90mm Enlarging Lens

[thefizz]

Why is it so hard to find a second-hand 90mm enlarging lens. With all the 6x7 cameras out there, you would think there would be plenty of these lenses.

I have been looking for ages but no success. I have a 105mm Nikkor but a 90mm would produce bigger prints.

Peter

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

Perhaps because the suggested standard enlarging lens for 6x7 is 110mm? Or such is the length I've always seen coming with 6x7 enlargers...

Most probably, however, 6x7 enlargers and accessories are being kept by people. Who owns one, knows something about image quality. 135 or 120 enlargers were much more common, IMHO, 6x7 has always been into the high-end range.

 

[davetravis]

I print 6x7 and have always used the 80mm f4 Rodagon. The projected image is very bright, even at 20x24, and there is very little cropping, even on the 11x14's.
I've tried shorter and longer, but none were such a perfect "fit."

 

[ricksplace]

I use a 75/4 Ektar for 6X7 on a beseler 23C. I was pleasantly surprised that it covered. I was using a 105 for 6X7 and 6X9. I still use the 105 for 6X9, but I now use the ektar exclusively for 6X7. I can't tell the difference between the ektar and a 105 componon. Maybe I just got lucky and got a good one. I usually expose at f11 - f8.

They come up every so often on ebay, and they are pretty cheap. I think I paid about $15 for mine.

I was using a 75/4.5 componar for 6X6 and it just didn't have the sharpness I wanted, so I thought I'd try the Ektar before spending lots more on a componon/nikkor/rodagon.

IMHO, ektar lenses are the most underrated lenses out there, both for med and lrg format cameras and enlarging lenses. The commercial ektars still bring top dollar on the used market.

I use my 127/4.7 ektar from my 4X5 on my 2X3 Century graphic. The sharpness is right up there with the 80/2.8 Xenotar and 105/3.5 Colour Heliar I usually use on the Century. The four element Ektar doesn't give anything up to those five element lenses.

Rick.

 

[David Brown]

A 90mm would be nice, but there's not too many of them. You can usually cover 6x7 with an 80mm, however. I have the 80mm Nikkor and am very happy with it. Just my .02!

David

 

[fschifano]

I'm using a Schneider 80mm f/5.6 Componon-S for medium format negatives up to 6x7. I have no problems with sharpness out to the corners and no light fall off at the edges once stopped down to working aperture of f/11. Schneider doesn't recommend using the lens for that format, but it does work. The 80mm Nikkor is recommended for use with up to 6x7. See if you can find one of those around. They are both very good.

 

[thefizz]

Thanks for the replys.

Going by the experience some of you have had with the 80mm, I may look out for one and give it a go. There seem to be plenty available and they will provide me with bigger enlargements than my 105mm.

Thanks again,
Peter

 

[MattKing]

Wollensak 90mm f/ 4.5 Enlarging Raptar

Has anyone had any experience with this Wollensak 90mm f/ 4.5 Enlarging Raptar lens:

Wollensak 90mm

I have a 75mm YSARON which is OK for 6x6, but hope to move up to 6x7 some time in the near future.

Would it be a good investment? Is it possible that it would cover 6x9?

Thanks,
Matt

 

[Jim Jones]

90mm was commonly used for 6x9. The Wollensak is an older one, but some of those old lenses did quite well for MF and LF. The best way to determine if your 75mm Ysaron is adequate is to try it.

 

[MattKing]

90mm was commonly used for 6x9. The Wollensak is an older one, but some of those old lenses did quite well for MF and LF. The best way to determine if your 75mm Ysaron is adequate is to try it.

Thanks Jim - you make perfect sense.

The only problem is, does this mean that my wife may be correct, that I do not need any more lenses ?

 

[Bob Carnie]

I use the apo rodagon 90 for all 6x7 and 6x9 enlarging work. I bought it new and had no problem finding one. That was a couple of years ago.
It really does beat the apo 80 coverage .and being f4 is nice

 

[davetravis]

Hi Bob,
Are you saying the 90 beats the 80 for 6x7?
If so, in what ways?
Just curious.
Thanks.

 

[Bob Carnie]

hi Dave

It seems that the 90 gives me a little bit of play on the easal surface when using 6x7 and 6x9 negatives.
With an 80 I always found that the very edges seemed to be *clipped* and I was never happy or confident that the edges were perfectly sharp.
With the 90 the coverage seems to be better and I am happy with the sharpness.
I use the 80 for all 6x6 negs with confidence but I do put in the 90 for the larger format.
Since the starting apeture for both lenses are the same and my enlarger height does not change dramatically going to the 90 , I prefer the longer lens.

 

[davetravis]

Thanks Bob,
I just got the 80mm APO on ebay, so I guess I'm stuck!
And just wanted to see if my new fancy signature works!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I also use the 90 Apo-Rodagon for MF (6x6 through 6x9), and I've been happy with it. I tend not to print very big that often, so I haven't had a problem with clipping on 6x9, and I've got enough column to use it for 6x6.