My 90mm Beseler Color Pro is excellent.
That's a bit skimpy on 6x9, but would probably be OK, simply OK. The "normal" for 6x9 is 105, and slightly longer than normal is generally
preferable. But it sounds like you have old-style Componons (chrome?), nothing relatively modern. Just depends how fussy you want to be;
but a top-end apo enlarging lens will have somewhat better detail and contrast in terms of microtonality - and also a conspicuously higher price. Beseler lenses were more entry level items.
The Color Pro lenses were Beseler's "premium" line when they were current. Most likely, they are re-badged versions of lenses manufactured by Schneider, or Rodenstock.
Many of the results of a google search on the subject will include the reports of fans. I like mine - but I wouldn't expect it to handle 6x9 well.
Here is what appears to be Beseler's promotional materials, courtesy of KHB: http://www.khbphotografix.com/Used/ColorPro.htm
EDIT: From time to time I use mine to make enlargements that are also within the recommended range for my late model 80mm Rodagon lens. The two lenses give me similar, high quality results.
do you know how many elements the Color Pro lenses are ?
The Color Pro lenses were Beseler's "premium" line when they were current. Most likely, they are re-badged versions of lenses manufactured by Schneider, or Rodenstock.
Color Pro is only a product name & had nothing to do with color/bw abilities.
....
Top performer at 50mm was Schneider Componon-S. The Rodenstock APO-Rodagon N was second. The Beseler Pro pretty much tied with Computar, and the El Nikkor trailed.
I thought he said that the Nikkor was the perfect lens ever made. They are in no particular order are they? How do you think the Componon would compare to the componon s?
The Color Pros I believe were Computars, which are a little better than your average Componon assuming it hasn't separated which they are apt to do...
I suspect Beseler sourced a range of lenses from a range of suppliers. Some may certainly have been Computars, and the later 'HD' lenses where certainly Rodenstocks, but no doubt other suppliers have been involved and we may never know all the details.
The Color Pro's in the previously posted link (http://www.khbphotografix.com/Used/ColorPro.htm) don't marry up with Computar lenses that were available at the time. For example, Computar never made a 4.5/75, 5.6/90 or 5.6/105. Computar lenses in these focal lengths are 3.5/65, 4.5/80, 4.5/90 and 4.5/105. Of course lenses can simply be labelled differently and/or baffles inserted to provide a point of difference.
How does the performance of Color Pros compare to Computars?
80 is pretty short for 6x7. The 5.6 El Nikkor does an acceptable job, the cheaper faster version will have some definition problems toward the corners. More of a 6x6 length. For all my MF negs I use 105 Apo Rodagon N, which is unquestionably the finest enlarging lens in this focal length unless you can afford the ridiculously expensive rare Apo El Nikkor (not to be confused with El Nikkor). Componon S doesn't even come close, though it is a better performer than the old chrome Componons. But sometimes I prefer to use the 150 Apo Rodagon N. With longer than normal focal lengths you get more even illumination, important in situations when burning in edge and corner density is clumsy. I'm not guessing about any of this.
Oh for heaven sake! Everyone who has actually used these various lenses knows the facts. Forget you "Consumer Reports" mentality. Why
do you think Schneider came out with their "HM Apo" series of enlarger lenses - to compete with the Apo Rodagon N's. ...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?