Advice on Omega Enlarger

jackbaty · Jul 11, 2010

Some time ago I bought an odd enlarger. It's an Omega Super Chromega D head mounted on one of the larger motorized Beseler chassis.

A closer shot of the head here http://www.flickr.com/photos/jbaty/4240792166/

Everything seems to function, but it all seems a little rough (for lack of a better word.) The focus adjustment feels "sticky" and things seem just a bit loose.

I don't have a lot of experience with enlargers, so I'm curious about something. When printing 8x8(inch) from a medium format negative using an 80mm lens, the head has to be nearly as low as it physically can go in order to focus. Is that normal or is it perhaps a byproduct of the strange combination of head and chassis?

I'm considering either shopping for something a little more normal and smooth or refurbishing this one, so I'm interested in hearing opinions on how feasible a refurb project might be.

Paul VanAudenhove · Jul 11, 2010

It looks like you have a Beseler 45 series chassis, and I believe the largest negative size they take is 4x5 inches. The enlarger head shouldn't make any difference in focussing or enlargement size so long as the negative is evenly illuminated.

Most recomendations for enlarger lenses are to use a 50mm for 35mm film, 80mm for 120 roll film formats, and a 135-150mm lens for 4x5 sheet film. These are just starting points, I'm sure others will chime in with what works best for them, or other choices.

I'm confused when you say you are printing from an 8x8 inch medium format negative. Usually when people refer to medium format, they mean 120/220 roll film which is roughly 6cm wide.

Other than that, it looks like you have a very nice enlarging set-up. I hope you can get everything working correctly.

jackbaty · Jul 11, 2010

Thanks Paul. I was a little unclear, sorry. I meant that I'm making an 8x8 inch _print_ from a 120 (6x6cm) negative. When using an 80mm lens the head needs to be lowered almost all the way down in order to print at that size. Basically this would make it impossible to make a smaller 5x5 inch print. I don't really *want* to make 5x5 prints, but would like to know if this is normal or not.

David Brown · Jul 11, 2010

8x8 is not very big from a 120 negative, so the enlarger won't be very high up. Have you tried to make the same enlargement on the 23C next door? I'll bet the relative head height is about the same with the same lens.

One solution is to use a longer lens, such as a 105. This will cause you to have to raise the head higher for the same size enlargement.

Rick A · Jul 11, 2010

If you want the head raised up higher for the enlargment size, switch to a lens in the 90mm-105mm range. I have my 4x5 Pro Lab bottomed out for an 8x8 with 80mm lens. I have a 90mm that allows me to raise the head a bit, my 135 puts the head up fairly high to get that size. Printing a 5x5 requires me to use the 135mm.

jackbaty · Jul 11, 2010

This is great, thanks everyone! I may just start tearing it down to see if I can clean it up and make everything work like butter (without completely destroying it.)

I do have a 105mm also, so will give that a whirl for the smaller prints.

Sirius Glass · Jul 11, 2010

White grease or vasoline on the gears; WD-40 on moving parts; use both sparingly and wipe up any that thinks it belongs were it is not wanted!

Steve

tkamiya · Jul 11, 2010

It's very normal for the head to be that low. When I use 645 negs to print 5x7, my D-II with 75mm lens won't go low enough, so that I'll have to raise the easel. I picked up a 105mm lens for this purpose. Yours look like a fine enlarger. More than likely, all it needs is some cleaning and possibly adjusting.

ann · Jul 11, 2010

perhaps this head is similar to other diffusor types including cold light heads which has the unit remaining in the same slot, as close to the negative carrier as possible.

Using the correct focal length lens is important. you don't say which size negative your printing, i am assuming 2 1/4 square since your making a square print, but that may not be what you have. 80mm should cover, but you will need to go up if printing 6x7 , or 6x9 negatives, think 100 or 105

fotch · Jul 11, 2010

What others said, get a longer lens, 105mm or use a 135mm that you may have for 4x5. I wonder if that head is to heavy for the motor? The springs can be adjusted and may help if that is a problem.

i would contact Beseler to find out the proper lube. WD40 mucks up a lot of equipment and may not be a wise choice. If stored for a time in a humid environment, perhaps some rusting has occurred and that plus any lube that has lost it original qualities may be what is causing the roughness you mentioned. Disassemble, clean, oil, reassemble, adjust, will be as good as new.

Your wide angle makes the 45 look gigantic next to the 23C.

epatsellis · Jul 11, 2010

ann said:
perhaps this head is similar to other diffusor types including cold light heads which has the unit remaining in the same slot, as close to the negative carrier as possible.

Using the correct focal length lens is important. you don't say which size negative your printing, i am assuming 2 1/4 square since your making a square print, but that may not be what you have. 80mm should cover, but you will need to go up if printing 6x7 , or 6x9 negatives, think 100 or 105

I think it depends on the lens, Rodenstock suggests the 80mm Rodagon for 6x7. I have both the 80 and 105 and they both cover 6x7 equally well.

vedmak · Jul 11, 2010

Sirius Glass said:
White grease or vasoline on the gears; WD-40 on moving parts; use both sparingly and wipe up any that thinks it belongs were it is not wanted!

Steve

I would advice not to use wd-40 on photo equipment, lighter fluid will be less harmful to get sticky parts going, and then some heavy oil.

Advice on Omega Enlarger

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency