Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,507   Posts: 1,543,530   Online: 1035
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    artonpaper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    325
    Images
    135
    I have found Kodak lenses to be of lower contrast than Schneider Componons when doing side by side comparisons. Schneider Componons are good lenses. I like them better than Rodenstock.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    528
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by artonpaper View Post
    I have found Kodak lenses to be of lower contrast than Schneider Componons when doing side by side comparisons. Schneider Componons are good lenses. I like them better than Rodenstock.
    I would assume that is a coating situation. As some have said, these could be from 1940's to 1960's. They seem to have some sort of coating, but the only way I know of checking for a coating is to hold it in front of a light. There are 2 reflections showing in the glass of the B&L, 1 of a toned down white as the bulb, 1 very light pink/yellow. The later may just be the one given from the rear glass that is making it look pink/yellow. I don't know too much about the coatings themselves, just that they seem to boost contrast.

  3. #13
    Neanderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio River Valley
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    575
    1. Bausch & Lomb Opt co. Tessar IC 139mm E.F. f 4.5 - Probably not coated.

    2. Kodak ProjectionAnastigmat 105mm f 4.5 -- Probably not coated. It will have a 'circle L' (for 'Lumenized') engraved on the front retaining ring if it is.

    3. Kodak Projection Anastigmat 161mm f 4.5 -- As with #2

    4. Wollensak Raptar Enlarging 90mm f 4.5 -- Very likely coated. Wollensak used a 'circle W' (for 'Wocoated') to indicate coating.

    5. Schneider-Kreuznach Componon 50mm f 4 (chrome) -- Very likely coated. Some Schneider's have a triangle, either white or, more often, red to indicate coating.

    6. Wollensak Raptar Enlarging 75mm f 4.5 -- As with #4

    All coatings, if present, will be single coatings, and they might not be on all surfaces. The exception might be the Schneider -- the triangle is for single coating; their multi-coated lenses were marked with MC, at least until it became just accepted that every lens would be multi-coated (not until the late 70's or early 80's).

    Ed
    "I only wanted Uncle Vern standing by his new car (a Hudson) on a clear day. I got him and the car. I also got a bit of Aunt Mary's laundry, and Beau Jack, the dog, peeing on a fence, and a row of potted tuberous begonias on the porch and 78 trees and a million pebbles in the driveway and more. It's a generous medium, photography." -- Lee Friedlander

  4. #14
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,216
    Unless there is a particular focal length you don't have, I'd sell those lenses.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    528
    Images
    15
    @Ed - That is super cool. I just love learning stuff here. This piece of info got me out of my seat.

    So,

    1. B&L - no marks
    2. Kodak 105mm - no marks
    3. Koday 161mm - has the circled "L"
    4. Wollensak 90mm - has the "W" w/ circle, but that circle seems to actually be a big "C"
    5. Schneider 50mm - No triangle, but on the front element outer ring it is marked CPN50 and the Barrel says "OMEGA" in red letters
    6. Wollensak 75mm - same as #4

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    528
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Unless there is a particular focal length you don't have, I'd sell those lenses.
    What I plan on using when it is more accessible is;

    1st D-5, Ilford multigrade 500H head, turret -a; schneider 50mm f2.8 Componon-S, b; Rodagon 80mm f4, c; Rodagon 105mm f5.6

    2nd D-5, Zone VI head, Turret - a;empty, b;empty, c; Rodagon 150mm f5.6

    3rd D-5, Super Chromega D ichroic II, El-Nikkor 135mm f5.6

    though I really have no intension of printing color, I was told just in case, keep 1 color head and find the calculations to use the filters as multi contrast.

    Like I said earlier, I over killed while building and I may find I just don't need all 3 enlargers set up. I'm sure of it.

    The lenses listed in OP are all a stop brighter for a lack of better explanation. I think that would only come into play while focusing and I'm not sure the trade off is worth it.
    Last edited by JMC1969; 07-20-2011 at 05:02 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: last comment

  7. #17
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,375
    Images
    60
    I'd definitely keep the 90mm Wollensak lens - that focal length can be hard to find from other manufacturers.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  8. #18
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,216
    Quote Originally Posted by JMC1969 View Post
    keep 1 color head and find the calculations to use the filters as multi contrast.
    Here is your chart: Page 3 (use 'Kodak' numbers) http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/...0201152306.pdf

  9. #19
    Neanderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio River Valley
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    575
    Yes, you're right, Wollensak did use a large "C" with a "W" inside it. Typing from memory.

    As someone else pointed out, the 90mm focal length is rare these days, so it could be useful. But it really all depends on how large (or small) you want to print. I have two enlarging lenses -- and 80mm Rodagon and a 150 mm Nikkor. The 80 is for 35mm & 6x6; the 150 for 6x9 and 4x5. More critical with condenser enlargers is that the enlarging lens match the condensers in use.

    I think what you have planned is fine and you have some good, newer lenses, so by all means sell any of the older ones that you don't think you'll use.

    The Schneider sounds like a 'rebrand' that came with an Omega enlarger. I'd wager that it is at least single coated throughout. Schneider started multi-coating in the 1972 timeframe, so if you think it's newer than that, it may be MC.

    For me, the thing that I love about the vintage lenses is that they are all metal. And mostly shiny! I do have a 50mm Enlarging Ektar that came with my first enlarger. I never use it anymore, but I'd never sell it, either. It's not of the same quality as a modern, multi-coated 6 element lens, but, for it's day, it was a damn fine lens. And Kodak's quality control under Rudolf Kingslake was second to none.

    Ed
    "I only wanted Uncle Vern standing by his new car (a Hudson) on a clear day. I got him and the car. I also got a bit of Aunt Mary's laundry, and Beau Jack, the dog, peeing on a fence, and a row of potted tuberous begonias on the porch and 78 trees and a million pebbles in the driveway and more. It's a generous medium, photography." -- Lee Friedlander

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    528
    Images
    15
    @ Matt, thanks for that, I didn't think of that. I have an 80mm set up, but I do have an empty slot on a turret.

    @ ic-racer, Awesome! you guys make it so easy on me. My appreciation.

    I put the B&L on the Meridian a couple of nights ago and took a quick type 55 that is old as dirt and looked like crap on the print side, but the negs came out pretty nice I think. Once I get rid of these D-2's and can make a print I will know more. Fun anyway you look at it. I'm sure I will end up taking some more. Not exactly what I was expecting from the lens, but that really isn't a surprise.

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