Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 78

Thread: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Denbigh, North Wales
    Posts
    567

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    It should be great.
    I think this market has got very confused with people using enlarger lenses for macro 35mm work. Maybe the older El-Nikkor 135 has some cult following ?
    I myself just went looking for a good 135 to enlarge 4x5" IR this year, and found a late Rodagon with some marks on the barrel & without lens caps for £69 in the UK. Elsewhere they can be up to £250 in near-mint condition.
    Last edited by Mark J; 16-Mar-2024 at 06:11.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Apr 2023
    Posts
    242

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    I paid $61 for the single coated 135mm El Nikkor in nice condition 6 years ago and the late model 150mm Componon S was sitting there for days at $115 until I could stand it no longer. LOL I've run into a few motivated sellers lately that have lowered my resistance.

    There is one Componon S for $700 that doesn't look as nice. Early Multi-coat El Nikkors $150, late $270. Several late Beseler Rodagons for $115 but shipping was high.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    572

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    Are Componon-S lens multi-coated or only the APO HM series?

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Apr 2023
    Posts
    242

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Pere View Post
    Are Componon-S lens multi-coated or only the APO HM series?
    The late model ones are but I don't know the history as well as Nikon. Everything I purchased in the early '70s was multi-coated including the 150mm El Nikkor with the all black barrel. Excellent lens, just not fireproof.

    Just got an offer $100+ shipping excellent Componon S, the deal I got was slightly better. It seems to confirm a soft market.
    Last edited by Mal Paso; 16-Mar-2024 at 10:32.

  5. #45
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    6,825

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    $10,000 enlarging lens? Nothing I ever heard of in a Durst mount, but just about anything could be adapted I suppose.

  6. #46
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    6,825

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    I'm not sure about the current market for large format enlarger lenses. Quite a while back a got a set of silver, Durst branded, Componon lenses for less than $100 each. These went from 80mm to 360mm. I did sell most of those silver lenses maybe 3 or 4 years ago to get the set of modern black bodied Componon-S large format enlarging lenses 80 to 300mm. These were the top of the line lenses for Durst with the Durst mounts. I paid quite a bit for them and they were difficult to find in the Durst mounts.

  7. #47
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    18,569

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    $11,000 was a conservative 90's price, Ice-Racer. I understated it. You'd pay way more today if one ever turned up. Nobody paying that kind of price is mistaken about its application. If they want to best of the best when it comes to enlarging, and have the means, that's what they do. A nice complement to a $90,000 8x10 horizontal enlarger. Pride of ownership, I guess. But I can't afford a Ferrari or Lamborghini either, not even a Lexus. Does it make a bit of visual difference in the actual print? Probably not.

    My more affordable (mostly free) regular f/9 Apo Nikkor lenses thread right into common Durst L rings, even the 360; but the massive 360 f/5.6 EL Nikkor most certainly will not! (neither of these should be confused with a rare Apo El Nikkor of that focal length).

    One of the best 135's out there is allegedly the Fuji EX; but it unfortunately has an odd thread size.

  8. #48

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    I listened to the advice I got and found complete sets of silver Componons, some of which I cleaned out myself. Ken Ruth (Repair Guru Photography on Bald Mountain) explained that the Componon comes apart in complete optical groups. Use spanners and take the groups to the kitchen sink. Dawn Dishwashing Detergent makes 'em shiny clean again, some of mine were down right milky, they all came clean in the end except one. One 360mm was cloudy in the middle, I traded Jason Lane some Speed Plates for that one. I really think these are every bit as good as silver Schneider Symmars, in fact side by side, it's hard to tell them apart. I paid $50-$100 for each, ended up with a set of complete matching pairs for my TLR Normas.

    These olde lenses can be underrated. Work just fine for my uses. 16x20 is as big as I can go.
    Flikr Photos Here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/

    “The secret of getting ahead is getting started.”
    ― Mark Twain

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Sheridan, Colorado
    Posts
    2,634

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Wiley View Post
    One of the best 135's out there is allegedly the Fuji EX; but it unfortunately has an odd thread size.
    I have no complaints with mine, but I'll admit that the 53mm x 0.75mm thread is not common -- but it has a very convenient front thread of 55mm to make up for that. I found mine, used, at a great price, and already on a Beseler 4x5 board. The EX lenses have 6/6 designs, EBC coating, and wide angle of coverage & Image circle, but Fuji made a few other 135mm lenses as well -- here are some details:

    http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/enlarge.htm

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Denbigh, North Wales
    Posts
    567

    Re: Enlarge lens 150 vs 135

    Thanks, I dug out some of the info on that one.
    It's interesting that it's a double-gauss type construction, unlike all of the other premium brands which are Plasmats. I wonder if the 105 is the same.

    In the meantime -
    I received my bargain Rodagon-N 135 today, very quick. Its looks generally fine although with a slight dinge in the outer plastic barrel, optics are clean and unmarked though. On a quick check with grain magnifier and a 'busy' 4x5" neg from a few years ago, all looks well as best I can tell in centre and four corners, so will try out soon when I get some new 20x16 paper.

    I also did a comparison test of my newly-acquired 100 Componon-S against my existing El-Nikkor N 105 at the weekend. I just did small prints in the corners on a 20x16" enlargement from 6x9cm. Focused in the centre of the picture. To my slight surprise, the Nikkor was just better, though you have to put your face up to the print to see the difference. I'll do one more test soon and then sell on whichever loses.

    Thanks for the info on the full Apo-El-Nikkor range, Drew. I had missed the 170mm from the earlier series.
    It's quite odd that they went for x1.7 to x3 on that one - to be honest it must work outside of that range, there's no way to make it so specialised from that lens construction, so I expect it's pretty impressive at x4 , shame they aren't more common or cheaper !

Similar Threads

  1. What distance needed to enlarge to 30" x 40" with 135mm or 150mm lens for 4x5?
    By David Wolf in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 25-Aug-2021, 13:40
  2. To enlarge or not to enlarge, that's the question.
    By Gregory Gomez in forum On Photography
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 1-Aug-2005, 18:38
  3. Enlarge to sepps?
    By Jim Rice in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 18-Apr-2005, 20:28
  4. Anybody Enlarge 11 x 14?
    By nick rowan in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 8-Feb-2002, 10:16

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •