Has nothing to do with that.
Has nothing to do with that.
Most of the better lens manufacturers strive for a round aperture, maybe that's not important enlarging. I thought it was a sign of quality.Originally Posted by ic-racer
I've been looking for another 150. There was no taper to the barrel on the one I had and the iris ring had flutes, it was a Nikkor, so was the 50mm, the 105 was a Schneider.....
Late model Schneider Componon-S, 240mm, 210mm and 135mm. Does not get much better, or expensive than this in enlarging lenses.
Very cool.
I replaced all my Componon S lenses with much better ones. At least they were superior to older chrome Componons. But they haven't been top tier for several decades, and never were if you factor in the use of process lenses for enlarging purposes.
And if nothing gets more expensive in potential enlarging lens choices, that presumes you paid at least $10,000 for one of those - and you didn't.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
All my older black and chrome Componons have 14/15 blades, and the new ones have five -- as pictured. I've never run a comparison, but my old ones (all under 50mm) are great.Late model Schneider Componon-S, 240mm, 210mm and 135mm. Does not get much better, or expensive than this in enlarging lenses.
What about the aspect of "signature" in enlarging lenses? Maybe its more a matter of having as little as possible so that as much as possible of the signature of the taking lens can get transmitted forward into the final print? Hmmm...
I have noticed a couple of things...like how my now aging 100mm Companon-S - which, while still "top tier," is not exactly the latest and greatest - but gives me a wonderful something - an extra bit of dimensionality and smoothness...and yet with great edge to edge resolution.
Or my three 50mm enlarging lenses...latest 50mm Companon-S, Rodagon, and very old Leitz 4.5 Focotar. While I really don't print that much from 35mm these days, that old Focotar has a bit of something special...especially when I dig up some old negatives I'd made with my (long ago sold) Leitz 60mm Macro-Elmarit, from my Leicaflex days. Lots of folks dissed those cameras...but to me they were really something special.
At any rate...back to enlarging lens signature - is it a factor?
There is very little which can be ascribed to a signature look between brands, unless you deliberately employ some funky old camera lens on the enlarger instead for creative reasons, or put a nylon stocking over the lens to diffuse the image like portrait photographers often did, or even vaseline on the lens. Once in awhile I used an old lens with its particular "look" in conjunction with copying antique prints.
But there are nuances of difference which I find useful. Sometimes it's nice to have a little less contrast, especially when color printing certain subjects. In that case, I might resort to conventional Rodagons or, formerly, Componon S. Those are fine lenses, but in a general purpose sense. When a little more contrast is desired instead, or accentuated microtonality in black and white prints, I reach for Apo Rodagon N's. (The best El Nikkor's are somewhere in between in performance).
Then when I want very high faithfulness and true apo performance at any scale of magnification, I use f/9 Apo Nikkor process lenses, But these aren't available in focal lengths shorter than 180mm, so are really more for sheet film enlargement, as well as for technical applications like making precision internegatives or duplicate chromes. I have a set clear up to 760mm. These lenses were once quite expensive, but now are some of the best bargains out there for large-format enlarging, ever since graphics work went over to scanners instead.
The best of the best are the bulky and uber-expensive f/5.6 Apo El Nikkors, which function like the more compact f/9 Apo Nikkors, but at one stop faster if needed. Most home enlargers won't even hold their extra weight steady. They're hard to find anymore, anyway, and are ridiculous overkill, qualitatively, except for the very most demanding applications. For awhile they were repurposed for high-end scanning back cameras for sake of high-quality painting reproductions.
Well I ordered the late model 150 Componon S with the 5 blade aperture, the price was half the going rate to replace my 1975 El Nikkor. I will see if I can tell the difference between it and my old single coated 135 El Nikkor. The 150 should move the print area out enough to clear my 16x20 easel. The 135 may have been a misstep but not an expensive one.
Looking at the extreme price ranges of enlarging lenses and what is selling, there may be a lot more lenses out there than enlargers to put them on.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks