convert De Vere 504 Bench Enlarger (4x5) to 5x7 help needed

[zsolt]

You need the charts that show enlarger magnification, with distances with each lens.

Here is a sample Durst doc. http://www.durst-pro-usa.com/pdf/MAK...%20APENDIX.pdf

Thanks a lot Randy!
this table tells me that i could make 24x30 inch prints with my bench De Vere without wall mounting with the 240mm lens,i guess with a EI-nikkor 210 could make even biggers(but there is no need2x enlargement is more than enough for me)
could you tell us Randy,if you can recall what lenses you tried on your enlarger?after what your table tells,i think it was at least a 300-360mm.
i think it could really work out for my purpose..im gonna measure what bellows draw i need for my 5x4,and neg. to easel distance with my "normal use"and if its possible to use after somehow with 4x5 as well,im goodif 8x10 and 4x5 works 5x7 cant be a problem..
would someone have a table like this for 4x5 and 5x7 too?could be really useful!
Thanks Everyone for the info-suggestions!its really apreciated!!
thought first i would be abandoned as a vandal-punk

[zsolt]

could you tell us Randy,if you can recall what lenses you tried on your enlarger?after what your table tells,i think it was at least a 300-360mm.

just realised my confusion,sorry..you talked aboutyour 5x7,but i turned 8x10 with the table..my bad..
but still,would be curious about the lenses you tried on your 5x7 experiment..

[IanG]

Ian,
may i ask what lenses you use with your 5108,and could you tell me some info on the distance between lens and easel,and lens and negative when making 2x-3x enlargements?(with the lens you use)
Thanks in advance!
zsolt

Mine's the floor standing version. I have 240mm and 300mm Componom S lenses, there's no way the 300mm would be practical on a bench model which is why I bought the 240mm, I found the 300mm awkward. I can measure some distances tomorrow.

Ian

[zsolt]

Mine's the floor standing version. I have 240mm and 300mm Componom S lenses, there's no way the 300mm would be practical on a bench model which is why I bought the 240mm, I found the 300mm awkward. I can measure some distances tomorrow.

Ian

Thanks Ian!would appreciate it!

[Tin Can]

Right now I use 150mm Rodagon with 5x7" negs or 6x17cm on a 10x10 FOTAR enlarger chassis with my own head. I need the baseboard to neg room.

I want to find a mounting ring for my El-Nikkor 180mm enlarging lens and try that. It's an odd size.

I doubt many are using longer than 210mm for 5x7 enlargements.

I use 240 Rodagon for 8X10 enlarging on Calumet 10X10 chassis with a 1212 Aristo as of last week.

I experiment a lot.

I am also not the expert on any of this.

[zsolt]

Right now I use 150mm Rodagon with 5x7" negs or 6x17cm on a 10x10 FOTAR enlarger chassis with my own head. I need the baseboard to neg room.

I want to find a mounting ring for my El-Nikkor 180mm enlarging lens and try that. It's an odd size.

I doubt many are using longer than 210mm for 5x7 enlargements.

I use 240 Rodagon for 8X10 enlarging on Calumet 10X10 chassis with a 1212 Aristo as of last week.

I experiment a lot.

I am also not the expert on any of this.

Thanks Randy!
and may i ask which lenses couldnt focus on your 5x7 experiment with the De Vere?would be interested in that..if you remember..
Thanks in advance!

[jose angel]

Thanks a lot Randy!
this table tells me that i could make 24x30 inch prints with my bench De Vere without wall mounting with the 240mm lens,i guess with a EI-nikkor 210 could make even biggers(but there is no need2x enlargement is more than enough for me)
could you tell us Randy,if you can recall what lenses you tried on your enlarger?after what your table tells,i think it was at least a 300-360mm.
i think it could really work out for my purpose..im gonna measure what bellows draw i need for my 5x4,and neg. to easel distance with my "normal use"and if its possible to use after somehow with 4x5 as well,im goodif 8x10 and 4x5 works 5x7 cant be a problem..
would someone have a table like this for 4x5 and 5x7 too?could be really useful!
Thanks Everyone for the info-suggestions!its really apreciated!!
thought first i would be abandoned as a vandal-punk

Some thoughts:
If I understand you correctly, you think you may use your 4x5" bellows with a 5x7" (or even a 8x10") lens. Usually, any 4x5" bellows/cone is simply too short.

Think that theoretically, at 1:1 you need to double the focal lenght to find the bellows draw/base to lens distance. That is, with a 150mm lens, the bellows draw should be near 300mm, and the base to lens distance about another 300mm. At 2:1, just add another focal lenght to that base to lens distance (that is, 300+150=450mm), for 3:1 another focal lenght (300+150+150=600mm), and so on. To calculate the bellows draw, for 2:1 add half the focal lenght to the focal lenght (150+75=225mm), for 3:1 add one third the focal lenght to the focal lenght (150+50=200mm), and so on.

Just apply this calculations for any enlarging lens. 5x7" lenses usually are in the 180-210mm range, 8x10" lenses are in the 240-300 range (WA versions aside). A 240mm lens will need 360mm of bellows to focus a 2:1 print.
Don`t know about your enlarger, but you can calculate&DIY a wide enough lens cone (if possible) to be used at a given magnification. And you can made a "box" to be used on top of your film stage... if possible. And there is the colum height. And you`ll need a good film carrier (big&heavy). A new light head. Etc. etc. etc. (BTW, the light head will take you a couple inches at much).

Let`s be realistic. Do you really need to do this? Isn`t 4x5" big enough for you? What about contact printing 8x10", or even to work on alternative processes? At the end, 2:1 or smaller from 8x10" seem too much pain, too much homemade, too much flimsy approaches to make a not so big print at all. And don`t miss that shooting 8x10" is not cheap.
Well, if you want it, that`s right. But honestly, I`d look for a "true" 5x7" enlarger instead. 8x10"s are not so common anywhere (nor cheap!).

I`d find even easier to build a 16x20" camera in order to make contact prints... Good luck.

[zsolt]

Some thoughts:
If I understand you correctly, you think you may use your 4x5" bellows with a 5x7" (or even a 8x10") lens. Usually, any 4x5" bellows/cone is simply too short.

Think that theoretically, at 1:1 you need to double the focal lenght to find the bellows draw/base to lens distance. That is, with a 150mm lens, the bellows draw should be near 300mm, and the base to lens distance about another 300mm. At 2:1, just add another focal lenght to that base to lens distance (that is, 300+150=450mm), for 3:1 another focal lenght (300+150+150=600mm), and so on. To calculate the bellows draw, for 2:1 add half the focal lenght to the focal lenght (150+75=225mm), for 3:1 add one third the focal lenght to the focal lenght (150+50=200mm), and so on.

Just apply this calculations for any enlarging lens. 5x7" lenses usually are in the 180-210mm range, 8x10" lenses are in the 240-300 range (WA versions aside). A 240mm lens will need 360mm of bellows to focus a 2:1 print.
Don`t know about your enlarger, but you can calculate&DIY a wide enough lens cone (if possible) to be used at a given magnification. And you can made a "box" to be used on top of your film stage... if possible. And there is the colum height. And you`ll need a good film carrier (big&heavy). A new light head. Etc. etc. etc. (BTW, the light head will take you a couple inches at much).

Let`s be realistic. Do you really need to do this? Isn`t 4x5" big enough for you? What about contact printing 8x10", or even to work on alternative processes? At the end, 2:1 or smaller from 8x10" seem too much pain, too much homemade, too much flimsy approaches to make a not so big print at all. And don`t miss that shooting 8x10" is not cheap.
Well, if you want it, that`s right. But honestly, I`d look for a "true" 5x7" enlarger instead. 8x10"s are not so common anywhere (nor cheap!).

I`d find even easier to build a 16x20" camera in order to make contact prints... Good luck.

Hello Jose,and thanks for writing!
useful calculations here,what i appreciate,Thanks!
i have a De Vere 504 Bench Enlarger,as i mentioned before.that has(at the moment):
52cm bellows draw,and with the head up bellows extended the lens easel distance is approx 62cm.that makes a film-easel distance of 115cm(and if i make "the box" the distance will be just bigger)
you are right..i need a light source(what i already got,as mentioned before),a box on the "film base"(or whats its name),to take thefilm away,i dont see a reason for a heavy negative carrier,but that i got too already with ANR glass,(and the way i see there is no more etc-etc...)
no,4x5 isnt "big enough" for me,and i would like to enlarge the negs,if i would like to contact print,i wouldnt write this post here.alternative processes are out of the question..
lets be realistic..pain is good,homemade-DIY i love,if its well done i dont see why it would be "flimsy",and i dont know how big you print,but to me a well made 16x20 print is good-big enough(for the moment )
so lets love each other,
an enlarger be it DIY-or-professionaly made in a factory with engeneers working on it for decades,the result is a print..
and if thats good,im happy
btw,wouldnt mind building a 16x20 camera,but getting film holders and film for the thing would be another question..
Thanks!
zs.

[jose angel]

Right, the result is a print, but the enlarger is certainly not the same... the game may be the same, but there is a difference in the playing! Anyway, if it doesn`t matter for you, that`s ok! No questions here. "DIY photography" is even more funny than "plain photography" by itself. I know it (although sometimes I forget that the important thing is that... the final print!)
A 16x20 print coming from 8x10" is 2x. If it comes from 4x5" it is 4x. From 5x7" is less than 3x. Not sure if there is a big difference. (Hopefully you have a good 8x10" camera and the enlarger is perfectly aligned after the upgrade).
It is like printing smaller than 4x6, out of 35mm film or 6x7. But as mentioned, it`s all for fun. Go ahead!

[zsolt]

did i say something wrong Jose?

i think(it might be just me) there is a difference between 4x5 and 8x10,even enlarged just 16x20,im not saying like 6x7 and 8x10,but there is..
important that subject matter also playes a role here,how much DOF you need..etc
for example,16x20 enlargement is the upper limit of 4x5 for me..and again,it might be just me in the whole world..but its like that.
lets take that up to a 24x30 enlargement.(what i could do on my enlarger after the modification,as your calculations say.)i dont think the game would be the same.
btw..Father Ansel built his enlarger too from a repro camera,with the help of a pro metal worker(-i guess..maybe he did it all on his own,but doubt that)
and doesnt look "flimsy"to me at all..
again..im not triing to fight here over opinions,was just asking for some help here,and your calculations just did the thing,Thanks for that!
but again..its just opinions..and mine is different than yours.and none of us will lose sleep over this i think
i didnt ask for an easy solution out of this..i asked help to fix a specific idea.
and you helped me,and im grateful for that!
Thank You Jose!
zs.