Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,971   Posts: 1,558,563   Online: 1147
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 39
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388

    el nikkor 50mm - 2.8 or 4?

    replacement enlarger arrive today - meopta 6 replacing an old rondo. Within a week i have managed to source the enlarger, glass for neg carriers and a el nikkor 75mm, now i need to get a replacement 50mm lens.
    Bearing in mind that i am someone who does prints for family and friends and my own pleasure - will i really notice any difference with the el nikkor 50mm 2.8 over 4? [referred to as the `cost/benefit ratio']

    Background info, i use ilford C41 BW exclusively at present through minolta auotocord/ Kiev 4/ minolta sr /1.4 lens.
    The prints are done as give aways - no money involved - and the prints out of the rondonar 50mm i have been ok , cheers

  2. #2
    alexmacphee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    310
    I've had the EL Nikkor 50mm f/4 for about thirty years. I've occasionally thought it would be nice to have that extra stop, but I've never got round to getting it, so I reckon the f/4 is good enough or I'd have overcome the inertia by now. Optically, it's a cracking good enlarging lens.
    Alex

  3. #3
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,297
    I think of this like a large format lens. The wider aperture may help you focus and compose.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Tallinn, Estonia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    332
    Images
    2
    Meopta 6 as Opemus 6? If the lensboard of Opemus 6 is similar to the one of Opemus 5, 2.8 El-Nikkor will not fit into included reversible lensboard. Diameter of plastic-style, not N, 2.8 is 49,5mm, just below mounting thread. Check if it fits, just to be sure.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388
    yes opemus 6, do you use opemus 6?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388
    I've had the EL Nikkor 50mm f/4 for about thirty years. I've occasionally thought it would be nice to have that extra stop, but I've never got round to getting it, so I reckon the f/4 is good enough or I'd have overcome the inertia by now. Optically, it's a cracking good enlarging lens.

    30 years, thats a good enough recommendation for me, cheers

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    I have both the f/4 and the f/2.8 EL-Nikkors, and the f/2.8 lens is clearly better when making prints of 8x10 or larger from 35 mm negatives. With smaller prints, you can't see any difference.
    Frank Schifano

  8. #8
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,330
    Images
    8
    The extra stop is not the only difference. The f2.8 is a 6 element lens, whereas the f4 is a 4 element. In theory, the 6 element lens is a better lens, and fschifano's experience points to this. Considering that I've seen the 50mm f2.8 go for as little as 10-15 dollars recently, why not?

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oceania
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    388
    thanx, David, yeah i was aware of the element difference, yes if i got a 2.8 for that kinda money - off course, latest seen is aud 55.00 plus post at aud 15.00, i`m in no hurry but you know how it is, ya see something that fits the deal and think ya better get it before the next guy

    Werra, i think i`ve got a custom lens board with this one as well as original, thanks for info

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Near Tavistock, Devon, on the edge of Dartmoor.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,038
    Quote Originally Posted by fschifano View Post
    I have both the f/4 and the f/2.8 EL-Nikkors, and the f/2.8 lens is clearly better when making prints of 8x10 or larger from 35 mm negatives. With smaller prints, you can't see any difference.
    I also have both. I can't perceive any difference up to 10 x 8 and the difference in brightness for focussing is minimal for a correctly exposed negative. My 2.8, however, does have a very slight internal haze, visible when looking at a point light source but with no discernable effect on the finished print - perhaps a penalty of its more complex construction and number of lens element surfaces?
    Steve

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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