It's a myth that using the taking lens for enalrging will work. People may have done it if it was the only lens they had but you are not reproducing what happened at the taking stage unless you were doing macro photography.
An enlarger is a macro camera which uses macro lenses. It takes a photograph of the negative and uses paper for its output film.
Will your lens focus on the film? If you use it the same way round as in your camera, then it would, but how far away would the paper need to be, to be in focus. And if you did it that way round you would magnify the barrel distortion as has alread been pointed out. If you reverse the lense would you be able to focus on the film? All depends on the type of lens but it won't work as well as a properly designed enlarging lens.
Consider the discussion of a meniscus lens and whether the stop is fore or aft. One situation is supposed to have barrel distortion and the other pincushion. Hence the recommendation for one configuration as being less objectionable.
Now, if you had a symmetrical enlarger lens like a Componon or Rodagon, would this work? My Rodagon lens will allow me to unscrew one cell (the back?). Not sure about the front. The Componon is either uncooperative or too tight for me to tell.
Would this work, or would you gain more aberrations than would fix your 2% distortion? I don't know. Just an idea.
About a non-flat 'paper plane' (no pun) below your enlarger...some enlargers had accessory tilt tables...so is the projected field of an enlarger more tolerant of 'DOF' like the object side of a taking lens is compared to the image side ('depth of focus'), for the same reason film plane flatness is more critical than DOF?
You are right. I was puzzled for a moment, then realizing that at least I have been looking at the wrong side of the issue, eh lens...
However in case of an enlarger lens (to which Jim was referring) the distortion would be referred to concerning the print side. Thus with an larger lens being reported to have barrel distortion a negative showing barrel distortion could not be compensated...
Last edited by AgX; 04-14-2008 at 08:16 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I'd use a rangefinder lens. They are usually free of pincushion distortion.
that would solve the problem if only rangefinder lenses could focus closer. a lot of the photography i do has a nearby foreground object and its background. but you're right, rangefinder lenses do have an advantage when it comes to distortion.