all the trouble of crafting a lens board for it I thought I'd ask. I will say one thing, it's one impressive piece of glass! JohnW

Ian Grant · Feb 24, 2010

It's optimised for enlarger use 1:1 to 1:6, but will be OK on a camera stopped well down, but rather heavy although a large image circle. There's no shutter that'll fit in

I have the Schneider equivalent Componon S, and a 240mm Rodagon.

Ian

John Wiegerink · Feb 24, 2010

Ian, I couldn't pass it up for $57.00 as it is a very impressive lens. I thought if I couldn't get my use out of it I could at least sell it and maybe make a buck or two. I have a Bausch & Lomb Zeiss Triple Convertible in an Ilex No.4 shutter for my 8x10 and it's a very fine lens, but thought I'd like to see just what the 300mm Rodagon could do. I would assume stopping down to f22-f32 should give me enough coverage for the 8x10. I just got the lens today so haven't had time to play with it on the 8x10 or know if it would even cover it at infinity wide open(not that I would use it at f5.6). Maybe I'll have to make a horizontal enlarger and enlarge some of my 8x10 negatives, but that sure seems like over-kill for anything smaller than a 16x20 print. JohnW

Ian Grant · Feb 24, 2010

That 300mm should cover 10x8 at f5.6 at infinity easily, a 240mm Rodagon is OK (& recommended) as an enlarger lens for 10x8 negatives.

A Packard shutter perhaps One issue is the enlarger lens barrels don't stop down as far as a camera lens barel/shutters.

Ian

John Wiegerink · Feb 24, 2010

Yes, I noticed that the smallest aperture is f45, but that shouldn't be a big problem. I'm glad to hear it covers 8x10 wide open as it will make initial focusing easier. Ian, is there any advantage reversing this lens for pictorial use? I had three Packard shutters that I sold about a year ago and now wish I had one of them back. I'll just use the "old cap" method to try it out. If it's much better than my Protar, which I doubt, then I'll spring for a shutter or rig something to work. Thanks Ian! JohnW

Ian Grant · Feb 24, 2010

They are symmetrical so reversing is

I think they cover 11x14 which is why they are SO large. It may well be better than a Protar because it's so much more modern.

Ian

John Wiegerink · Feb 24, 2010

Sounds more encouraging than I thought and might just be worth the effort. Although the old Protar seems to be a very nice lens and makes for nice pictures(contacts). I will admit that it's not bitingly sharp, but 8x10 makes up for that. JohnW

ic-racer · Feb 24, 2010

If you don't like it as a camera lens, you could still double your money and it would be a good deal for enlarging. I have seen many cases of 8x10 enlargers trading hands or on the market without 300mm lenses for whatever reason.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=540080&postcount=163

John Wiegerink · Feb 24, 2010

ic-racer, that's kind of what I figured and was the reason I didn't pass it up. It's really a "buyers market" when it comes to darkroom equipment and if I had more money I'd probably have a warehouse full. Good thing I don't have more money! JohnW

3e8 · Feb 24, 2010

John,
I just picked one up as well. Was yours the one off of Ebay that had a stuck aperature?

Did yours come with a retaining ring? Mine didn't, and finding one is turning out to be a bit of a hastle.

Cheers,
Bryan

John Wiegerink · Feb 24, 2010

3e8,
Yes, and the aperture took less than ten minutes to fix(it wasn't stuck) and the glass is perfect. It did come with the retaining ring. The retaining ring was mounted on a bayonet with three screws, but I removed the bayonet. So, now it's just lens and retaining ring. Still a sweet deal in my book! Where did you get yours? I'm might have a retaining ring, but it will probably take me a day or two to find it. If I do I'll let you know. JohnW

John Wiegerink · Feb 25, 2010

No extra retaining ring!

When I was looking for the extra retaining ring I also dug out my 480mm f9 Rodenstock APO-Ronar and tried the retaining ring off the 300mm Rodagon onto the APO-Ronar. Yep, perfect fit! That's how I know I have no extra retaining ring as I have been looking for the proper ring for the 480mm APO-Ronar for sometime now. I actually much more pleased with my purchase of the 300mm Rodagon now simply because I now have the retaining ring I need for the APO-Ronar. Yeppie! JohnW

300mm f5.6 Rodenstock Rodagon

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency