Everyone know how to read them? If not I can point out what is going on in those charts.
While I generally agree with this, I've used both 50 and 80mm Rodagons for 135, and have never seen a noticeable difference in sharpness, personally. Doesn't mean it isn't there, but it seems negligible at best.
Originally Posted by Anscojohn
Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.
Bill, pretty much all enlarging lenses up to and including 135mm use a 39mm thread - so you should have plenty of options.
Originally Posted by Uncle Bill
I actually like using a slightly longer than "standard" lens of enlarging - as it gives me more room to wiggle my hands as I dodge and burn.
With an enlarger the size of the 504 column height isn't going to be a problem with any length of lens unless you are into very selective enlargements of parts of a negative
I suspect almost none of us could detect the performance variations between any decent enlarging lens on even the most fabulous 11x14 print, as the performance level seems to start at outstanding and only goes up from there
As well as the Nikkor, the Rodenstock Rodagon and Schneider Componon-S are both excellent. The 80mm f/4 versions of all these lenses are 6 element in 4 groups and are considered better than the 4 element f/5,6 counterparts - but again as 11x14 could you really tell?