Cheap Lenses! Post your pics done with some real mud suckers here:

[Lightbender]

heres another with the same lens.. needed a lens hood theres some flare.
I think i paid $20 for the lens and less than 10 for the shutter.

[Jim Galli]

Now this is is my kinda thread!
Heres one taken with a 135mm componon mounted in a Tempor shutter from a folder.

Gorgeous tones in that. Don't you know better than using an enlarging lens for taking photos!! I had a Componon in a little Polaroid shutter for a long time until my little Fuji 125 came along. Mine came in a piece or 2" allthread with a bunch of other industrial junk. $12 IIRC

[Lightbender]

Heres one done with a caltar 210mm (symmar-s)
This counts cause the rear element has a chip in it about 1/4th of the rear element. I covered the chip with a piece of black cardboard.

[Lightbender]

heres one in 2x3 format.. a 103mm graflex tri-optar (triplet)

[dominikus bw]

old version Componon-S 100/5.6, won't cover 4x5 except at 1:3 ratio or more and it shown a little bit soft at the edges...

[dominikus bw]

Forgot to tell, it's a $20 lens...

[Dan Fromm]

Dominikus, you seem to be using your Componon-S as a macro lens.

Per Schneider, the Componon (predecessor of your -S, a Symmar tweaked for enlarging) was best as an enlarging lens from 6x - 10x, the Comparon (a Xenar tweaked for enlarging) was better from 2x to 6x. Used as taking lenses, those ranges are 1:6 - 1:10 and 1:2 - 1:6 respectively. I expect that the Componon-S has the same optimizations as the Componon.

So what else is new? We've beaten the idea of using enlarging lenses for closeup work to death and then some. The interesting question about them is whether they're good replacements for serious dedicated macro lenses.

By an odd coincidence, I've asked that question for 100/6.3 Zeiss Luminar, 100/6.3 Reichert Neupolar, and 4"/5.6 Enlarging Pro Raptar. The Luminar is recommended for use from 1:8 to 8:1 and is easily reversible. No recommendations on the Neupolar or Enlarging Pro Raptar, and neither is reversible.

On 2x3, the Neupolar is best from 1:8 to 1:1 at marked f/11, f/16, f/22. The Luminar and Enlarging Pro Raptar are tied. From 1:1 to 4:1 wide open, the rankings are the same. Reversing the Luminar made no difference.

Neupolar, $14 delivered. Enlarging Pro Raptar, about the same. Luminar, borrowed from my neighbor the Zeiss collector. My own 100 Luminar, sold long ago, wasn't very good. And old lens' present condition matters at least as much as its reputation when new.

[Lightbender]

I picked up the same lens for free, from someone who was getting rid of a beat-up old Calumet 4x5. I used the lens a few times so far (just got it) and it seems to be good! the front glass has odd streaks on it, like some sort of coating has been rubbed off (or applied )

I have a conv symmar with the same problem! I wonder if some of the old symmars were soft-coated.

[athanasius80]

Nice gams!

[Wimpler]

4x5 arca swiss, paper negative, 300mm f3 lens from magnifier (1$).