It'll be OK if you don't mind having the enlarger head at max elevation to do an 8x10 print. NO it's NOT OK. Sorry to be a kill joy, but for cryin' out loud, just get an 80mm from someone.
Originally Posted by modafoto
I quite often use a 135mm lens but 150 is a bit long IMHO.
I use El Nikkors 50 and 75mm, for 35mm and MF!
Seems perfect to me.
I use a 135mm Fujinon EX for 645, 66, 67 and 4x5 on my Omega D2.
If I want to print 11x14's or larger, I need to use a Nikkor 80mm enlarging lens.
I like using a longer lens though, more even illumination I believe..
Also my Nikkor lens might be a dog because the Fujinon lens blows it away..
Just my $0.02...
I inherited a 90/5.6 Fujinon EX with an enlarger purchase and reckon it's as good or better than my 80/4 Schneider. Not much info about them around, it's probably meant to cover 6x9cm but I put it in my 4x5 enlarger and couldn't see any falloff. Never made a print though.
Originally Posted by Phillip P. Dimor
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Nige, The Fujinon EX series are their top-of-the-line enlarging lenses with EBC coating.
I believe 5 elements but I could be wrong. Truly excellent lenses!
I use a 135mm componon-s on a D-II for both 4x5 and 6x7. It allows a 16x20 print on the baseboard from 4x5 and 11x14 prints from 6x7 negs. You'll need to get a 2 1/2 inch cone for the 135mm though.
I know what I want but I just don't know how to go about gettin' it.-Hendrix
Some fime printers opt for enlarger lenses longer than the "normal" lens for each negative size. You see, the lens coverage circle in this case will be far larger than the surface of the negative and you avoid to use the lense's "problematic" peripheral part which is subject to aberrations (astigmatism). Using the center part of the lens will give you better image quality...
If you print a 6x6 neg with an 80mm and a 150mm lens of the same quality, the second one shall give you the best results. You still have to resolve the max magnification problem. If your enlarger head is too high, vibration might cause you problems, so be careful...
In the early days of my photographic experience (30 years ago) conventional advice was to use the same size enlarging lens as the film format's "normal" lens. When I was setting up my darkroom 25 years ago, there was a lot of "new" advice encouraging the use of a lens slightly longer than that for printing. The logic was that you will rely less on the extreme edges of lens coverage and thus will be less likely to suffer the various aberrations that occur as you approach the "outer limits."
Fred Picker, the founder and principle evangelist for Zone VI was a strong proponent of this. In fact, I just dug out one of the old Zone VI catelogs and in it, he list the 80, 100, 135 and 150 as the recommended enlarging lenses for 35, 2 1/4, 2 1/3 x 3 1/4 and 4x5 respectively.
I can't testify to the soundness of this advice and have discovered that Fred tended to get a "wee bit" dogmatic on issues that I now understand are clearly personal preference (like the "perfect proof" concept.) : )
Be that as it may, I print my 6x7 (2 1/4 x 3 1/4) with a 100mm and my 4x5 with a 150mm and feel comfortable that I am not being held back my my equipment. I recall trying to print the 6x7 with the 150 and found that I was at the upper reaches of the enlarger and that exposure times were exceeding my personal preferance.
Once I have satisfied myself that all of my equipment is optimum - I can embrace the philosophy: "We have met the enemy and he is me!"