Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,233   Posts: 1,532,902   Online: 969
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    nze
    nze is offline
    nze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    France
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    705
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    49
    My favorite is the Meogon 5.6 as good as an apo rodagon . I even one I don't use in my lab.if you ever interested.
    Chris Nze
    me Apug Portfolio
    Me web page

  2. #12
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,173
    If you are going to do a lot of enlarging beyond 8x10 then consider a high magnification lens like the Schneider APO-HM. My experience has been that many 50mm lenses have a flat field up to magnification for an 8x10, but the field becomes more curved as the magnification increases. I have a nice Nikkor 50mm 2.8 that can only focus the edges or center of a 16x20, but is fine up to 8x10. Literature on the lens confirms that it is "good for high magnification up to 8x10." I had a Schneider COMPONON-S with nearly idenical performance.

    My APO COMPONON HM is a different beast. The field flatness at a magnification for 16x20 is much better than the Componon-S but still not perfect (this is with a glass carrier). You can check the MTF papers on the two lenses here: http://www.schneideroptics.com/pdfs/...-s_28_50_2.pdf and here: http://www.schneideroptics.com/pdfs/...on_40_45_2.pdf

    The Componon-S is even tested at lower levels of magnification. Schneider does not give practical limits on the web site (just the curves), so I am giving you the practical information. That is, the HM lens is much better and almost required, if you want the corners sharp on a 16x20.

    If you are not going to do a lot beyond 8x10, there are many, many fine lenes. My personal experience with the Nikkor 50/2.8 and Schneider Componon-S is that they are excellent at that magnification (not much difference than the APO-HM) Although the sharpness and contrast of the grain with the APO-HM almost blows you away the first time you see it under the magnifier, once you stop down 2-3 stops and examine the prints side by side, the grain is nearly identical.
    Last edited by ic-racer; 02-15-2008 at 04:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #13
    jeroldharter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,958
    Images
    1
    The usual advice is get a 6 element lens from Nikon, Schneider, or Rodenstock and that "Apo" lenses are probably a little better if you are very particular or do color and that there is still variation lens to lens so send it back if you are not happy. I have a Schneider Apo Componon 50 mm lens which seems very good.
    Jerold Harter MD

  4. #14
    Michel Hardy-Vallée's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Montréal (QC)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,351
    Images
    132
    Go for either an El-Nikkor f2.8N (they sell for 40$ on ebay!), a Componon-S or a good Rodagon. At this point in history, there are no reasons not to use the best lenses because they are so cheap.

    If you are lucky like me, try to find a Minolta C.E. Rokkor-X 50mm f2.8. It's such an outstanding lens, and it's beautiful for color as well.

    Bear in mind that your enlarger alignment matters as much as the quality of your lens. My old beater was never really straight, and I saw all the difference when I got a new, sturdier enlarger.
    Last edited by Michel Hardy-Vallée; 02-15-2008 at 08:33 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    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. #15

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by mhv View Post
    Bear in mind that your enlarger alignment matters as much as the quality of your lens. My old beater was never really straight, and I saw all the difference when I got a new, sturdier enlarger.
    I'll second this comment. I saw more difference moving from a Durst C35 (a bottom-of-the-line enlarger) to a Philips PCS130 (a much more capable enlarger) than I saw going from my worst 4-element lens to my 6-element Nikon f/2.8, both on the Philips enlarger.

  6. #16
    Michel Hardy-Vallée's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Montréal (QC)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,351
    Images
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694 View Post
    I'll second this comment. I saw more difference moving from a Durst C35 (a bottom-of-the-line enlarger) to a Philips PCS130 (a much more capable enlarger) than I saw going from my worst 4-element lens to my 6-element Nikon f/2.8, both on the Philips enlarger.
    Yep, there is a little difference between a 4- and a 6-element lens, but without proper alignment, it's meaningless.
    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

  7. #17
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    My experience has been that many 50mm lenses have a flat field up to magnification for an 8x10, but the field becomes more curved as the magnification increases. I have a nice Nikkor 50mm 2.8 that can only focus the edges or center of a 16x20, but is fine up to 8x10.
    I've had similar experiences with three or four samples of the El-Nikkor 50/2.8, but found that astigmatism was the greater limiting factor at high magnification. One instance was with an Omega D5-XL cranked to full height (enlargement factor of 24X) and printing the corner of a negative. The sagittal and tangential stretching of the grain made it impossible to even focus correctly at that magnification. I found a Focotar 50/4.5 in a drawer that allowed me to finish the job. Most of the printing on that job was 8x10 or smaller, and the Nikkor lens did OK there.

    Lee

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sarajevo
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,801
    Buy Leica Focomat V35 enlarger with Leica Focotar 40mm f2,8 lens, and you will have what some people (especially Leica lovers) consider as maybe the best 35mm enlarger/lens ever And it is autofocus

    I personally use Rodagon 50mm/f4
    Bosnia... You don't have to be crazy to live here, but it helps...
    No things in life should be left unfinis

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    1,028
    Quote Originally Posted by awaken77 View Post
    I have choice of :
    Rogonar 2.8/50 - 100 EUR
    Rogonar-S 2.8/50 - 200 EUR
    Componon-S 2.8/50 - 250 EUR
    and also Rodagon , which is similar in price to Componon-S
    there is 2x difference in price between Rogonar-S and Rogonar - does it means it's twice better?
    I'm going to print BW only , and up to 30x40cm (11x16" )
    but I'd like to have occasional (very rare) possibility to print 50x60cm with floor projection, although never tried that and I think it's a complicated job
    Rogonar and rogonar s are optimised for 4X enlargement and 10X is at the extreme limit for those lenses so forget rogonar lenses for your 11x16 prints.

    Rodagon is optimised for 10X enlargement upto max of 15X so that would be suitable for you.
    I beleive componon S is optimised for similar range as Rodagon but is perhaps a slightly higher spec lense which really only means it will work well over a wider range of enlargements. So either should be fine and at 10X enlargement you wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

    However, like all lenses, it depends how well they were assembled and the rodagon may out perform the componon or vice versa. Serious printers will try several of the same model to find which one is best.

    p.s. you will notice that none of the previous posters seems to know that all enlarging lenses are optimised for a certain range of enlargement with the optimum being approx 2/3 the way up the range. I would rather use a 4 element lense at its optimum enlargement factor over any 6 element lense designed for a much larger enlargement factor. I'd put money on those saying 4 element lenses are poorer quality, not having a clue what enlargement factor it was designed for and were using it for 8x10 or bigger enlargments.
    Last edited by rob champagne; 02-21-2008 at 05:13 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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