Rodenstock versus Nikkor

Hi,
I am in the process of buying a used 75mm large format lens. Which one of those lens would you select. There's a big difference in the prices but is it really worth it to buy the Rodenstock instead of the Nikkor.

75 F4.5 GRANDAGON-N MC the condition is EX+ 919$ US
Dead Link Removed

75 F4.5 NIKKOR SW the condition is EX+ 645$ US
Dead Link Removed

By looking at the specs at
http://www.thsimagery.com/lflenschart.htm the Nikkor has a bigger image circle at f/22.

So which one would you select?
Jacques

While the Rodenstock is a superb lens that price difference is quite substantial and in real terms you are unlikely to see any difference in quality between the two. Some prefer to keep all their lenses to one brand particularly for colour work so that may be a criteria.

Ian

I don't do color very often and I agree with you that there is a big difference in the price.

The 75mm f5.6 or f8 Super Angulon's are both superb lenses the f5.6 has similar coverage to the Grandagon, the f8 a touch less but they are more common so tend to be cheaper. I use the f8 SA on my 6x17 camera and occasionally 5x4 and despite its aperture it's great to use and easy to focus.

Also look at the 75mm f6.8 Grandagon sometimes sold as a Caltar-II N it's another excellent lens.

Ian

personally, I've *always* found the Japanese glass to be a tad 'colder' in terms of color rendition.

the german(rodenstock and schneider, again, IMO, are a bit more 'neutral')

I've used both, and own both. My 90mm is Fuji-SW f/8. Tremendous lens for the price these days. I used a 90mm Grandagon, and that was even better(but not enough to justify 2x the price IMO).

I'd assume the same from lenses in the 75/72mm range.

-Dan

Having a selection of both Nikkor SW and Grandagon lenses, I can't see any difference between Rodenstock and Nikkor. The prices for both seem a bit high. The 65mm's sell for less. The Caltar II lenses are rebadged Grandagons that often sell for several hundred dollars less.

Thank you for all your comments I really appreciate. Ian, my 90mm is a f8 Super Angulon's MC Sinar and I really like it. When there is not a lot of light it is a little hard to focus but I managed to do it. I will also look in the Caltar II lenses.
Jacques

THe Nikkor SW 75 was my second lens after the 135mm which I used 3 years solo!
And it is a fair price for it, in my opinion if its really in very good condition.

Armin

Keep in mind that KEH's condition grades are grossly understated. I bought a 300/5.6 Xenar a few weeks ago in BGN condition that looked almost new when it arrived, likewise I remember purchasing a 1930s Leitz 90mm Elmar from KEH in BGN condition that again looked superb (especially for a very old lens) so don't be afraid to buy BGN from KEH if you can and save a good bit of cash.

I always assume that image quality of any high-quality large format lens will be good enough for my purposes, and make my choice based on image circle and price. Thus, I'd go for the Nikkor, personally.

The smaller the format, the more attention I pay to differences in "image quality" between lenses. For large format, the size of the image circle is a more important consideration when it comes to practically useful characteristics of a lens, IMHO.

Thank you all.

Just wanted to add my 2 cents worth - in a career as an architectural photographer (and in the larger context of photography in general) - I've shots thousands of negatives and positives on wide angles and other lenses. I used to be a staunch defender of rodenstocks when everyone poo-poohed them in favor of schneiders (in the 80s) back when I was searching for the ultimate in image quality. But then and maybe even more so now - I am partial to the Nikkors. I think Nikon always played second fiddle to the germans in terms of popularity - and as a resulty- they tried harder, had better quality control and spent more money on their glass even though they were less expensive than the german lenses. But that being said - Photography is a NOTORIOUSLY fashion conscious game full of insecurity full of incredibly fickle end users. It really matters very little - the choices you make behind the ground glass are almost infinitely more impactful than the choice of what lens you use, within a range of decent alternatives... ergonomics plays a big role too. If you can get something in f/4.5 you'll be able to see what you're shooting a lot better and get better images! Truly. A reflex hood, though unpopular with the hard core types is just common sense and will put you way ahead of the game for the very same reason.