Rodenstock Trinar 50mm f4 ?

ChrisRaper · Post by **ChrisRaper** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 6:50 am

Has anyone got any experience with the Rodenstock Trinar 50mm f4 lens, for reversing? Just wondering how it stacks up to the usual Rodagon lenses?

Eric F · Post by **Eric F** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:11 am

Chris -- I have no experience with Trinar lenses. However, the fact that they are very simple in construction, with only 3 glass elements, means that they should fall short of the best enlarger lenses (Componon, Rodagon, El-Nikkor, etc.) -- which all have 6 elements.

ChrisRaper · Post by **ChrisRaper** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:57 am

Good point - probably the "budget" line

cocuyo · Post by **cocuyo** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:13 pm

The number of lens elements does not convey a lot about the quality of a lens.

I have tried a Componon I had and also an EL-Nikkor for macro work, and none of them was good for digital, because of reflections between the lens and the low-pass filter that reduce image quality. They are excellent for enlarging and for making circuit boards, as well as general photography and reproduction with a film camera, but they fell short for digital due to their AR coating.

However, not long ago I acquired a Rodenstock Trinar 50 mm f/3,5 enlarging lens that I have tried for some time now with very pleasing results. It is crisp, it has high contrast, and I cannot complain about its resolution. It is in fact one of my best lenses. Its AR coating is superior to those other lenses that I bought back in the seventies. I cannot tell when this one was made, but AR coating is an important feature of any lens that is to be used for digital photo.

The purple deadnettle flower is about the size of the head of a match. It is taken with the Trinar lens mounted on a set of extension rings, which I find is most convenient for this type of work, focussing by moving the camera into position. As the lens has no filter thread, I do not use it breech to subject, but screw it normally into the extensions. The red plastic light pipe for the diaphragm numbers is blocked out with a piece of cable pressed down into the space between lens and mount.

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/u ... reum_1.jpg

ChrisRaper · Post by **ChrisRaper** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:27 pm

That's very interesting and a nice photo - thanks for contributing

Babylonia · Post by **Babylonia** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:47 pm

cocuyo wrote:The number of lens elements does not convey a lot about the quality of a lens.

If I am right the Zeiss Luminar 63mm/4.5 has only three lens pieces, but it is still considered as one of the best lenses performing for macro/micro.
(Still some at e-bay for big prices).

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 66898a40ed

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:07 pm

The 3 element Rodenstock lenses were regarded as relatively soft in the corners ( as are Luminars, - relatively, and near their (large) designed field of view).
It's often easy to reverse mount small 39mm mount enl lenses simply by putting them backwards inside fatter tubes/bellows, screwed into the rear side of a (eg Canon EF to 39mm mount). I have a few which do that.

cocuyo · Post by **cocuyo** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:07 pm

I don't have any softness issues with it, but on the other hand, I don't use it for a 24x36 camera, but mine is µ4/3. Here's another shot of the little dead-nettle in its native location, the lawn at the back of the house where I live.

http://uploads.ifokus.se/uploads/968/96 ... blomma.jpg

I also took a few other shots in the lawn with the lens, and it seems rather sharp with a field of focus that is nearly flat. As always, the subject seldom falls into that category.

http://uploads.ifokus.se/uploads/26e/26 ... ika-02.jpg

Both these images were shot with the Trinar lens.

I also have a tilt adapter that can be used for angled shots of the lawn. In that way focus may be laid along the plane of the lawn. There is an abundance of small white flowers, so small that they aren't easily seen with the naked eye while standing, but when you go down to grass level, they almost make a carpet, more dense than the grass. It is the common chickweed, stellaria media. It's shot with a Tamron SP 24-48 mm zoom at 24 mm, tilted, full resolution image.

http://uploads.ifokus.se/uploads/e14/e1 ... lommor.jpg