Has anyone compared 50mm Rodenstock APO-Rodagon (old) with APO-Rodagon-N enlarging lenses.
The APO-Rodagon-N's were introduced in about 1995 and although lens construction remained the same as the APO-Rodagon, I'm curious to know what optical differences there are between old and new, if any (both are 6/4 but that doesn't mean they are optically identical).
I have the MTF for the 50mm APO-Rodagon-N lens but haven't seen MTF's for the older APO-Rodagon lenses. Does anyone have copies of the MTF's?
The answer is no. I have a newer version and to be honest I have no desire to check an earlier version because this one is so good. I also have a 80/F5.6 Non APO which is also very very good and will do everything I am capable of asking it to do. Is it better than any other 80/5.6? Who cares it is just simply very good as is the other one.
I have both, pickup the new one after the older one since I found it at a good price, kept the older one as a spare for workshops. I have never done a test but I suspect with black and white printing I would hardly notice the difference.
I have both, pickup the new one after the older one since I found it at a good price, kept the older one as a spare for workshops. I have never done a test but I suspect with black and white printing I would hardly notice the difference.
That's fair enough too, but my question is really about how the APO-Rodagon 50 'old' and 'new' compare, are they really different optically and is this noticeable?
FWIW, a test was done by a gentleman of the old Apo Rodagon vs the Leitz 50mm 4.5 Focotar 2. The APO was sharper, but he prefered the Focotar because it was "more human".
Expect noticeably better contrast and micotonality, sharper too, than ordinary Rodagon. I happen to print 35mm with a 105 Apo N, and even wide open it outperforms any 50 I've ever used. (Don't use it wide open for MF negs).