Which is the better lens, Nikkor 50/2.8 or Beseler Color Pro 50/2.8 ?

Thanks,
Brad

Test and see. I'm guessing both are used. Who knows what has been done to both over the years.

If brand new the Nikon should be better. Better enough to notice? I guess it would depend on the rest of the process. Camera,lenses and enlarger.

I'd expect to pay more for the Nikon. That sort of implies it should be better.

You have to chose and you cant drive before you buy I would buy the Nikon. I forget who made the Bessler, but I have a vage memory that Bessler rebranded lens from several compaines.

I believe the Color Pro lenses are made by Rondenstock and are good, possibly better than the Nikkor. But I only use the Nikkor so I wouldn't know.

I have the 50mm 2.8 EL nikkor and find it sharp and contrasty and was very happy with the results as far as I recall, I haven't used it for several years (I don't have a darkroom at the moment) but they are rated as one of the best.

I've an older 50mm f2.8 el-nikkor. It was sharper than an omega-branded lens that felt cheap in comparison. I'm not familiar with the beseler color pro though..

Chalk up another vote for the EL Nikkor. I have one and it's a great lens. Rodenstock enlarging lenses of similar design are also top notch. So if the Beseler lens is truly a rebranded Rodenstock, it would be a good choice as well. Anyone know how to identify the lens as a Rodenstock?

Hi, the Color Pro was made in Japan and is reputed to be a fine lens*.

Jon

*Darkroom Magazine, The Best Enlarging Lenses in the World, Ctein & Ken Werner, Sept./Oct. 1983; Chugai Computar 50mm f/2.8 is "very similar in appearance to Color Pro."

If it was made in Japan does that make it either a Fuji or a Nikon?

Hi Nick:
Minolta made lenses for their own line of enlargers. So they are another possibility. One of my enlargers is a Minolta but I use Nikkor lenses.
Howard Tanger

If it was made in Japan does that make it either a Fuji or a Nikon?