Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,767   Posts: 1,516,489   Online: 891
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    Quote Originally Posted by Thilo Schmid
    ...which means that it does not fulfill the
    manufacturer's quality criteria for that format -
    at least at the declared maximum mag-ratio.
    Of enlarging lenses in general, do you know of their quality
    of performance at less than the maximum mag-ratio? Also,
    is that maximum mag-ratio the lens' designed optimal
    magnification? Dan

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    France
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by dancqu
    ...is that maximum mag-ratio the lens' designed optimal
    magnification?
    Usually not. The maximum mag-ratio is a figure where the lens still reaches a certain quality criteria, but its optimum performance is usually somewhere between the min and max ratios stated in the tech specs. This is especially the case when a lens is supposed to work in a larger range (e.g. 1:2 to 1:15). There are some special lenses around that were designed to work with a single or a limited range of mag-ratios (e.g. special lenses for slide duplication). These lenses are excellent within the whole range.

  3. #33
    craigclu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NW Wisconsin, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    765
    Up to 8X10 (from 6X7), I can't tell the difference between my Rodagon 80, Schneider APO 90 and Comp S 105. I've tried a number of times, I've also had others inspect and it keeps returning the same verdict. Something happens at 11X14 and up, though. Then the APO starts to show some advantage but it is really quite small in difference. I'm glad I have it and I find I use it for about 75% of everything I do, even 35mm as I tend to not print beyond 5X7 regularly with 35mm. Used examples of all of these are floating around at such affordable prices, I'd lean toward buying the best glass you can find and get that bottleneck out of your quality trail....

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    I did'nt quite ask the question I ment to ask. As the lens magnification
    lessens, coverage increases at the negative. I was just wondering if that
    additional coverage is of any value. For example will a 50mm lens
    do well with 2 1/4 square at 1:1 or perhaps 1:2? Dan

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    France
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by dancqu
    I was just wondering if that additional coverage is of any value. For example will a 50mm lens do well with 2 1/4 square at 1:1 or perhaps 1:2? Dan
    Although I have not yet tried this, I wouldn't expect much from it. 50mm lenses usually start working at 1:5. However, you won't see anything critical below a 5x7 print size anyhow.

  6. #36
    Maine-iac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Island Heights, NJ, but will retire back to Maine.
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by Thilo Schmid
    Are we talking about Componons or Componon-S? AFAIK, there was only one Componon 5.6/80 and that dates back to the 60's. The later model Componon from the 80's have only been 28/35/60. Coverage depends, of course, on the mag-ratio. Even the current Componon-S 4/80 is not supposed to cover 6x7, which means that it does not fulfill the manufacturer's quality criteria for that format - at least at the declared maximum mag-ratio. Otherwise he would have written in the specs that it does cover 6x7.

    My old 5.6 Componon was a 1960's vintage--small diameter screw mount.

    The new one, purchased about 8 years ago is an f4 Componon-S and is, indeed, an 80mm. I bought it to replace the older one when I was printing a lot of Ilfochromes and needed the extra stop to shorten the exposure times. Whether or not the manufacturer's specs call for it to cover 6X7, it does quite nicely. Maybe it's due to the bellows length and 4X5 mixing chamber on my dichro head, but whatever, it works.

    Larry

  7. #37

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    My 80mm Componon-S must be one of the later ones. It covers a 6x7 negative in my Omega D-4 if you stop it down about 3 stops and delivers pretty good results on an 8x10 enlargement. Your problem with focusing is surely due to a lack of bellows extension. If you can get a lens cone to match your lens that problem will go away. You need to increase the distance between the lens and the negative.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin