Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,523   Posts: 1,572,255   Online: 731
      
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 73
  1. #51
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,351
    Quote Originally Posted by darkroom_rookie View Post
    Yes, a Rodagon, 120 WA.
    I suspect that will be a fine lens. One thing to watch is that as an enlarging lens gets closer to the negative (like a shorter focal length, or as you make a bigger enlargement and bring the lens closer to the negative as you focus) the angle of the rays at the edges of the frame make the light mixing box opening seem smaller in relation to the negative. I know that my 4x5 mixing box just barely covers a full 4x5 negative with a 150mm lens.

    Based on that I would predict on MY SYSTEM to use a wide angle 120mm lens for 4x5 I'd need to use the 5x7 mixing box if I wanted to make big enlargements full frame and show the rebate.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    268
    The diffused-light working surface of the mixing box in my enlarger measures exactly 6 x 5 1/4" inches. The box was recently completely re-lined by myself with new high-quality polystyrene sheets.
    Last edited by darkroom_rookie; 08-25-2012 at 11:35 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #53
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,064
    Images
    38
    My anecdotal experience 6 pages into this thread:

    I used to have all my lenses in the silver barrel componon... 50 80 105
    One started to grow fungus and I ran into a chance to replace all of them with the single coated Nikkors
    I was surprised to see that the Nikkors were quite a bit contrastier and the grain was sharper in the grain focuser.

    I also used to use a Rodenstock 135 for 4x5 and was annoyed for years that I had to burn the corners down for 16x20s.
    I replaced it with a 150 Componon-S and now there is no need to burn corners at all.
    It seems to me that the tonality is smoother and less contrasty with the 150 Componon-S than the shorter Nikkors.
    I replaced 2 of my Nikkors with the multi coated newer variety and can't personally see a difference from the single coated ones.. I print black and white


    Dennis

  4. #54
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,351
    Quote Originally Posted by darkroom_rookie View Post
    The diffused-light working surface of the mixing box in my enlarger measures exactly 6 x 5 1/4" inches. The box was recently completely re-lined by myself with new high-quality polystyrene sheets.
    Very nice! My Omega 4x5 box measures only 5 1/8" square.

  5. #55
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,351
    Quote Originally Posted by dpurdy View Post
    I also used to use a Rodenstock 135 for 4x5 and was annoyed for years that I had to burn the corners down for 16x20s.
    I replaced it with a 150 Componon-S and now there is no need to burn corners at all.
    Interesting. That Rodenstock was probably not a Rodagon, correct?

    Within the Schneider line there is only 2.5% difference in falloff between the 135mm and 150mm Componon-S. That is one-sixteenth of a stop.

  6. #56
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,529
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Interesting. That Rodenstock was probably not a Rodagon, correct?

    Within the Schneider line there is only 2.5% difference in falloff between the 135mm and 150mm Componon-S. That is one-sixteenth of a stop.
    I thought the reason for using 150mm vs 135mm is that you don't go as near the edges of the coverage area. So even though two lenses may have the same falloff... You aren't getting into where falloff occurs.

    p.s. I use a 135 Schneider Xenar 4.5 and while it may not be an APO, it serves my needs well enough that I am not looking for a replacement.

  7. #57
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,351
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    I thought the reason for using 150mm vs 135mm is that you don't go as near the edges of the coverage area. So even though two lenses may have the same falloff... You aren't getting into where falloff occurs.

    p.s. I use a 135 Schneider Xenar 4.5 and while it may not be an APO, it serves my needs well enough that I am not looking for a replacement.
    Bill, you know that the coverage of a lens is designed into the lens and is not an intrinsic function of focal length. If you compare the MTF and light falloff curves of the two mentioned Schneider lenses you see they have similar image circles at the same magnification.

    Also, as you know, one is only using the far edges of the image circle when making enlargements at the lenses maximum recommended magnification. Otherwise, the lens should be functioning well within the image circle (that is one reason why 3 and 4 element lenses work well at small magnification but fail at large magnification).

  8. #58
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,529
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Bill, you know that ...
    You give me too much credit. I don't know optics that well...

    I just figured the coverage of different focal length enlarging lenses followed a progression (50 covers 35mm, 80 covers 6x6, 105 covers 6x9, etc)... And 135 nominally covers 4x5 while 150 covers some larger neg (5x7 maybe?).

  9. #59
    Leigh B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    1
    The 135mm and 150mm lenses are awfully similar.

    In fact, there is no 135mm in the Schneider Apo-Componon HM series, only 150mm.

    That may be true of other product lines.

    - Leigh
    Last edited by Leigh B; 08-25-2012 at 06:43 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” - Plato

  10. #60
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,704
    Images
    1
    the 150mm el nikkor is an excellent enlarging lens for 4x5. i have always enjoyed mine!
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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