Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,558   Posts: 1,545,238   Online: 881
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Carnie
    I prefer to use my 50 's two stops down from wide open.
    The optimum on this lens is about f/6.

  2. #12
    Bob Carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto-Ontario
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    4,661
    Images
    14
    If the bidding keeps the lens under $150Euro and the optimum apeture is f6 I would say go for it sounds like a good deal

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Carnie
    If the bidding keeps the lens under $150Euro and the optimum apeture is f6 I would say go for it sounds like a good deal
    Who knows? The last ones have gone for about $400-500

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    I have the first version of the Focotar. I hear the second version is an improvement. I beat the eBay price by a good bit by buying it at a garage sale for $7.00. Mine had a Leitz Valoy enlarger attached to it as well.

    It is a great lens. Combined with a Leitz enlarger, it is perfectly reasonable to print wide open and not lose a helluva lot of sharpness. We used Leitz autofocus enlargers at the paper where I used to work and we printed nearly everything wide open to get prints done quickly.

    It is kinda dark, though. I also have an El-Nikkor 50/2.8 and I now use it most of the time for the brighter image on the easel. Stopped down, I don't see any difference between the two lenses.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Shively
    I have the first version of the Focotar. I hear the second version is an improvement. I beat the eBay price by a good bit by buying it at a garage sale for $7.00. Mine had a Leitz Valoy enlarger attached to it as well.

    It is a great lens. Combined with a Leitz enlarger, it is perfectly reasonable to print wide open and not lose a helluva lot of sharpness. We used Leitz autofocus enlargers at the paper where I used to work and we printed nearly everything wide open to get prints done quickly.

    It is kinda dark, though. I also have an El-Nikkor 50/2.8 and I now use it most of the time for the brighter image on the easel. Stopped down, I don't see any difference between the two lenses.
    The Focotar-2 is a splendid, stunning lens.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Ayrshire Scotland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    386
    Images
    4
    I'll stick with my neonon, but I'm sure the seller (ornello?) is well chuffed at having a free ad and discussion on APUG.
    Cheeky.

  7. #17
    Zathras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    507
    Quote Originally Posted by Ornello
    Who knows? The last ones have gone for about $400-500
    [size=3][font=Times New Roman]I got mine for just under $ 200.00, but I consider myself extremely lucky. For a while after I got it, I saw quite a few go for the above prices, with nothing under $ 395.00 .

    Mike Sullivan
    [/font][/size]
    When the chips are down,

    The buffalo is empty!!!



  8. #18
    Zathras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    507
    Quote Originally Posted by gareth harper
    I'll stick with my neonon, but I'm sure the seller (ornello?) is well chuffed at having a free ad and discussion on APUG.
    Cheeky.
    [font=Times New Roman][size=3]He's not the seller. He usually posts here or in rec.photo.darkroom when one of these lenses becomes available. In this case, I think he's trying to find the lens a good home.

    Mike Sullivan
    [/size][/font]
    When the chips are down,

    The buffalo is empty!!!



  9. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    When I had a Focotar 2 it was better than a 40mm 2.8 Focotar and better than an f 4 Durst 50mm Componon. I found mine to work best between 5.6 to 8...which is Ornello findings also. There is no doubt, that the 50mm Focotar 2 is a lens of good quality , to my mind. As far as I know the lens has not been upgraded since it introduction.

    If you use glass carriers and have a ten year old lens that is by one of the best makers you will find it to be diffraction limited at about f4. There may be higher contrast a f 5.6; However, any lens that reaches its best performance at f 6 can not out perform a lens that reaches its best performance at a wider aperture..this is not my opinion this is the laws of physics and light.

    Perhaps I am incorrect. It has been years since I owned my Focotar 2 but I believe that the lens offered for sale is a Focotar (1).

    As far as it being the best enlarging lens in the world baloney is concerned I believe that the 105mm Apo El Nikkor is most certainly better but problematic for making the larger sizes of enlargements is concerned for amy enlargers.

    If one wants to make 15x or bigger enlargements than the best (2) lenses ever released into general commerce are the 40mm f 5.6 Zeiss S-Biogon and the 60mm S-Orthoplanar. Neither lens was sold directly as an enlargong lens. They were sold as a part of a machine for making micro film copies.
    My understanding is, that back in the 70's is concerned , price of the 60mm S- Orthoplanar exceeded $20,000.00 I do not know what the price of the 40mm S-Biogon was. Approximately one year ago an 60mm S-Orthoplanar was sold on Ebay. Its price was around $2,500.00
    A 100 mm was sold at that same time and it fetched approximately $6,000.00

    No Ornello I was not asking you to send me anything. From other postings I came,perhaps erroneously, to the conclusion that you retain quite a file of older data. Therefore, I had hoped you had saved test prints that you could share with this forum and we to could get the 'staggers'.

  10. #20
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Claire Senft
    If you use glass carriers and have a ten year old lens that is by one of the best makers you will find it to be diffraction limited at about f4. There may be higher contrast a f 5.6; However, any lens that reaches its best performance at f 6 can not out perform a lens that reaches its best performance at a wider aperture..this is not my opinion this is the laws of physics and light.
    There are formulae to determine the threshold of diffraction that "limits" the resolving power of any given lens - but in this case I won't bother to wrestle with them. An enlarging lens for 35mm ... 50mm focal length or thereabouts - "diffraction limited" at f/4? I don't think so. Enlarging lenses follow the same "laws" as camera lenses .. there is only ONE "set" of laws. Camera lenses are normally equipped with iris diaphrams that only close to the "limit of acceptable diffraction"... typically, *any* 50mm (or so) lens will only stop down to f/16.... close to the limit of diffraction.

    Why is it that so many are so critical of enlarging optics? A camera lens is designed around an "Optimal Aperture" but is certainly useable at a wide variety of others, and the same holds true for enlarging lenses.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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