Rodenstock Ronar 360mm f9 lens

[P Sanders]

Is anyone using a Rodenstock Ronar 360mm f9 MC lens and can describe the good and bad in its’ use?

Using a Deardorff 5x7 for outdoor photography and have a Rodenstock 180 Sironar N and 240 Sironar S. I’m looking to complete the set with a longish lens without adding another 3 to 4 lbs. 3 Copal shutters are not light but conventional 360mm lenses are twice the weight of the Ronar 360/9 and I’m not getting any younger. My Schneider 120 SA only comes out occasionally, it’s just too damn heavy. I’m shooting strictly black & white and making contact prints. On a really rare occasion I’ll scan it and make a digital print - haven’t taken the step to digital negatives.

Thank you

 

[djdister]

I had a 360mm Apo Ronar in a Copal 3 shutter and it was beautiful for 5x7 shots.

 

[abruzzi]

I have two Apo Ronars--a 490mm for 8x10, and a 150mm for 6x9, They are both great lenses, and nice and small. The only negative (other than the darker max aperture) is they have a small image circle relative to their focal length. The 150mm won't cover 4x5, so I assume a 300mm won't cover 8x10. I have no doubt though that a 360mm will cover 5x7, with plenty of room to spare.

 

[P Sanders]

Thank you both for the quick and helpful response, very much appreciated.

 

[Craig]

The Ronars are process lenses, optimized for 1:1 copying and graphic arts applications. The design goal for these is low distortion for copying. They can make general purpose taking lenses, but that's not their strength.

Coverage is smaller than a typical LF lens, a rough rule of thumb for this series is the coverage is 0.89 times the focal length at infinity. So a 360/9 won't quite cover 8x10 at infinity, but it would be fine for 5x7.

Not cheap, but the Fuji C series have better coverage and are amazingly light for their size.

 

[P Sanders]

Thank you for the information. Many times I’ve noticed that personal experiences may give insight into using a lens (or film and developer for example) that written specifications don’t convey. And the reason I asked for hands on practical experience and opinion.

Your suggestion for a Fujinon C is right on target and currently the C 300/8.5 is on my 4x5, and believe the only other C lenses are the 450/12.5 and the 600/11.5.

For my 5x7 the progression that seemed most comfortable from a normal 420mm was to a 360mm however these lenses become notoriously large and heavy. I have not had a good experience with a G-Claron lens and was inquiring about the Ronar.

 

[djdister]

Thank you for the information. Many times I’ve noticed that personal experiences may give insight into using a lens (or film and developer for example) that written specifications don’t convey. And the reason I asked for hands on practical experience and opinion.

Your suggestion for a Fujinon C is right on target and currently the C 300/8.5 is on my 4x5, and believe the only other C lenses are the 450/12.5 and the 600/11.5.

For my 5x7 the progression that seemed most comfortable from a normal 420mm was to a 360mm however these lenses become notoriously large and heavy. I have not had a good experience with a G-Claron lens and was inquiring about the Ronar.

As I said, I've used the 360mm Apo Ronar on 5x7 and it worked beautifully. But in a Copal 3 shutter, it was quite large if not heavy.

 

[Craig]

I have not had a good experience with a G-Claron lens and was inquiring about the Ronar.

The Ronars are designed to do the same job as the G-Claron, so I would expect them to similar. I've not used either, so can't comment about how they actually perform. I've read a number of people who were happy with the Ronar for landscape work.

Apparently ( take it with a grain of salt) the Ronars in a shutter are optimized for 1:20 reproduction, and those in barrel are optimized for 1:1. The difference is the spacing of the cells of lenses.

Yes, there are only the 3 Fujinon C series. I have the 450 and it's a fine lens. I can use it on 4x5 with an extension lensboard, or on 8x10.

 

[abruzzi]

another nice and small 360mm (or really 355mm, i.e. 14 inch) Is the last generation Schneider Dagor. They're expensive, but frequently I think the eBay proces are pretty speculative. I got mine for a very reasonable price from a US dealer, much lower than the eBay prices, and its been superb. (It still has the bulk of a Compur #3 shutter, but the lens elements are fairly small.)

 

[Dan Fromm]

The Ronars are process lenses, optimized for 1:1 copying and graphic arts applications. The design goal for these is low distortion for copying. They can make general purpose taking lenses, but that's not their strength.

Um, they and dialyte type ApoNikkors (at least as good, possibly better) hold their corrections to infinity. Old Rodenstock propaganda touted them as better at distance than telephoto lenses.

 

[Dan Fromm]

The Ronars are designed to do the same job as the G-Claron, so I would expect them to similar. I've not used either, so can't comment about how they actually perform.

Er, I've had several 150/9 G-Clarons and still have two 150/9 ApoRonars. I shot them all on 2x3. The ARs are clearly better at all distances.

 

[reddesert]

I have not had a good experience with a G-Claron lens and was inquiring about the Ronar.

The Ronars are designed to do the same job as the G-Claron, so I would expect them to similar. I've not used either, so can't comment about how they actually perform. I've read a number of people who were happy with the Ronar for landscape work.

Apo-Ronars are a dialyte type lens (4 elements in 4 groups), while G-Clarons come in two flavors: a Dagor type (6 el in 2 groups) and a plasmat type (6 el in 4 groups). The division between the G-Claron types is somewhere around sn 12 million. Each of them is fairly symmetrical.

The G-Clarons have more coverage for a given focal length than a dialyte does. Dialytes are generally said to be good at infinity even if optimized at 1:1. (Which is not to say that G-Clarons are bad at infinity.) I have never made a direct comparison, so I can't advise on that, just that one can't really generalize between the different types of lenses, and there are even two different kinds of G-Claron to make it harder.

 

[Ian Grant]

I have a 360mm f9 Apo-Ronar CL, it definitely covers 10"x8" at Infinity, but it is a barrel lens. I use it with a Gitzo studio shutter, single speed with flash sync, or a TP roller blind shutter, both are front mounting..

Ian

 

[Nokton48]

Adox Ortho PL25 5x7 Norma MicX 360 Apo Ronar by Nokton48, on Flickr