Two 150mm lenses...which to keep?

[Phil Woodney]

Through no (or not much) fault of my own, I've wound up with two 150mm lenses, a Sironar N MC and a Symmar S. All things being equal (both with perfect glass, no marks on barrel and accurate shutters), which would you keep? I can't make out any apparent differences on film, so I'd like to have opinions from others with either better eyes or more experience with these lenses.
Thanks very much for your input!
Phil

 

[naturephoto1]

Through no (or not much) fault of my own, I've wound up with two 150mm lenses, a Sironar N MC and a Symmar S. All things being equal (both with perfect glass, no marks on barrel and accurate shutters), which would you keep? I can't make out any apparent differences on film, so I'd like to have opinions from others with either better eyes or more experience with these lenses.
Thanks very much for your input!
Phil

Phil,

Unfortunately I can not give you a definitive answer. I had a Rodenstock f5.6 150mm Sironar N MC and I have a Schneider f5.6 210mm Symmar S. The Sironar N which was stolen with my Linhof Technika IV and later replaced with a Rodenstock f5.6 150mm Apo Sironar S, performed very well with excellent color and sharpness. My 210 Symmar S also performs very well but I do not use it that much because it is a bit heavy and large for much of my field shooting. I would presume that the performance of your 150mm Symmar would have performance similar to my 210.

Sorry I can not be of any more help.

Rich

 

[Phil Woodney]

Hi Rich,
Thanks for your input! I understand there is probably no definitive answer, but opinions count! In the end I suspect it'll come down to a coin toss. In my younger days I could plainly hear the differerences in speakers, but now good hi-fi equipment all sounds about the same to me. The photos from these lenses appear to my eye to be identical. Maybe instead of worrying about which lens to keep, I oughta be looking for a youth-restorer!

Phil

 

[rbarker]

You might try shooting the same near to mid-range subject with both, and see which you prefer. Both are good lenses, so differences in "infinity-distance" images would be difficult to see.

Or, you could sell them both and get a (not-so-dainty) 150 Super Symmar XL.

 

[Phil Woodney]

Or, you could sell them both and get a (not-so-dainty) 150 Super Symmar XL.

Aw Ralph...that's just what I need. Explain to my wife why I need to sell two 150mm lenses so I can buy one 150mm lens. You know, it's that kind of logic that made me what I am today...a twice-divorced man who has given away three houses.

But your other idea was a good one! I didn't shoot anything close to middle distance. I shoulda thought of that.

Thanks!

Phil

 

[Changeling1]

Through no (or not much) fault of my own, I've wound up with two 150mm lenses, a Sironar N MC and a Symmar S. All things being equal (both with perfect glass, no marks on barrel and accurate shutters), which would you keep? I can't make out any apparent differences on film, so I'd like to have opinions from others with either better eyes or more experience with these lenses.
Thanks very much for your input!
Phil

Isn't that Symmar S a convertible? Check for a second row F-stop markings (sometimes hard to see). If you remove the front element, you'll have a perfectly good 265 mm lens, (even without the second f-stop markings).
I know there's a number of people taking advantage of that particular lens' versatility.

 

[naturephoto1]

Isn't that Symmar S a convertible? Check for a second row F-stop markings (sometimes hard to see). If you remove the front element, you'll have a perfectly good 265 mm lens, (even without the second f-stop markings).
I know there's a number of people taking advantage of that particular lens' versatility.

I do not believe that the Symmar S is a convertible lens. I believe that the Symmar S lenses replaced the convertible lenses.

Rich

 

[PhotoJim]

You may want to try both lenses at full aperture and see if one performs better than the other. If everything else is equal, you might as well have the lens that will let you use it wide open if you absolutely have to use it that way some day.

 

[Ole]

If you have nothing to separate the two lenses, sell the most expensive one and buy a cheap one in a different focal length.

That's what I'd do, and that could possibly also be why I have 8 150mm lenses. All cheap, all good - except for two which are both expensive and great. I won't sell the great ones, and won't get much for the cheap ones.

 

[Oren Grad]

You might try shooting the same near to mid-range subject with both, and see which you prefer. Both are good lenses, so differences in "infinity-distance" images would be difficult to see.

In particular, shoot the same near to mid-range subject in a composition that includes a distant background, using the same wide to middling apertures with both. The bokeh will be different; you can pick the one you like better.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Aside from doing head-to-head tests at wide apertures, try some tests under different lighting conditions on color slide film alongside your other lenses. If you have a rollfilm back, that's fine for the purpose of such a test. See which one you like better for color rendition, and which one fits best in the context of your other lenses.

Both of these lenses are potentially convertible, but I wouldn't let that affect the decision. You would probably end up stopping either of them down at least two stops to use them that way, and they might not be so different for that purpose.

 

[raucousimages]

I'm confused. We can sell lenses? Don't tell my wife.

 

[BradS]

I'm confused. We can sell lenses? Don't tell my wife.

Yeah, that was my reaction too...

What ? Sell glass? Does somebody have a gun to your head or something? I'd keep 'em both but, then, my accountant, well, she'd just have that much more evidenece to support her hypothesis - that I'm a sick collector. Oh, well.

Seriously though, I think you need to evaluate the value you gain by keeping each lens against the money you might gain by selling it. I think, that I'd be tempted to sell the Rodenstock Sironar-N just because it sounds like it might be newer and hence, fetch more money. I also have a sweet spot in my heart for the Symmar line of lenses.

I think you'd probably be lucky to get $200 for an excellent condition 150mm Symmar-S. More likely, $150 -$175 depending on you marketing savy and timing. Good luck.

 

[acroell]

You mentioned that the Sironar N is MC, but didn't specify the Symmar-S. The Symmar-S was made both single coated and multicoated. If it is multicoated, it will be labeled that way, so which one do you have? That could be a factor in your decision.

 

[naturephoto1]

As far as I know the Symmar S lenses are and are all marked as Multicoated.

Rich

 

[MattCarey]

Yeah, that was my reaction too...

What ? Sell glass? Does somebody have a gun to your head or something? I'd keep 'em both but, then, my accountant, well, she'd just have that much more evidenece to support her hypothesis - that I'm a sick collector. Oh, well.

Seriously though, I think you need to evaluate the value you gain by keeping each lens against the money you might gain by selling it. I think, that I'd be tempted to sell the Rodenstock Sironar-N just because it sounds like it might be newer and hence, fetch more money. I also have a sweet spot in my heart for the Symmar line of lenses.

I think you'd probably be lucky to get $200 for an excellent condition 150mm Symmar-S. More likely, $150 -$175 depending on you marketing savy and timing. Good luck.

Selling items is a very advanced topic. However, I think we should all send a package to Brad's house with something on the label stating "eBay photographic purchase". If he gets 10 or 20 of these in a week, his wife may stop her co-dependency.

By the way, KEH has the 150mm symmar-s in bargain condition for $265.

Matt

 

[roteague]

A lot of good suggestions. I doubt there is too much difference between the lenses. Personally, I use all Schneider lenses, but that is more from a personal preference point of view. Unlike Rich, I have a 210 APO Symmar that I absolutely love!!

 

[vet173]

Between the two, the sironar will be just a tad warmer. If your doing product photography where color must be neutral use the schneider. I do lanscapes and prefer the sironar, but Roberts images, I must say are a site to behold.

 

[Donald Qualls]

From back up the thread a bit -- a Symmar S *is* convertible, even if not marked to do so or marketed as such; removing the front group from the 150 mm f/5.6 gives a 265 mm f/12. Even if there's only one scale, you can convert with a factor of 2 1/3 stops. The rear group may be a little softer than a lens originally made to be convertible, or it may not -- but in any case, the Symmar S is really two lenses of different focal lengths, and if your camera will accommodated, say, 275 mm film to board, you'll be able to focus reasonably well with the rear group.

On that basis alone, if you can't see the difference on film and really need to get rid of one lens, I'd keep the Symmar S; it's a lot cheaper and lighter than carrying a separate lens in the 240-265 range...

 

[naturephoto1]

Donald,

As I recall, the Symmar S lenses, which were a replacement and improvement for the older convertible Symmars, were not intended to be used in convertible form. However, I believe that the Symmar, Symmar S, and the Sironar N lenses are all f5.6 6 element in 4 group Plasmat designs. If you are correct about the ability for the Symmar S to be used as a convertible lens, then why would the Sironar N also not function in the same manner?

Rich

 

[Campbell]

The Symmar S isn't a convertible in the sense that it doesn't have a separate aperture scale for a "converted" focal length. However, it can be used as a convertible by removing one side (the front in this case I believe), if you can figure out an aperture scale and if you're willing to settle for somewhat inferior quality from the converted length. Personally I wouldn't keep the Symmar S solely because it can, kind of, be used as a convertible.

The image quality from these two lenses is unlikely to differ significantly. I'd base the decision on things like size and weight of lens, image circle, maximum aperture if one is different from the other, filter size if they differ, things like that. You might also check the completed sales section of ebay and see if it looks like one would sell for more than the other. A 150mm Symmar S would probably go for something in the $200-$300 range. I don't know about the Rodenstock.

 

[BradS]

By the way, KEH has the 150mm symmar-s in bargain condition for $265.

Matt

Hmmm, yeah.....I see your point but, I'm too cheap to pay that much (plus shipping) for a nominally 20~25 year old 150mm plasmat. We cheapskate need to stand to our priciples!

 

[BradS]

OK. Phil, I'll stop clowning around and offer some sincere advice. If you're really convinced that you must sell one of them, pick one and sell the other. Then never look back. No regrets!

It really is that simple.


personally, I'd keep the Schneider but, that's just me. Somewhat contray to popular opinion, I'd be especially partial toward the Symmar-S if it was infact single coated but again, that's just me.

Good luck. Sounds like you really can't loose no matter what you decide.

 

[Phil Woodney]

Wow! I asked a question then had to go off to work, went to bed, then woke up to find a ton of information! Thanks very much to everyone who contributed! I guess what I'll do is just flip a coin and sell or trade one of them. I am returning to large format in an odd way: I have a rollfilm back, a Polaroid back and now two similar lenses. Think I'll get a camera to put in the middle. I was comparing prints shot on a friend's camera with my lenses. But I do want a 90mm and a 240, so I figured I'd keep one of the 150's and if one was noticeably better, keep that one and sell the other. Really makes no difference now which I keep because either one is fine to me.
Again, Thanks to each and every one of you for taking the time to offer your insights!

best regards,
Phil

 

[acroell]

As far as I know the Symmar S lenses are and are all marked as Multicoated.

Rich

Schneider replaced the Symmar with the Symmar-S in 1972. They started with multicoating in 1978/79.