Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,593   Posts: 1,546,097   Online: 903
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,281
    Images
    12
    I haven't tried the 50/2.8 but our club darkroom has the 50/4. It has visibly soft corners even at f/8 enlarging to 5x7, which caused me to go out and buy myself a Rodagon to use instead (much much better). I can't tell you if maybe theirs was damaged or whether they're all like that, but the one 50/4 I tried was not good at all.

    I think AUD30-50 is pretty typical for the 50/2.8 and you can get other great enlarging lenses (Rodagon, Componon-S) in the AUD50-80 range.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    South East Middle Tennessee
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    269
    Back in the 70's I used the F/4.0 and was very pleased with the enlargments. I also used it on my Canon FTB with an adapter and a short extension tube as a macro lens and and it performed very well, not as good as the 50/3.5 Micro, but very good needless to say. As others have said, you won't see much difference in print quality up to 8x10 size and as others have also said you can get the 2.8 lens for just a few dollars more, so I would go for the 2.8 model. Which ever version you get be sure to use it at f/8 or f/11 for best sharpness. You might also consider the 63mm f/2.8 el-Nikkor or the Schneider 60mm f/5.6 Componon, both are outstanding lenses, but can get a little expensive.

  3. #23
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,226
    I have never seen a MTF curve for any Nikkor enlarging lens, but I thought Schneider still had the Comparon (4 element) MTF that I could pull up to compare to the Componon-S (6 element) MTF but I'm unable to locate the Comparon MTF data.

  4. #24
    Michel Hardy-Vallée's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Montréal (QC)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,351
    Images
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    I agree with Nicholas except for the fact that a 6-element should always have an advantage over the 4-element variety at wide-open apertures.

    However, I like to add a thought:

    Why would anyone even think about a compromise in enlarger lens performance?

    They are very cheap (compared to taking lenses and cameras), and they are part of the image system, which is only as good as its weakest link. I think, the best strategy is: Get the best enlarging lens you can afford, because it's the cheapest way to get best technical print quality!

    Everything else is like buying a Porsche and then fit it with wooden spoked wheels. Who would do that?
    What Ralph said.

    In the olden days, perhaps it was worth saving 200-300$ dollars and sticking with more modest lenses (insofar as it was within the limits of performance needed), but with the current prices, the only expensive lens that's left is the APO-El-Nikkor!

    One is not throwing money away by going after the best of the bunch at the prices we can have it. Especially an enlarger lens. The features or "defects" of camera lenses can be exploited creatively, but I have yet to see someone do the same at the enlarging stage. Enlarging lenses are strictly practical tools: if your camera is a violin, your enlarger is a wrench.

    By using the best enlarger lens one can find, you're reducing the degradation of the image you worked hard to get on your negative.
    Using film since before it was hip.


    "One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11

    My APUG Portfolio

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388
    okay so we got a 50/50 split, solution is that i will buy both, the f4 this week because there are more around, a 2.8 next week/month, then i will sell the one i dont want, easy as that.
    Thank you all for your helpfull replies, i can now weigh up the pros and cons.
    regards.

    Everything else is like buying a Porsche and then fit it with wooden spoked wheels. Who would do that ,
    you may have something here that Porsche would be interested in, there may be carbon credits involved:

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Tallinn, Estonia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    332
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by pakeha View Post
    okay so we got a 50/50 split, solution is that i will buy both
    Don't forget that there are Rodagons and Componons out there as well. Just to add confusion

    Last night I made handful of 24x30 and 30x40cm prints with Rodagon-WA 40/4 and they are a tad sharper than ones with 2.8 El-Nikkor. Specially made some to compare with earlier prints. But this could be just a sample variation.

  7. #27
    alexmacphee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by polyglot View Post
    I haven't tried the 50/2.8 but our club darkroom has the 50/4. It has visibly soft corners even at f/8 enlarging to 5x7
    Ooooh, you got a bad'un. Or conversely, I got a good'un...
    Alex

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388
    Don't forget that there are Rodagons and Componons out there as well. Just to add confusion

    Yep i knew when i posted that this would happen, so i have a couple on watch list

    Originally Posted by polyglot
    I haven't tried the 50/2.8 but our club darkroom has the 50/4. It has visibly soft corners even at f/8 enlarging to 5x7

    Ooooh, you got a bad'un. Or conversely, I got a good'un...


    Must have a bad one, even the rondo i have does not give this result.

    Also, i just did a double check around the world and a 2.8 ranges from US40.00[US shipping only] to US 266.00:o at the moment

  9. #29
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,817
    I've used several EL-Nikkor f/2.8 lenses over the last 40 years, and found all of them good. I've occasionally used the f/4 model, too. As others have said, the f/4 is fine for most printing. One advantage of the faster lens is in aligning enlargers.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    S Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    158
    I've had a 50 f4 for probably 30 years now. I used it a couple times early on and it has been in it's plastic bubble and original box ever since. No particular reason why it has been stored away. It made very nice prints. I am just more of a german optics guy and I have an array of Rodenstock Roagons and Roganar S lenses plus a couple Schneider Comparons as well. I would say save your money and just stick with the f4 for the 35mm stuff. When and if you go to any larger formats then it is time to start looking much closer at the lens you use on the enlarger. The Nikkor f4 is more than capable at 35mm in my opinion. I agree with the comments by Nicklaus FWIW to you. Enjoy the lens you have and the prints it will create with your guidance and control.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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