Enlarger lens on view camera

[norm the storm]

Hi everybody

Probably this question was asked before but I want to know if I can put an Apo Rodagon 90 mm f4 or a Componon 150 mm on a Sinar F1?

What would I expect?

Regards

[pergorm]

You can expect good close-up performance and not-so-good performance at infinity. Enlarging lenses are well corrected at close up distances....

Regards
Per

[BetterSense]

It will work fine for normal print sizes, but of course you don't have a shutter. You might notice some differences in the out-of-focus areas compared to a taking lens--I used a generic 135mm enlarging lens on my speed graphic for a long time and sometimes I would get "doughnut" or "nisen" boke.

[rdenney]

It will work fine for normal print sizes, but of course you don't have a shutter. You might notice some differences in the out-of-focus areas compared to a taking lens--I used a generic 135mm enlarging lens on my speed graphic for a long time and sometimes I would get "doughnut" or "nisen" boke.

Indeed. I have a very old Bausch and Lomb Tessar 139mm enlarging lens that provides pronounced bright-edge bokeh, untypical of other tessar lenses I own. Example below:


This image was made using the B&L Tessar mounted on a bellows and attached to a Canon DSLR, solely for the purpose of evaluating bokeh. The setup was designed to demonstrate bokeh for my online article on the topic.

But if used at small apertures and generally to make sharp images, it seems to work about as well as any other tessar of similar vintage.

Note that enlarging lenses are usually used at magnification ratios in the 1:2 to 1:10 range--as denoted by the size of the enlarged print with respect to the negative--and are probably designed for something in that range. The usual working range will tend to the 1:2 end for larger formats. They are not necessarily optimized for 1:1 the way a true copy lens might be--at that magnification, one can make a contact print.

But I wonder if enlarging lenses present any particular advantage over regular taking lenses.

Rick "who has used them for copy work because of their flat field" Denney

[E. von Hoegh]

I had a B&L Tessar Ic 139mm. It wasn't an enlarging lens; I used it on a Graflex. It was coated and if I remember correctly had a yellow dot on the bezel.

[EdSawyer]

"But I wonder if enlarging lenses present any particular advantage over regular taking lenses."

Well, aside from the lack of a shutter, or because of it, they are significantly cheaper. A mint Schneider Componon-S 150mm can be had for $50-65 on ebay. Even an older Symmar 150mm will cost 2-3 times that probably. A modern Apo-Symmar will be up to 10x that price, even used.

Ed

[E. von Hoegh]

"But I wonder if enlarging lenses present any particular advantage over regular taking lenses."

Well, aside from the lack of a shutter, or because of it, they are significantly cheaper. A mint Schneider Componon-S 150mm can be had for $50-65 on ebay. Even an older Symmar 150mm will cost 2-3 times that probably. A modern Apo-Symmar will be up to 10x that price, even used.

Ed

In addition to the bargain price, they are good for macro or flat field work.

[Arne Croell]

Similar to their process lenses (G-Claron, Repro-Claron), the lens cells of many Schneider enlarging lenses will screw directly into a shutter. Some of the older ones might ask for a size 2 shutter, and one has to figure out the aperture values, but in many cases it should be easy.

[rdenney]

I wasn't aware that that B&L Tessar was not an enlarging lens. It's in a barrel that threads into a typical enlarger plate, as I recall, and I installed it in a stock Omega lens board (25 years ago, that is). And it was sold to me as an enlarging lens, so I took that on face value. If it was intended as a taking lens, then its rendering isn't much like other tessars as taking lenses. Field was quite flat with that lens. Maybe it was intended as a process lens.

It certainly bears little resemblance to a modern(ish) Componon or EL-Nikkor (I also own a 105mm EL-Nikkor and a 50mm Componon). And I also wasn't aware those were as cheap as reported here. I guess the few I've seen in the large-format focal range have been more like $150--still a bargain compared to their original price in real dollars, but closer to the price of a used Symmar or Sironar.

Of course, the cheapness works if you already have a workable shutter. If the OP owns a Sinar shutter for his Sinar view camera, then it's a no-brainer. Shutters that go beyond something like a Packard often come with a lens as cheaply as without, by my observation.

Rick "counting the cost" Denney

[neil poulsen]

I did this once with a 150mm Componon-S enlarging lens to photograph some artwork, and it worked out fine. That lens directly fits into a Copal 0 shutter.