Enlarging lenses for 8x10 b/w

[Rodney Polden]

I'm interested in your opinions and preferences between these three lenses for enlarging 8x10 b/w in the 2x to 10x enlargement range:

300mm f9 Apo Ronar CL (near new)
360mm f9 Apo Ronar (older model - maybe from the 50's or 60's?)
480mm f9 Apo Ronar (older model - maybe from the 50's or 60's?)

I realise that all of these are primarily camera lenses optimised for process work, and that their max apertures are not ideal, but that's what I have available at present.

Thanks for any suggestions.

[Drew Wiley]

I'd test them. But if I had to bet on one it would be the 360.

[Tony Lakin]

Hi
Depends on your ceiling height or if you can drop the baseboard of your enlarger, I have tried 450mm and 360mm lenses and found that I was not able to get much above 10X8 without lowering the baseboard of my Devere which is rather inconvenient, I also found using a 300mm a bit of a bother, I now use a 240mm Componon S for 10X8 inch Negs which allows enlargements from 8X10 to 20X30 inches without any hassle.
Good luck.

[Rodney Polden]

Thanks for those.
Yeah, I wasn't sure whether the 300 or the 360 might not have adequate coverage. Or alternatively, if they would not provide enough magnification to be useful for the larger print sizes, which I assumed would be the case with the 480.
What was the issue with the 300mm that made you find using it a bother, Tony?
Is the 240 that you mentioned a regular or a wide-angle enlarging lens?
I will be printing on a De Vere also.

[John Bowen]

Do you have enough bellows extension for such long lenses?

[Chuck Pere]

Don't forget you have to focus them. If you use a grain focuser you need to be able to look into the focuser and adjust the focus knob. This is easier with a shorter lens.

[Tony Lakin]

Thanks for those.
Yeah, I wasn't sure whether the 300 or the 360 might not have adequate coverage. Or alternatively, if they would not provide enough magnification to be useful for the larger print sizes, which I assumed would be the case with the 480.
What was the issue with the 300mm that made you find using it a bother, Tony?
Is the 240 that you mentioned a regular or a wide-angle enlarging lens?
I will be printing on a De Vere also.

Hi Rodney
I had similar problems to to longer lenses, my ceiling height is about eight feet I could not get larger than about 14X17 inch enlargements without lowering the baseboard which with my old Devere is a nuisance, I could keep my baseboard at the lower level but this involves some acrobatics to focus and compose ie kneeling on the floor, if you have a more modern Devere lowering and raising the baseboard maybe an easier option if you wish to use the longer lenses, as I have said I now use a 240mm lens and have eliminated all the hassle, the 240mm Componon S covers a 10X8 inch neg with corner to corner sharpness when stopped down by one stop (f5.6 to f8) there are many 240mm lenses avalable cheaply which would do the job well ie G Claron or similar process lens, I paid the equivalent of US$180 for my 240 Componon S boxed and in mint condition, I have seen similar dedicated enlarging lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock sell for less than US$100.
Hope this helps.
Good luck:) :) :)

[Tony Lakin]

Don't forget you have to focus them. If you use a grain focuser you need to be able to look into the focuser and adjust the focus knob. This is easier with a shorter lens.

Rodney is using a Devere which has front of baseboard controls making focusing a doddle regardless of which lens he chooses.

[neil poulsen]

I have a Patterson grain focuser that's about a foot or so higher than the typical focuser. They come up occassionally on EBay. Makes it easier to focus, when the enlarger head is high.

What's driving you towards one of these lenses? There've been some pretty good prices on 240mm Rodenstock Rodagons lately.

[Rodney Polden]

Well the three Apo Ronars are among the lenses I already have for shooting 5x7 and 8x10, so if one of them will work as satisfactorily as a dedicated enlarging lens, then I would not spend the time and money on finding and buying a Componon, Rodagon etc.

The simple answer would be to test all three on the 8x10 De Vere, and see how they do. Trouble is, the enlarger is sitting in two large crates awaiting a whole lot more work on my new darkroom (including an area with raised ceiling to accommodate the max height of the enlarger). It will need some assembly, careful alignment and the rest before I can use it to assess lenses.

So the idea of getting opinions from all you helpful guys was so that, if I really do NEED a dedicated enlarging lens, the task of finding the right one can go ahead at the same time as continuing the work on the light traps, the air filtration system, the cabinets, the water temp controller, the light-table ......

As John said so succinctly: "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans". Thanks for your input everyone, I really appreciate your valuable comments. I'm getting there.... ;)

[John Kasaian]

I've been using a 229mm Ilex Copy Paragon, they're coated, they're cheap(about $30 IIRC) and they open up to f5.6 for much easier focusing than f/9. It might be worth it to keep your eyes open for one. I've also heard of guys using them as taking lenses with good results, so if you wanted to add a "wide" to your Rodagon family...there you go! :)

[Turner Reich]

I've got a 10" Ilex Paragon f4.5, would it work for an enlarging lens on an 8x10 enlarger, I've never thought of trying it? I've not even used it on a camera yet but but was hoping to try it out this Fall. I too got it for very little and it's very clean. Its got the largest retaining ring I've seen.

[Kevin Crisp]

The 210 El-Nikkor covers 8X10 and often sells for very little. The downside is the large diameter which makes below the lens filters a problem. The APO HD Beseler 240 is also very inexpensive and covers the format well, without the filter issue.

[Bob Salomon]

Rodney, process lenses are made to work optimally at f22 only. Plus they are not optimized for enlarging plus they are lacking common features of an enlarging lens - like an illuminated aperture ring.

Will they make prints - yes. Will they be the best you can do - even with a properly aligned enlarger and a glassless carrier. NO. That is why there are enlarging lenses.

[Turner Reich]

So Bob, a 240mm Rodagon will cover an 8x10 negative and will print with quality?

[Bob Salomon]

So Bob, a 240mm Rodagon will cover an 8x10 negative and will print with quality?

Yes

[Tony Lakin]

So Bob, a 240mm Rodagon will cover an 8x10 negative and will print with quality?

For what my opinion is worth I have a late 240mm Rodagon as well as my 240mm Componon S the reason I use the Componon is because it is pristine condition, the Rodagon performs equally well (covers 8X10 with excellent sharpness and even coverage) I keep it as a back-up.

[Turner Reich]

Great, thanks Bob and Tony, I'll put it on and give it a go.

[Herb Cunningham]

I have a 240mm Rodagon which I use most of all to print 5x7 and 8x10 negs up to 16x20 on my Durst 184.
I have a ten foot ceiling, and can use the 300mm Nikon enlarging lens that came with the enlarger, but the extensions needed are a PITA so I use the shorter lens most of the time.
You can do 30 x40 prints with this setup, I have not tried that yet, but the guy I got the enlarger from did it routinely.

[Turner Reich]

Thanks Herb, much appreciated.

[Rodney Polden]

Yes, that's very helpful to learn - thanks all for your contributions. I had not known that Componons and Rodagons as short as 240 would still handle the 8x10 format.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - I use process lenses for enlargement as well as dupes all the time, namely
Apo-nikkors, mostly between f/11 to f/45. My favorites are the 240,305, and 360.
They are actually superior to conventional enlarger lenses from around 1:2 to 8X.
Better sharpness, better color correction. The only disadvantage is the speed. When
that is the issue, I turn to my apo-rodagons or conventional rodagons. Ceiling height is
not a factor for me, so I never use a 240 for 8X10, only for 4x5.

[Bob Salomon]

Bob - I use process lenses for enlargement as well as dupes all the time, namely
Apo-nikkors, mostly between f/11 to f/45. My favorites are the 240,305, and 360.
They are actually superior to conventional enlarger lenses from around 1:2 to 8X.
Better sharpness, better color correction. The only disadvantage is the speed. When
that is the issue, I turn to my apo-rodagons or conventional rodagons. Ceiling height is
not a factor for me, so I never use a 240 for 8X10, only for 4x5.

Drew,

You using a glass carrier?

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - I always use glass carriers, sometimes with optically coated glass. Everything is
very very precise, well beyond the ordinary.

[Bob Salomon]

Bob - I always use glass carriers, sometimes with optically coated glass. Everything is
very very precise, well beyond the ordinary.

Then you should be getting all the lenses can deliver.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - I've got more enlarging lenses than taking lenses. A dedicated enlarging lens has the advantage of not only being faster than a process lens, but of having a
shallower depth of field due to the larger usable aperture. This can be important for
critical work, since it allows focus only on the emulsion itself and not on potential
contaminants or flaws on the outside of the sandwich. Unfortunately, not everyone properly aligns their enlarger. And there are times when an extremely high MTF can
result in the reproduction of the AN pattern of the glass. In some color work I might select a 180 Rodagon instead of an Apo-Rodagon for this reason alone. Or, in things like Ciba printing, I'll pick up the 150 Apo-Rodagon instead not only for the faster speed, but for the degree of illumination fall-off I desire. In my work, I have to choose the correct angle of incidence as well as the correct diffuser for each of my four different enlargers relative to the application. I also have a variety of glass types for my various carriers. Apo-Nikkors are useful if you understand their respective magnification ratios. I even have an old poorly-corrected 14-inch Meyer process lens; but it is pure magic when combined with a wide-open portrait shot from a dagor, with a lovely softness toward the corners. This is all overkill, of course; but it's part of the fun of lenses, and I've learned a lot.

[Allen in Montreal]

......... I even have an old poorly-corrected 14-inch Meyer process lens; but it is pure magic when combined with a wide-open portrait shot from a dagor, with a lovely softness toward the corners. This is all overkill, of course; but it's part of the fun of lenses, and I've learned a lot.

That does not sound like over kill, it sounds like finding an almost magic combination!

[DeBone75]

I have an Omega F 10X10. My ceiling height is just over eight feet. I have found that with the 300mm I have I could barely cover 8X10 paper also. I found just by experimenting that with the 7 1/2" Kodak projection lens I have will cover the 8X10 negative nicely and can enlarge more than 20X24 with normal baseboard height. Just a thought.

[Rodney Polden]

Thank you for that input, Les. It sounds to me like I will need an enlarging lens shorter than 300mm if I am to be able to make large prints, and maybe shorter even than 240mm. I am building some extra ceiling height into the area of my darkroom where the 8x10 De Vere is to stand, but even with that, prints larger than 20x24 may need some additional strategy, I'm guessing.

Now I need to do some research into alternative lenses, maybe WA options.

[IanG]

Rodney, I have a 300mm Componon, as well as 210 & 240mm Rodagons for my De Vere 5108.

The 210 lens almost covers 10x8, but the 240mm is perfect. The 300mm is OK but it's a bit of a pain to use in practice as you need to make bigger changes in column/baseboard position to make relatively small changes in enlargement.

Shorter than 240mm isn't really practical as you will get substantially greater light fall off at the corners. The 240mm lenses are optimised to make images from 10x8 negatives.

Ian

[Andrew O'Neill]

My darkroom ceiling is about 8ft high. I use a Schneider 240 enlarging lens, and can make 20x24 enlargements no problem. I should also add that my enlarger is an old graphics copy camera from a silkscreen printing shop, with an Aristo 1212 head on the top. The enlarger is wall mounted.

[Steve M Hostetter]

Rodenstock Rodagon 240mm 5.6 I can do 40x50" from 8x10"

[Brad Rippe]

This is a very interesting thread. I always thought using an enlarging lens less than 300 mm would cause a softer image due to optical spread. I'll have to look for a 240 lens.
-Brad

[Peter De Smidt]

I use a 240mm El-Nikkor. I'm very happy with it.