Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,958   Posts: 1,522,995   Online: 1172
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9

    Help: Need suggestion on enlarging lens

    Hi:

    I own a Zone VI Type I enlarger with a short column (I believe it's 44 inches). I have a 8x10 and 5x7 head for it. Currently, I print with a Rodenstock Rodagon 240mm lens. I cannot make 11x14 prints from the 5x7 or 16x20 prints from the 8x10, which is what I'd like to do. The 240 does cover the 8x10 but the head just can't go high up enough to make the 4x enlargements that I want as a minimum.

    Can someone recommend a lens that will give me the 4x enlargements from 5x7 and 8x10 negatives that I want?

    Thanks.

    -Mike

  2. #2
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    It is a problem with the column and not the lens. The complictated solution to your problem is to raise the column and lower the base. Drop shelves are not hard to make or you could mount the Zone VI on a box to gain the extra height needed for 16x20's. A shorter lens for the 8x10 head might not cover the negative. The equivalent lens for 5x7 is approx 180 mm. I have seen some 150 mm enlarging lens that would cover 5x7 but certainly not 8x10.

  3. #3
    Loose Gravel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    921
    Images
    14
    I use 210mm El Nikkor for 810. It covers. I don't know for sure, but I'd guess a modern 150mm enlarging lens will cover 57. A 135mm El Nikkor covers 45.

    I'm not familiar with this enlarger. Make sure your light source is oversized and even (lumination) as the lens gets wider. Since diffusers are not perfect, this means that you can 'see through them' to some degree. A wider anlge lens might end up seeing past the edge of the light source (behind the diffuser).

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    I personally would not go shorter then a 240 mm lens on 8X10. Some even report light fall off at the print edges with a 240 mm lens when enlargement approaches 20X24 from an 8X10 negative.

    What I would probably do as an alternative would be to wall mount the enlarger base/column...lose the base board. Install the baseboard on the floor or a stand mounted to the floor. In effect gain greater distance of projection.

  5. #5
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Well, you can't say I don't jump right into things.

    I got the enlarger wall mounted this evening. The anchoring at the top of the column really provides a lot of rigidity to the setup. It is really solid. And I basically just built a level 6-inch wide 1-inch thick hardwood (not pine) shelf to sit the enlarger base on. It is anchored in place with L-shaped metal supports with 9 screws all going into studs and 9 more holding the shelf down onto the L-shaped arms. Then I just screwed some heavy loops into the studs and anchored the top of the column to these with heavy wire drawn tight. The enlarger is level and very solid.

    Now, with a 240mm lens, I can easily make 16x20's and even larger. There is defenitely light fall-off at 20x24 but I won't be making anything that big unless I make\but an easel. I have a 4-blade adjustable Saundrers now that I can make up to 16x20 with. I do have a 300mm APO Rodagon, but I'd have to have it mounted onto a Zone VI lens carrier. I may do that and use it even for 16x20's just to be sure I'm not getting any light fall off at all with 16x20.

    I may start hunting around for a vaccum easel that I can do 20x24 or bigger. Anyone have any suggestions? Some of these 8x10 negatives really look good when enlarged that much. A 16x20 from an 8x10 is really nice, too.

    Looks like I'll be buying an 8x10 VC Zone VI head setup for Condit pin registration. I already have the punch so I'm all read to go. I also got some nice Condit registration pins on eBay for 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. So, I can use them for my smaller negatives.

    Based on a post by someone here, I bought Lynn Radeka's book\course on masking. It is really interesting stuff. She goes way beyond unsharp masking. And she has a great formula for hightlight bleaching. You can check her out at:

    http://www.radekaphotography.com/

    -Mike
    Last edited by mikewhi; 11-29-2004 at 02:06 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typo correxion

  6. #6
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    Based on a post by someone here, I bought Lynn Radeka's book\course on masking. It is really interesting stuff. She goes way beyond unsharp masking. And she has a great formula for hightlight bleaching. You can check her out at:

    Mike,
    Lynn is also a guys name. he is known for his unsharp masking and his formulas for highlight bleaching.

    lee\c

  7. #7
    JackRosa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    238
    Images
    8

    249mm lens & fall-off

    Personally, I would not go any smaller than 240mm to enlarge 8x10 negatives. The Rodenstock Rodagon 240mm is a very good lens. There is light fall-off at 20x24 enlargemets but less than 1/2 f/stop - easily correctable with edge burning in.
    Jack Rosa



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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