cyberjunkie
1-May-2011, 11:06
Time ago, the friend that does most of the photographic repairs i need, told me that after careful examination, he could not find a real difference between a Componon and the equivalent Symmar lens.
I think he compared the elements size and their curves, i don't know if he compared the spacing. I don't remember if i asked which lenses he was referring to, but i think he compared Componon-S vs Symmar-S, of the same focal.
That was his personal opinion, of course, but other people seem to concur: i have found the same opinion expressed over and over, on this forum and elsewhere. Some also say that Schneider provided different spacing for the same optics, whether they were originally assembled in shutter or in barrel.
If you do 1+1=2, then it could well be that some Componon lenses are actually a Symmar in disguise, in barrel and with different spacing (optimized for a different reproduction ratio).
I'd love to know your opinion. In particular, i have two questions:
Are some Rodagon lenses closely resembling their Sironar counterparts?
I have an old Rodagon 240mm (black-chrome ring). I admit that i've never tried to unscrew the cells to see if they fit on a standard shutter; very little hope, from what i have read online. Nevertheless, there is a chance that it could be optically identical to an old Sironar, but with a non-standard barrel.
IF Componon-S enlarging lenses are "clones" of Symmar-S taking lenses, what about the other Componons?
There are, going by memory, Apo-Componons, Componons HM, G-Componons, WA Componons.
For example i have a nice 210mm G-Componon. Of course it's in barrel (with a small shim in front of the back cell); i have fitted the cells to a standard No.1 shutter, removing the shim, but the total length is still bigger than the original configuration.
A confirmation that barrel lenses were spaced in a different way?
The G-Componon is a strange lens, no inscriptions at all on the cells, just on the barrel. Unfortunately i didn't try this lens on film, cause i had a better use for the shutter. After i learned that some Componons and some Symmars are close relatives, if not twin brothers, i got very curious about the other models i mentioned, and in particular the G-Componon i own.
Any clue?
have fun
CJ
I think he compared the elements size and their curves, i don't know if he compared the spacing. I don't remember if i asked which lenses he was referring to, but i think he compared Componon-S vs Symmar-S, of the same focal.
That was his personal opinion, of course, but other people seem to concur: i have found the same opinion expressed over and over, on this forum and elsewhere. Some also say that Schneider provided different spacing for the same optics, whether they were originally assembled in shutter or in barrel.
If you do 1+1=2, then it could well be that some Componon lenses are actually a Symmar in disguise, in barrel and with different spacing (optimized for a different reproduction ratio).
I'd love to know your opinion. In particular, i have two questions:
Are some Rodagon lenses closely resembling their Sironar counterparts?
I have an old Rodagon 240mm (black-chrome ring). I admit that i've never tried to unscrew the cells to see if they fit on a standard shutter; very little hope, from what i have read online. Nevertheless, there is a chance that it could be optically identical to an old Sironar, but with a non-standard barrel.
IF Componon-S enlarging lenses are "clones" of Symmar-S taking lenses, what about the other Componons?
There are, going by memory, Apo-Componons, Componons HM, G-Componons, WA Componons.
For example i have a nice 210mm G-Componon. Of course it's in barrel (with a small shim in front of the back cell); i have fitted the cells to a standard No.1 shutter, removing the shim, but the total length is still bigger than the original configuration.
A confirmation that barrel lenses were spaced in a different way?
The G-Componon is a strange lens, no inscriptions at all on the cells, just on the barrel. Unfortunately i didn't try this lens on film, cause i had a better use for the shutter. After i learned that some Componons and some Symmars are close relatives, if not twin brothers, i got very curious about the other models i mentioned, and in particular the G-Componon i own.
Any clue?
have fun
CJ