Highest quality enlarger

[Ron Spencer]

Hi to everyone.

I would like your help making a decision. I am just getting into large format photography and need to buy an enlarger.
I just bought a 4x5 large format camera and I have a keen interest at some point in possibly buying a 6x17 camera as well,
so I may have to go for a 5x7 enlarger. The only thing that would stop me in doing so, would be if it were way too expensive
or way too big. In that case, I would go for a 4x5 enlarger only (and not buy the 6x17 camera). I understand from all the info
I've received via the internet that Durst would be the top contender in the high quality enlarger category. I've used Devere in my
local rental darkroom and found that there is a wheel for the head and another for the lens stage, but there is no fine focuse adjustment
possible as there is on the Saunders 4x5 enlargers (I used to have the Saunders 4x5 enlarger). The enlarger I'm looking for should
have the fine focusing ability, the ability to easily align everything (head. lens stage and base). I've read that the Zone VI 5x7 enlargers
are rock sturdy and have everything I"m looking for. I am only interested in Durst, Devere, Saunders and Zone VI. Can you shed light
on all these enlargers strengths and weaknesses? I liked the Saunders, but you can only align by using shims - I think that's rather
a poor way to do that. I would like an enlarger that has that engineered in. Thank you so much in advance.

Ron

[Craig Wactor]

An 8x10 Durst just sold for $800 on ebay. But they are very big. I think your printing skills are going to make a bigger difference than the enlarger, as long as it is not a dog. Shimming enlargers and lenses is not a big deal to me. Once you do it, you don't have to change it for years, unless you are abusive to it. I use an Omega D5XL with an Aristo cold light head. On it, you can align the lens plane and head, but the lens has one axis that is hard to align. I rarely ever have to shim, though.

[John Cook]

Oddly enough, my experience is that mechanical quality is not necessarily the most important characteristic in an enlarger.

For instance, think of someone who plows snow for a living, who purchases a $200,000 Ferrari with a plow attached to do the job. Great quality. Hand-built. Unsurpassed engineering. But totally unsuitable for the task.

The Durst I owned during the 1970's was the best built machine I ever used. Like a swiss watch. But awkward to use. A real dog. Also, it was at least one paper grade more contrasty than the Besseler or Omega condensers. Today as the market shrinks dramatically, parts must be a major problem.

The VW Beetle of professional enlargers has always been the Omega D series. Their major claim to fame has always been the speed with which you can use one. This used to be important when the market price for a 5x7 print was 25 cents. Real simple, fast and smooth to operate. No struggles.

Perhaps the Omega D metal parts are sheet metal where the Durst has cast aluminum. But there are so many around that spare parts will never be a problem. Especially now, as 99% of the public never even heard of an enlarger.

I'm not trying to sell you a particular enlarger. Just making the point that the "best" may not actually be best in the long run. Ever heard of the LED enlarger from Salthill. We all fell in love with it at the annual national trade show at Javitts in NYC in 1991. Very expensive, but definitely the best. Then the company disappeared.

By the way, aside from an old Leica (pre-1970), I dislike everything about all enlargers smaller than 4x5.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I think what John is trying to say is that the most expensive does not necessarily translate into the best.
For my money I would buy a Saunders LPL They are great enlargers, going very cheap on e bay and even if you want new, they are not too expensive compared to other brands like Zone VI, Durst, etc, etc.

+

[Robert A. Zeichner]

I can't speak as a long time owner of the Durst, but just a couple of weeks ago, I finally put my L138S into service. It was the tallest 5x7 enlarger that would physically fit under my low basement ceiling. I bought this from a used equipment dealer in Chicago and had to drive there to pick it up. It's large and heavy, but comes apart and I was able to get it back in good order and down to the basement and in the darkroom by myself. I did need to purchase some glass for the NEGA138 carrier and a LAPLA53 lensboard both of which I got from Jens Jensen out west. I outfitted it with an Aristo VCL57 head minus controller, which I had from my VCL4500 that sits on the other side of the room on my Beseler 45MXII. I ordered the Aristo with a 12' cord so I could run it along a ceiling beam to the other side and now I just have to swap cables to use one or the other enlarger. The Durst is the first enlarger I've ever owned that is perfectly aligned! Sharp from corner to corner wide open. It is not the newest or the most mint piece of gear I own, but I'm now a believer. I suppose there is some element of luck involved in buying any used equipment, but I've got far more in the cost of the light source, the two parts I bought and the modifications to my darkroom to make floorspace available for its installation than I have in the enlarger, so I also feel I lucked out, which is fitting considering the mint 210mm El-Nikkor that's mounted to the turret only cost me $100 on e**y. I hope you are as lucky in your quest.

[Brian C. Miller]

Personally, I think that the highest quality stuff is what you have in your posession and performs well. I have two Omega enlargers, a D-II and a D-3. These are monsters, and both are rigid and I get excellent prints from them. I have no complaints. They don't have fine focus, but I can focus finely with the knob just fine. The D-II doesn't have a crank to move the head on the column, but that doesn't bother me.

I honestly think that the person operating the equipment is the largest factor. There is so much that an ingenious person can make do with it isn't funny. Remember, Ed Weston's darkroom print technique consisted of a lightbulb and a contact frame.

It is better to get something well built and produce prints than have a pie-in-the-sky dream and have nothing in your hands.

[Bill_1856]

There's no such thing as a bad post-WW2 4x5 enlarger. But get the best, latest glass that you can afford. I'm a D2 man, myself, but the Negatrans carrier for Bessler is very tempting.

[jose angel]

Hi Ron; Do you want to start shooting 6x17 right now? It is easier to find a good&cheap 4x5" enlarger, smaller, more confortable to use, etc. The 5x7" enlargers I have seen are very expensive, if not, they are usually very old, without or with useless or obsolete light heads. I found years ago one of this old monsters, "rock solid" type; I spent some years (and some money, I must say) to put it in a real optimum working condition. My advice is to buy a modern 4x5" color head enlarger, and then search for a cheap bigger one to be used with a cold light head.
In my opinion "... the ability to easily align everything (head. lens stage and base)..." is a must. Even if the enlarger lacks an alignment system you can adjust it with some tricks.

"... I liked the Saunders, but you can only align by using shims... " Not all all. Saunders enlargers can be adjusted on the lens stage (mine does). You must align a four bladed easel (shimming it is the easiest way; I have installed on mine four screws -like four feet- to adjust it) with the negative stage. Then, align the lens stage. In this way column&base and negative stage doesn´t need to be shimmed. If you wall mount the enlarger (IMO the best option), you could adjust the column (aligning the negative stage) without the need of shimming the easel or anything. The right way.

I like very much The Durst L1200, but like John says, it is like a Ferrari (Ferrari priced, I mean). I go so comfortably with my "Toyota" saunders...

[jose angel]

About fine focus on Saunders: don´t be worried about it. After years of use (not so much years!) the fine focus wheel of my enlarger have lost its tightness, although it works with an unpleasant play. I have also a Beseler enlarger with a rude but tight friction knob. My vintage 5x7" have the best focusing knob I have ever seen, works like it was absolutely new, way more precise and easier to focus than Saunders and Beseler.

[bob carnie]

I own three different models, durst,deveere and omega.
As John stated and others , application is the most important. For 4x5 a Omega has the most readily available parts and flexibility . Alignment of this unit is easy and precise, as well for split printing it is the easiest by far. Some of the models do not have fine focus but most do. If you are going to 8x10 I would then recommend Durst first then Deveere.

[darter]

Hey Jose,

The fine focusing gears on the Saunders tend to wear out over time. In my case it was exacerbated by the use of the focusing extension wand that puts additional strain on the gears. Fortunately you can replace the whole setup at a fairly reasonable price by ordering the fine focusing attachment for the 6700 series enlarger: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=45757&is=REG&addedTroughType=search
Note that it works on the 4500 series too. Also, make sure the chassis friction screws are not set too tight as this tends to strain the gears as well.

[Nick Morris]

Another vote for the Omega 2D, with the variable condenser head. Solid, quick and easy to use.

[jose angel]

Phil, thank you very-very much for your notice! I have already make a note for my BH´s next order. I feel very dissapointed each time I need to focus... that´s just what I needed to know!!

[picturetraveler]

I'll put in a vote for a 8x10 horizontal Devere enlarger

but you need space to keep it...

It works wonderfull for large printing

greetings

Marc

[Drew Wiley]

Compared to a classic Durst enlarger in good condition, everything else is a toy. Nobody could afford that kind of machining anymore. The trick is to find one in good shape, or know how to fix one.

[Peter De Smidt]

I vote for De Vere, either 4x5 vertical, or 8x10 vertical or horizontal.

[Renato Tonelli]

Compared to a classic Durst enlarger in good condition, everything else is a toy. Nobody could afford that kind of machining anymore. The trick is to find one in good shape, or know how to fix one.

I agree. I have had a Durst L1200 since the mid-nineties - it is a pleasure to use it; never a problem. I paid full price for it back then and it wasn't easy but I have no regrets. I still have a Durst PRO that my students now use: in continuous use since the mid-1970's. Students can be rough on equipment: still perfectly aligned. Everything else I have used in the past seems like pieces of metal screwed together to make an enlarger - except the LPL. The LPL seems well designed and easy to use. Get the best you can afford - a good enlarger will last a lifetime.

[Rodney Polden]

I have Dursts, LPL/Saunders, Omega, Focomat and De Vere, and I've printed on a bunch of others.
For me, the Dursts stand out as the smoothest, most hassle-free and reliable companions I have ever worked with in the darkroom. At times I have printed one neg after another for hours, checking focus after changing negs, and never (or very rarely) needing to modify the focus from one to the next. That shows a steadiness and consistency that I never found in other enlargers. One of my Durst 4x5's has never required re-alignment since the 80's. Engineering like this, the Italians do particularly well.
The other brands are fine too.
As others have said, it's more important to get so familiar with the workings of your own equipment that your hands know what to do, and leave your eyes and senses free for drawing out the image.
There are some amazing deals on fine used equipment these days. Have fun!

[willwilson]

I'm an Omega man. D3 and D5. They are easy to maintain, modify and find parts for. I have my D3 bolted directly to my workbench, very solid. Did I mention they are cheap?

[Drew Wiley]

My first enlarger was a 4x5 Omega with colorhead. I still use it, mostly for 4x5 black and white work. These are indeed a good buy and hold up well. But you can get from
point A to point B in a VW Bug as well as a Ferrari. And the Durst is the Ferrari. I bought two Durst chassis, one in good condition, the other for parts; but both have
now been completely refubished. I also have a big 8x10 color enlarger of my own design. But let's put things in perspective: an Omega enlarger in good condition might
run you a grand or less; a really clean or boxed late Durst is going to run you anywhere
from fifteen to a hundred grand, depending on the format and accessories - if you can
find one. Most of the Fleabay bargains you see are pretty ratted out. Let's just say
that if I run into a clean Durst Chassis for two to four grand, I'm certainly not going to
tell anyone else!

[paulr]

Well, here's a shout from the wilderness: the only enlargers I would never consider are Omegas. I've happily used Durst, Besseler (own one, used several), Saunders, Leitz ...

The Omegas I've used were in friends' darkrooms, my college darkroom, and the commercial lab where I worked for two years. They spanned every 4x5 model over two decades. And they were all dogs. Not a single one was capable of maintaining alignment through repeated use. The people who used them disliked them; the people who maintained them cursed them.

At my college darkroom, out of frustration, the darkroom technician invited the school's machinist to try to come up with a solution. He almost fell over when he examined the D-2s. Gave us a point by point lecture on how there were no known methods to manufacture a machine more cheaply and innefectively. He suggested recycling them, threw up his arms and walked out laughing!

Anyway. For cheap enlargers, I'm much happier with Beseler. Once you align it (which takes some extra effort) it will stay aligned for years. I've also had no issues with Durst, although I would not pay the extra money for one.

[Merg Ross]

Well, here's a shout from the wilderness: the only enlargers I would never consider are Omegas. I've happily used Durst, Besseler (own one, used several), Saunders, Leitz ...

The Omegas I've used were in friends' darkrooms, my college darkroom, and the commercial lab where I worked for two years. They spanned every 4x5 model over two decades. And they were all dogs. Not a single one was capable of maintaining alignment through repeated use. The people who used them disliked them; the people who maintained them cursed them.

At my college darkroom, out of frustration, the darkroom technician invited the school's machinist to try to come up with a solution. He almost fell over when he examined the D-2s. Gave us a point by point lecture on how there were no known methods to manufacture a machine more cheaply and innefectively. He suggested recycling them, threw up his arms and walked out laughing!


Anyway. For cheap enlargers, I'm much happier with Beseler. Once you align it (which takes some extra effort) it will stay aligned for years. I've also had no issues with Durst, although I would not pay the extra money for one.

My Omega DII, that I have been using for 45 years, has perfomed admirably. I have never had an alignment problem and last aligned it in 2004. Your experience sounds more like user abuse than a design flaw. Or perhaps mine is an earlier model.

[ic-racer]

And the Durst is the Ferrari.

It is made in Italy....

[Allen in Montreal]

My Omega DII, that I have been using for 45 years, has perfomed admirably. I have never had an alignment problem and last aligned it in 2004. Your experience sounds more like user abuse than a design flaw. Or perhaps mine is an earlier model.

45 years! Now that is a good track record.

In the days of shooting Tri-X for the newspaper, we had an amazing chief darkroom tech, Armand, a life'er in the Montreal Star and then The Gazette darkroom, I learned so much from him, anyway, when they ditched the Durst 138s (1977 or so), he then worked on two Omega D2 units, both with Omega cold lights, his prints were always perfect. No one touched his enlargers, (there were 8 in the darkroom and his two were off limits without permission). I think they were as good when they left the darkroom, as when they entered it.

[Merg Ross]

45 years! Now that is a good track record.

In the days of shooting Tri-X for the newspaper, we had an amazing chief darkroom tech, Armand, a life'er in the Montreal Star and then The Gazette darkroom, I learned so much from him, anyway, when they ditched the Durst 138s (1977 or so), he then worked on two Omega D2 units, both with Omega cold lights, his prints were always perfect. No one touched his enlargers, (there were 8 in the darkroom and his two were off limits without permission). I think they were as good when they left the darkroom, as when they entered it.

Allen, that may be the answer; one enlarger, one operator. No one, other than myself, has touched mine in the 45 years. A community enlarger would be an invitation to disaster.

[gary mulder]

My first enlarger was a 4x5 Omega with colorhead. I still use it, mostly for 4x5 black and white work. These are indeed a good buy and hold up well. But you can get from
point A to point B in a VW Bug as well as a Ferrari. And the Durst is the Ferrari. I bought two Durst chassis, one in good condition, the other for parts; but both have
now been completely refubished. I also have a big 8x10 color enlarger of my own design. But let's put things in perspective: an Omega enlarger in good condition might
run you a grand or less; a really clean or boxed late Durst is going to run you anywhere
from fifteen to a hundred grand, depending on the format and accessories - if you can
find one. Most of the Fleabay bargains you see are pretty ratted out. Let's just say
that if I run into a clean Durst Chassis for two to four grand, I'm certainly not going to
tell anyone else!

If you have faith in electronics and you can get your hands on a durst Optopia in good condition, the name optopia explains all.
It will do 13 X 18 cm it is a modern design table standing and auto focus.
I have great fun making color prints with it. (and b/w) :D

[Steve M Hostetter]

I have a Condit mfg made in Sandy Hook Conn. w/ 10x10 Zone VC head will produce a 40x50" print

[John Powers]

Ron,

I was reading through this thread this morning and I thought, where is he? If you are near some of us you might see some of the qualities that are being described. I am just south of Cleveland, OH with a:
Durst 138S a 5x7 enlarger converted to 8x10 with a 12x12 Aristo Cold light head and a Saunders 4550XLG/VCCE Enlarger.

Ice racer is not far away with a Durst 1184

Maybe I haven’t had enough coffee yet. Ice racer has an old Ferrari and I have a small snow plow. Maybe this idea of us getting together isn’t a very good idea after all.

When I moved up from 35mm to 6x7cm I asked the man who sold me the Mamiya RZ about enlargers. He said be sure to get one that will print 4x5 because most people go up from 6x7 to 4x5. He suggested a Durst. I thought, not a chance. I would encourage you to look beyond where you are to where you might go in the surprisingly near future. I now shoot 8"x10" occasionally and 7"x17" full time.

John

[Chuck P.]

I use an LPL 4550 XLG with the VCCE (variable contrast constant exposure) head. It is a very smooth and sweet machine, completely modular, extremely sturdy. One of the finest points about it is being able, with the VCCE head, to change contrast without needing a change in exposure time. If you choose to use a dichroic head you can switch the heads out easily.

[Allen in Montreal]

....Durst 138S a 5x7 enlarger converted to 8x10 with a 12x12 Aristo Cold light head...
Ice racer is not far away with a Durst 1184

Ice racer has an old Ferrari and I have a small snow plow. Maybe this idea of us getting together isn’t a very good idea after all........


That is one hell of a sweet snow plow!! :)

[Herb Cunningham]

Check out what Clyde Butcher usess. That would be a test for who has the biggest one.

I have an old Durst 184, and as a mechanical engineer, I can appreciate the build quality, but I also have a 4x5 Beseler that would convert to 8x10 with the proper kit.

The answer to the question is: how much vertical clearance and how good are you at alignment? The second question is the important one.

[Ralph Barker]

I've only been using my Omega D2V since the late '60s, so the experience is somewhat limited. It has, however, performed well during that time, with careful (non-abusive) use. ;)

It should be noted that this thread was originally started back in 2005.

[Drew Wiley]

My Durst chassis are built of machined stainless steel; everything else is extruded
aluminum. That tells you something about the original cost of mfg. And the Durst
has all kinds of hidden alignment corrections built in that no else even thinks about;
You have to dissect a few of these things to appreciate it. Alas, their most advanced colorhead never went into production, even after the subcomponents were made.
Durst "professional" went over to the Dark Side of the farce (digital).

[tgtaylor]

Although the Beselers are not in consideration, I recommend that you take a second look at the 45MXT for the following reasons.

1. An 8x10 cold light conversion head is available from Beseler and from another supplier on E-bay.

2. Beseler is still in business, answers their phone (or returns calls), and parts for them abound. Just search E-bay for Beseler, for example, and a hundred or more listings pop up.

3. The MXT is extremely easy to align with a laser. The newer Beseler lensboards have three torque screws that serve to hold the lensboard to the enlarger AND, by simply adjusting the individual torques, to align the lens stage.

4. The MXT has a fine focus knob.

5. The chassis is motorized. Yeah, you could turn a crank like you have to do with an Omega, but the motorized Beseler has a more modern high tech feel about it.

6. Ansel Adams though so much about the Beseler that he had two of them.

Whatever you're going to get, get it, and start shooting and printing!

Thomas

[Frank Petronio]

Since Beselers and Omegas are about the same price, opt for the Beseler. I got a good 10 years out of the 30 year old one I owned pre-digital.

[John Powers]

............
It should be noted that this thread was originally started back in 2005.

Good point. I looked up the OP most recent post, dated
Quote]15-Mar-2007, 21:28 #1

Ron Spencer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 26 Darkroom items for sale $10 - $300

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am selling what I have remaining of my darkroom to convert to digital.
All items will be reasonably priced. My apologies... I haven't had the time to price everything. [Quote


Frustratingly there was no enlarger listed.

Now back to that snow plow.

John

[paulr]

My Omega DII, that I have been using for 45 years, has perfomed admirably. I have never had an alignment problem and last aligned it in 2004. Your experience sounds more like user abuse than a design flaw. Or perhaps mine is an earlier model.

I know there are people who are very happy with these enlargers.

I just wanted to make it clear that my experience includes about 60 data points ... Omegas of a number of vintages (all 4x5) used professionally (lots of use), academically (lots of abuse), and individually (lots of babying). In all cases they were the least popular choice among the users, and were despised by their maintainers.

In fact, I must sadly report that I've used more of this brand than any other, since for whatever reason it became industry standard. Every other brand I've used has been dramatically better.

My Beseler has some design limitations (that can be overcome with a bit of custom work), but no glaring flaws or insultingly innept engineering. It's a solid workhorse; if I were shopping for enlargers on a budget, I'd buy a Beseler even if an Omega were offered free. If I had a larger budget, I might investigate some other options.

[paulr]

3. The MXT is extremely easy to align with a laser. The newer Beseler lensboards have three torque screws that serve to hold the lensboard to the enlarger AND, by simply adjusting the individual torques, to align the lens stage.

That's cool ... I had to make mine. Actually, I could have bought one from zone vi, but since I was friends with a machinist it was cheaper to just steal the idea. I'm glad Beseler incorporated it. This fixes the one real design limitation of the MX.

Not a perfect fix ... annoying if you use several lenses. But at least it works.

When I first got the beseler I thought the motorized housing was a gimmic. Now I like it. The advantage is that you're not whaling on the chasis when you adjust the height. No cranking and shaking it like a tree ... just a flick of a switch. And the fine focus knob is sweet.

[Merg Ross]

I know there are people who are very happy with these enlargers.

I just wanted to make it clear that my experience includes about 60 data points ... Omegas of a number of vintages (all 4x5) used professionally (lots of use), academically (lots of abuse), and individually (lots of babying). In all cases they were the least popular choice among the users, and were despised by their maintainers.

In fact, I must sadly report that I've used more of this brand than any other, since for whatever reason it became industry standard. Every other brand I've used has been dramatically better.

My Beseler has some design limitations (that can be overcome with a bit of custom work), but no glaring flaws or insultingly innept engineering. It's a solid workhorse; if I were shopping for enlargers on a budget, I'd buy a Beseler even if an Omega were offered free. If I had a larger budget, I might investigate some other options.

Paul, I agree, Beseler makes a fine enlarger. I was only suggesting, that for some, an Omega might be adequate. If offered free, I would take a chance and grab one. I also have a Durst that I use for 6x6, and it is very well made, as one would expect from Durst.

[Shen45]

I have a D2V which I used for years untill I got a DeVere 504 with all carriers for 35mm to 5x4 and 50,80,105 and 150mm Rodenstock Rodagons for a very silly price. You just have to love the digital lemmings.

The DeVere is so far ahead of any enlarger I have used and I have used a large number. The DeVere design is wonderful for long darkroom sessions for one simple reason - you don't need to dislocate your shoulder for large prints.

Mind you both enlargers are correctly aligned with top quality lenses and prints made from either produce equally top quality prints from negatives tailored to the particular enlarger.

[ic-racer]

It seems the question of which enlarger to get comes up very frequently on these forums and it would probably be easier to just make up a list of BAD enlargers for 4x5 and up.

Ok I'll start....



Hmm... still thinking,...

Anyone know any?

[paulr]

I worked at a lab that had an HK horizontal enlarger. it was a thing of beauty. The neg carriers worked like the beseler holder that grabs the corners and stretches the neg flat (the infamous Neg-a-scratch) but this thing was perfectly designed and never harmed the neg. The carrier itself cost more than any other enlarger I've used.

The enlarger rolled back and forth on little railroad tracks, was controlled by a remote, and autofocussed!

[Chris623]

I used to use the Omega D2XL. I can't say I ever had a complaint with it. If I had one today, I might just start shooting LF again. Great piece of equipment and served my purposes well. I used it for 35mm, 2 1/4 square and 4x5.

[Bazz8]

Well the obvious answer is mine as is most of the posts that i have read.
I have a Durst 138s 5x7 mine is mint and I mean mint you could eat your dinner of it a local uni used it for of all things 8x10s ,when you can print 20x24 prints of the baseboard with no problems the build quality speaks for itself I was informed by the original saleman that the enlarger in 1973 was sold for $90,000 or so so comparing it with some units it not apples with apples,the sad part is how many of these machines have been cut up for scrap which was the fate of this one if not for a chance meeting with a scientest who put me on to the enlarger.
positive points ultimately stable
good light diffusion
does not give a hint of movement.
can be used horizontely
adjustable baseboard.

other enlargers used in order: omega:beseler:LPL:smaller durst 509 or somthing like that
Durst D659 (a mini laboritar autofocus up to 6x6)
as a builder just my observation any thing which requires bracing inducates poor
build tecknique in the first place eg: the omega came with a wall mount and a bracket system to brace the enlarger steady with all its flappy metel guides was never my favourite enlarger.

My favourite Durst I was lucky.

[e]

I have a Durst S-45 EM that I converted to 5x7. Works great. But I dont use it too much since contact printing these days. I always wanted a LF Focomat enlarger though...if they only made them...

[Toyon]

About fine focus on Saunders: don´t be worried about it. After years of use (not so much years!) the fine focus wheel of my enlarger have lost its tightness, although it works with an unpleasant play. I have also a Beseler enlarger with a rude but tight friction knob. My vintage 5x7" have the best focusing knob I have ever seen, works like it was absolutely new, way more precise and easier to focus than Saunders and Beseler.

No need to suffer Jose you can buy a new fine focus gear for the LPL 7600 and use in on the 4500 cost is about $99 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/45757-REG/Omega_240300_LPL_Fine_Focusing_Attachment.html. The trick is not to overtighten the fine screws. Theyll loosen over time, but are a cinch to retighten. I've been doing this on the last set of gears i bought for years.

[artflic]

I am going to sound very old here, but I guess I am. I used many different Omega models over the years and had no problems with them. They do tend to be shaky, but I simply attached them to the wall behind the enlarger with two pieces of threaded rod and angle irons. I do that with all of my enlargers having swiped the idea from Zone VI. I taught darkroom photography at a local college for 8 years and we had all Omega D5 enlargers. They were were all beat, not because they were bad, but because they were not maintained properly. At one point I decided to start shooting 8 x 10 and so an 8 x 10 enlarger was next on my shopping list. I bought the Zone VI since you can get both 5 x 7 and 8 x 10 heads. The VC black and white cold light head was quite nice. Their neg carriers only are landscape, so if you are doing a vertical print you have to look at the image sideways. I bought extra carriers and cut my own vertical openings, thus solving the problem. However, that is an added expense. I would not hesitate to recommend the enlarger, however, they are probably hard to find and parts not as easy to obtain as Omegas, etc. If you do select a Zone VI,make sure you get the Type 2, which has two columns in the head, it is more stable. For the past several years I have been using a Beseler 45V XL. It cost me $5 as a local vocational school closed out their program. I mounted it next to my Omega D5 and my Zone VI. When the time came to move to a new house I had to downsize and so I sold the Omegas and the Zone VI and kept the Besseler. It seems a bit more convenient to align .I generally use the color head as you can dial in contrast for B & W VC paper using the filters. I also have a condenser head which I use on occasion. Coupled with Nikkor lenses the results can be quite contrasty. I also have a complete set of Componon S lenses, so I can pick and choose appropriately for the project. It has been mentioned in other posts above, but I will second the assertion that the lens is the whole thing, everything else is just a convenience. The Bessler replaced my Zone VI and Omegas since it seemed more convenient in a number of ways. That having been said, I am confident that I could align almost any old enlarger and, with a good lens, make superior prints. It's all in the lens. Keep in mind that cold light heads are just diffuser heads of a newer variety. Some like condensers, some diffusers. I like both, depending on whatever I am trying to achieve. Sorry to ramble and I hope this helps. Rob Rielly

[tom north]

Ron,

Every good enlarger will require some set up involving leveling and plumbing. How difficult or how easy this is will vary on the design and are issues you should consider. To maximize your enlargers performance you should consider this along with choice of lenses and use of a glass negative carrier. I have an Omega 4 x 5 and 5 x 7 enlarger that I found performs great when set up correctly, have good anchorage to the wall to eliminate vibration, use good quality lenses and glass neg carriers. Any of the brands you described will do the job for you, however consider an enlarger as a system that has setup requirements and needs all of the additional components to work adequately.

Best

Tom

[Bazz8]

I am going to sound very old here, but I guess I am. I used many different Omega models over the years and had no problems with them. They do tend to be shaky, but I simply attached them to the wall behind the enlarger with two pieces of threaded rod and angle irons. I do that with all of my enlargers having swiped the idea from Zone VI. I taught darkroom photography at a local college for 8 years and we had all Omega D5 enlargers. They were were all beat, not because they were bad, but because they were not maintained properly. At one point I decided to start shooting 8 x 10 and so an 8 x 10 enlarger was next on my shopping list. I bought the Zone VI since you can get both 5 x 7 and 8 x 10 heads. The VC black and white cold light head was quite nice. Their neg carriers only are landscape, so if you are doing a vertical print you have to look at the image sideways. I bought extra carriers and cut my own vertical openings, thus solving the problem. However, that is an added expense. I would not hesitate to recommend the enlarger, however, they are probably hard to find and parts not as easy to obtain as Omegas, etc. If you do select a Zone VI,make sure you get the Type 2, which has two columns in the head, it is more stable. For the past several years I have been using a Beseler 45V XL. It cost me $5 as a local vocational school closed out their program. I mounted it next to my Omega D5 and my Zone VI. When the time came to move to a new house I had to downsize and so I sold the Omegas and the Zone VI and kept the Besseler. It seems a bit more convenient to align .I generally use the color head as you can dial in contrast for B & W VC paper using the filters. I also have a condenser head which I use on occasion. Coupled with Nikkor lenses the results can be quite contrasty. I also have a complete set of Componon S lenses, so I can pick and choose appropriately for the project. It has been mentioned in other posts above, but I will second the assertion that the lens is the whole thing, everything else is just a convenience. The Bessler replaced my Zone VI and Omegas since it seemed more convenient in a number of ways. That having been said, I am confident that I could align almost any old enlarger and, with a good lens, make superior prints. It's all in the lens. Keep in mind that cold light heads are just diffuser heads of a newer variety. Some like condensers, some diffusers. I like both, depending on whatever I am trying to achieve. Sorry to ramble and I hope this helps. Rob Rielly

Tongue in Cheek comment Rob the units I had came from a pro lab in adelaide which sadly went out of business with the advent of digital , they had wall brackets with 45deg bracing I suppose I used one for 6 months or so got some good prints from the setup. It took quite some time to set up the enlarger for level and true ( used a lazer level) I had a wall mouting bracket but as I was building a ramp for a house over the water at the time I got a 40mm cd ply offcut and cut a 900 deep x 600 wide baseboard, that kept it steady! It was sold to a school in victoria several years ago.
My present project is shifting my darkroom 3.6 X 3.0 MTR in size down to a galley style darkroom 4.0 mtr x 1.9 mtr width it will have 2 enlargers in it the Durst 138s and a mini laborator the durst Durst d659 for 35mm and 6x6 + wishing sink and my processers will be a little cosy compared to what I have used for over 10 years.
such is life.

[artflic]

I think we agree. Different enlargers take different methods to set up. When I used my Omegas I had a special machinist's level that helped level the lens board stage. As I recall the easist of the lot to align was the Zone VI, you just used a target neg and turned an allen wrench until you were level. I went from operating three enlargers in a space about 9 x 14 to a new darkroom that is about 15 x 20. Had I known that I probably would have kept the other enlargers, but the Besseler does what I need it to do. As I recall, each enlarger was set for different formats. The Omega was used for 35mm and medium format as was the Beseler and I generally used the Zone VI for 4 x 5 and 8 x 10. On other occasions the Beseler did some 4 x 5 work and, of course, will now do everything as I have all the mixing boxes from 35mm to 4 x 5. Regards, Rob