Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,771   Posts: 1,484,293   Online: 1146
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: 4.0 or 5.6?

  1. #1
    scinysnaps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    55

    4.0 or 5.6?

    Is there really a HUGE diff between a Rodagon 80mm 4.0 and and 5.6 or the Companon 4.0 and 5.6??
    Is it worth the extra money?

  2. #2
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    No.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  3. #3
    scinysnaps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    55
    Glad to know.
    Cheers

  4. #4
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    All that would be accomplished by the 4.0, well, two things really. First, reduced hyperfocal distance, not a huge selling point for printing. But a slightly brighter view of the negative for focusing when stopped open. 5.6 should be more than adequate.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  5. #5
    Shaggysk8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    465
    Images
    65
    Which I would say if you use XP2 it would be a bonus, or any thick emulsion negs but all my panF negs are easy to see at even F11

  6. #6
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19


    True. I can see my negs well at f/11 (TMY2) but the more light the better.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    625
    I have always wondered why enlarging lenses open up to f4. Its not like anyone in their right mind would try to print at that aperture.

  8. #8
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,750
    If you even want to make very large prints, or very slow materials, the larger apertures can really come in handy.
    f/22 and be there.

  9. #9
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,081
    Images
    20
    Faster lenses often have better corner sharpness, so they can be used at wider apertures for large prints or printing in quantity. You may not want to use an f:4 lens wide open, but it might be sharper at f:8 than an f:5.6 lens. Usually when enlarging lenses come in two maximum apertures, the faster one is a 6-element plasmat, and the slower one is a 4-element tessar type. There are 3-element enlarging lenses that are best avoided in most cases. Some of the tessar-types are pretty good actually. I had a 4-element EL-Nikkor for medium format that was quite good and had excellent contrast, but I eventually traded it for a 90mm Apo-Rodagon when enlarging lenses became absurdly cheap.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Alabama, The buttcrack of America
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    433
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    2
    What about contact printing? Would the extra stop be beneficial then?

    Please note that I've never done contact printing. I'm just assuming that you place the negative on top of the paper and line them up under the lens of a regular enlarger. Maybe that's not how it's done, and i'm just dumb
    "Gotta little problem with personal space, and I've been pounding the Jager. My breath and behavior have been driving the patrons away" -"Whipped Cream" by Ludo


    My photography blog: http://silver-light0.blogspot.com/

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