Vivitar 150 mm enlarging lens: fair or dog?

[Philippe Gauthier]

I do have loupes (not the best, alas!) as they are useful for GG focusing and 35 mm slide reviewing. I'll have a close look at my negs, even though on first glance they look OK in the corners, particularly those made with the 7.5 inches lens.

That said, I'm no equipement freak and I'm very happy with my LF setup (a wooden field camera with lots of movements, two lenses and nine holders) that cost me a total of about 325 US dollars. For me, it was either LF on the cheap or no LF at all.

I've done mostly cyanotype and gumbichromate contacts so far and the quality of the optics is largely irrelevant. With silver gelatin enlargement, lens quality matters more, but so far the lack of grain and the incredibly smooth tonal transitions (compared to my earlier 35 mm work) compensate, at least in my eyes, for any possible loss of optical quality.

[Philippe Gauthier]

I don't know if it still matters, but I purchased a 135 mm Componon-S enlarging lens about a year ago. It allowed me to compare its results with the results I got with 150 mm Vivitar.

In short, the Vivitar sucks big time. On a 16x20 print enlarged from 4x5, the Schneider shows details in the corners (abd even some distance away fromthe corners) that you barely suspect with the Vivitar. The outer 15% of the picture also shows some ghosting with the Vivitar, about the same look as bad bokeh.

I haven't used the Vivitar since I've made this test.