Camera lens as enlarger lens?

[BetterSense]

I read in my Manual of Closeup Photography than enlarger lenses make good closeup lenses for cameras because they are optimized for magnifications in the neighborhood of 1:1. Well, if it makes sense to use an enlarger lens on a camera for macro, does it make sense to use a camera lens on the enlarger when making very large prints? If 135mm enlarger lenses are optimized for, say, 4x enlargement (16x20 print), then when making very large prints, like 30 inches from a 4x5 negative, that's a 10x enlargement. The same size print from a 35mm negative would be a 30x enlargement. In that case, wouldn't it make sense to do the opposite, and use a camera lens on the enlarger? Would it be better than a common enlarging lens? What magnifications are enlarger lenses optimized for, anyway?

[Dan Fromm]

What you want to do has been done. The distinction between enlarging lenses and taking lenses is fairly recent. Boyer claimed that their Saphir B, a 6/4 plasmat type and not to be confused with any other flavor of Saphir, is the first lens designed specifically for enlarging. It was introduced in the mid-'30s.

Optimizations? Depends on the lens. Go to Schneider's archiv and read what they have to say about theirs. Generalizations aren't safe.

[Drew Wiley]

There are different kinds of enlarging lenses intended for different degrees of magnification. You can access the technical data from the respective manufacturers.
Taking lenses rarely become good enlarging lenses, though there a few exception.
In large format optics, taking lenses are generally optimized at much smaller aperture
than enlarging lenses; but there's also the problem with flatness of field and close range correction or not. You'd get better results with apo "process" lenses designed for copy cameras. Or, sometimes a taking lens based upon copy lenses, like the G-Claron series, will work for enlarging. But overall, you'd have to be a lot more specific
in what you intend to do to answer a question like this.

[BetterSense]

I had forgot about issues like field flatness and aperture size. I guess that makes sense.

[ic-racer]

Most camera lenses have the flat field at infinity, so that is a little too far off on the other end. The cheap-and-dirty way to do high magnification is to use a longer focal length enlarging lens. The problem usually is that the GOOD, FLAT image circle of the 'standard' enlarger lens is exceeded at high magnification. There is no universal enlarging lens image circle standard, likely because enlarging lenses are not used at either infinity or 1:1 in which to make a standard.

Real-world peeking at the corners of a 35mm negative enlarged to 16x20 with a Peak 1 reveals good edge sharpness with the Schneider 45mm high magnification lens, but a 'standard' 80mm enlarging lens provides an image just as good or even better. Certainly the light falloff is less with the longer lens.

[Leigh]

Graflex did exactly that with the Graflarger accessory for their press cameras.

It was a cold light head with film holder that fit on the back of the camera, and used the taking lens for printing.

The idea was that light fall-off near the edges of the frame would be compensated because the same lens was used to make the print.

Image quality was not the primary goal of press cameras/photographers.

- Leigh

[Lynn Jones]

Typically the fine quality enalrging lenses (Computar, Fuji, Rodenstock, Schneider)
come out kind of like this: 50mm 8X to 10X, 75-80mm around 6X, 105mm 4X to 5X, 135mm to 150mm around 4X to 5X.

I've used enlarging lenses for CU-Macro for decades, however if the magnification becames very great you will need to reverse the lenses, they are designed for the reverse orientation! When we designed all of the Computar lenses (among the best ever created), we had special hardware for reversing lenses, adding shutters, adding filters and lens shades for either orientation. We sold tons of them in industrial photography.

Lynn

[Wes Medlin]

It has been done before. 35mm enlarging lenses have a 39mm thread, originally so that Leica users could use their camera lens on the enlarger, and not have to buy another lens.

[Bill Poole]

Graflex did exactly that with the Graflarger accessory for their press cameras.

It was a cold light head with film holder that fit on the back of the camera, and used the taking lens for printing.

The idea was that light fall-off near the edges of the frame would be compensated because the same lens was used to make the print.

Image quality was not the primary goal of press cameras/photographers.

- Leigh

Probably true, but some of my own favorite photos from the 1970s were made with a Century Graphic and then printed with the same camera and lens and a Graflarger back. Wish I had that kit again. A lot of very useful photo gear in a very small package.

[Leigh]

Probably true, but some of my own favorite photos from the 1970s were made with a Century Graphic and then printed with the same camera and lens and a Graflarger back. Wish I had that kit again. A lot of very useful photo gear in a very small package.
Hi Bill,

I didn't mean to imply that the gear was lousy; quite the contrary. I took lots of ?good? photos with a Graphic in the 1960's.

I shot basketball with no flash using Royal-X Pan in Acufine.
I have no idea what the real film speed was, but the shots came out great, and they were published. :rolleyes:

My point was that when you're shooting for newspaper/magazine use with a 4x5 camera, the final image is usually reduced rather than enlarged, and printed with a halftone mask of relatively small dot count, so quality is not the paramount concern.

- Leigh

[Sevo]

It has been done before. 35mm enlarging lenses have a 39mm thread, originally so that Leica users could use their camera lens on the enlarger, and not have to buy another lens.

These presumably aren't intentionally similar - the more so as they are not the same. The common enlarger lens thread is M39x0.75, while Leica uses M39x1/26" - different enough that you may end up with worn threads or stuck lenses if you mismatch.

As far as large format lenses are concerned, there is no difference other than that you'll mostly encounter lenses mounted to suit their most popular application. Lenses optimized for camera typical distances rarely got sold in darkroom ready mount, as the number of horizontal enlargers capable of working at these distances always has been small. But they exist(ed) - at least a few years ago Schneider still offered the Symmar line in the same (darkroom ready large white dot) enlarger barrel mount as their mainstream enlarger lenses.

[Bob Salomon]

"Schneider still offered the Symmar line in the same (darkroom ready large white dot) enlarger barrel mount as their mainstream enlarger lenses."

Rodenstock still does offer all of their analog and their digital lenses in NF, barrel, mount. But not for use as enlarger lenses but for OEM use and for use on systems with built-in shutters, like a Sinar.

[Dan Fromm]

Sevo, I'm with Bob. At least post-WWII, Schneider has made a very clear distinction between taking lenses and enlarging lenses. They have indeed sold taking lenses in barrel and enlarging lenses in shutter; this has confused at least a few.

My only Symmar is a 135/5.6 convertible in barrel sold on eBay as an enlarging lens. Ignorant seller. And I have a couple of 105/5.6 Comparons in shutter (Copal #0 cock-and-shoot, Copal #0 Press) that came attached to mug shot cameras. Yes, portraiture with an enlarging lens.

The distinction between taking and enlarging lenses is fairly recent. I've seen mid-30s CZJ f/6.3 Tessars with Verkleinerung engraved on the front and Vergrosserung engraved on the rear. Verkleinerung towards the subject/paper for reductions and taking in general, Vergrosserung towards the paper for enlarging. Some years ago Mr. Galli very generously gave me a 150/6.3 CZJ Tessar in barrel with Vergrosserung engraved on the rear and nothing on the front. I believe (I think Arne Croell has confirmed this a couple of times) that all f/6.3 CZJ Tessars were made to the same prescription from roughly 1911 to 1946 or so.

Cheers,

Dan

[ic-racer]

The common enlarger lens thread is M39x0.75


Schneider "39mm" thread enlarging lenses are not M39x0.75, I have never heard of that.