Durst vs Saunders Black & White Variable Contrast

[William D. Lester]

I presently have a Saunders LPL 4500 enlarger with a CCCE head which has served me well for the past 15 years. If I have any nits to pick with it, the negative carriers tend to wear ever so slightly after years of use and leave traces of metal filings which tend to be more nuisance than anything else.

An aquaintance in my camera group has purchased a couple of Durst Laborator L1200 4x5 enlargers on Ebay. The design and construction of the negative stages appears to be first class on the Durst and I'm told the overall build quality is excellent. I might be interested in buying one from him. I have not actually seen the complete enlarger yet in person and hope to aquaint myself with the system a bit more before I seriously consider it. My question relates to the enlarger head module. I have not found any current heads other than a hugely expensive multigraph that offer diffusion light with variable contrast filters. The person in possession of the enlargers claims to have 2 manually operated VCCE heads, but that they must have been discontinued as he can no longer find any information on them. Did Durst in fact have a VCCE head with diffuse illumination for this enlarger? If so can it still be serviced if required? Is the Durst preferable to the Saunders LPL? Any comments would be appreciated.

[jose angel]

Is the Durst preferable to the Saunders LPL? In my opinion, yes. Before I bought my LPL, I compared it side by side with the L1200. The Durst looks to me by far much better. I didn`t buy the Durst because I wanted a color head, and a very used Durst with condenser head was the same as my LPL Dichro new with accesories. Other Durst light sources had astronomical prices at that time. After years using regularly the LPL I feel satiesfied with it, thought. I don`t need to change it.

[martin howard]

Dear William, I have a Durst laborator 1200 (L1200) with the Durst VLS500 head. There are very few of these variable contast heads around unlike the CLS450 or CLS500 colour heads. I wouldn't change it for anything - except for the multigraph! The filter grades are dialled in (mechanically not digitally) from 0-100 and any density changes are compensated for automatically. Over the last 5 years I,ve been able to pick-up all of the relevant accessories secondhand: femobox for diffussion and femoneg for the negative carrier glass/less. These are still available but at prices for new. It's solid, ergonomic, quite 'modern' and has the feel of a real tool - not a toy! Most of all, it's an alround pleasure to use in the darkroom and something you can put your confidence in. Happy printing.

[Armin Seeholzer]

I would not change my LPL for a Durst maybe for a Kienzle but not for a Durst.

[Bill Smith]

Several years ago I have owned the LPL. After many months of frustration with severe light leaks, I sold it and purchased a Durst L1200 Multigraph. Anyone who says that the LPL is anywhere close to the quality and build of the L1200 does not know whatthey are talking about.

The L1200 Multograph is an amazing machine. The negative holders blow the LPL away. They have registration pins for punched negatives should you be into masking. The control box is part of a closed loop system that utilizes filters, a shutter, timer, and photosensor. The unit also comes with a proble to read densities and determine ideal contrast and exposure.

The Durst L1200 is a league that is not even close to the LPL.

[Tom Westbrook]

At three to four times the cost new, I'd expect the Durst to have better quality, otherwise no one would bother with them. The issue to the buyer is if the features are worth the extra cost. The Multigraph head alone costs more than two complete LPL 4500XLG's.

As for the light leaks, the LPL is famous for them. A roll of black tape takes care of just about all of them. The fan housing can be enclosed in a tube of black construction paper. Not a huge deal.