Best 35mm film enlarger lens choice?

[Field]

I work in a darkroom and we have a lot of lenses sitting around. I'm not sure which one is going to give me the best picture? My understanding is that wide open the faster lenses have minor fall off, and supposidly aperutre blade count doesn't matter? (I don't see how not, light still bends around them).

The enlargers are dichromatic filters, color enlargers. (not condensors)

My options in the wider range are.
Nikon 50mm f2.8 and f4 lenses (the 2.8 are plastic, f4 metal)
Schnieder old chrome 60mm f5.6 (has a lot of blades, looks nice)
Shnieder 50mm f2.8 Componon-S

Or is printing with more compression better? Going 75-80mm lenses? In that case we have basically the same things, just different focal length.

 

[fotch]

My choice would be Nikon 50mm f2.8. YMMV

 

[Ian Grant]

Those are all good lenses personally I'd go for the Schneider 50mm f2.8 Componon-S, probably the best enlarger lenses around.

Ian

 

[Field]

I wish we had Rodenstock's, since I suspect they are even better, but we are a state school so...

I am pretty curious about the 60mm 5.6. I might have to try it.

It just seems so weird that all the care and concern in the world in involved into what camera lens you use (still have to take a good picture) yet enlarger lenses are not really that big of a deal... I understand there is zero depth of field, but still, every piece of glass an image goes through gains characteristics.

 

[tkamiya]

How large are you printing? At 8x10 or 11x14, I'd be surprised you can tell difference between lenses you have....

Between Nikons, your f/4 one is 4 element where as f/2.8 one is 6 element. The latter is considered the better of two. I use it here and it's pretty nice.

 

[Field]

I mostly do 8x10. I use pretty fine grain film though (Efke, and Agfa Cinirex)

 

[zsas]

If you are mostly 8x10, any clean and clear 6 element lens will yield prints that I bet you would have a hard time distinguishing the difference. I believe all the above except for the Nikon f4 are 6 elements

 

[Field]

Thanks for the advice!

 

[Bob-D659]

Well, when I did some tests, I did find a small difference between an older(1960's vintage) chrome 50mm Componon and the newer -S version, but that was at 16x magnification from a 35mm negative, AND you almost needed a 5x or stronger loupe to see the differences on the print. So if you exclude the 4 element Nikkor, you are not likely to spot much difference unless one of the lenses has internal haze or other form of damage.

 

[jp498]

Aperture blade roundness and perspective compression are irrelevant on the enlarger. Shape of the iris is only an issue taking the photo when portions of the scene are out of focus or you're dealing with flare. (Some of the super wide taking lenses have star shaped irises, but it's not apt to matter since they are used for f64 type situations where nothing is out of focus.) On the enlarger you want the same uniform good focus from one edge of the negative to another.

Going to 75-80mm isn't going to compress anything, because the actual perspectives of the scene are already hard-coded in the 2-dimensional negative. A longer lens is just going to require a little more height printing and allow bigger negatives.

I use an 80mm lens for both 6x6cm and 35mm. It's a componon-s with the iris opening lever (to open for focusing) and illuminated aperture setting. I've also used El-nikkor 50/2.8 and can't tell any difference optically for common B&W printing uses for 35mm. (With dichro enlarger). Both are very capable and it comes down to cleanliness and personal preference.

 

[zsas]

Good points JP about the longer lens, I too use a longer lens for 35mm neg printing (a 63mm enlarging lens). It is nice bc I can get more room when dodge/burn. Food for thought OP. Think I wd give that 60mm a try (so long as it is clean and clear).

 

[tony lockerbie]

Rodenstock, Nikkor and Schneider all make comparable lenses and you won't tell the difference at 10x8. The 60mm Companon does sound good though, the most important thing to check though is the clarity of the glass. A lot of older enlarger lenses have accumulated haze and this can adversely affect your image. I personally use a 63mm El-Nikkor for 35mm, gives me a nice working distance for 10x8's.

 

[onepuff]

I have the Nikon and it is a very good enlarging lens. I don't have experience of Schneider enlarging lenses but have used a number of Schneiders in the past on LF cameras and they were superb so I would expect their enlarging lenses to be also. I wouldn't think any of the lenses you listed would be duffers and certainly not the Nikon.

 

[John Austin]

So far you have received a lot of advice from people who don't know your particular lenses

The only way to find out is for you to conduct actual tests yourself in your own darkroom - Any recommendation stated on this thread without seeing your test results is fatuous

John

 

[ic-racer]

It just seems so weird that all the care and concern in the world in involved into what camera lens you use (still have to take a good picture) yet enlarger lenses are not really that big of a deal....

Oh, there is plenty of discussion of enlarging lenses. Just hang around APUG longer and you will see.

 

[MattKing]

I wish we had Rodenstock's, since I suspect they are even better, but we are a state school so...

I am pretty curious about the 60mm 5.6. I might have to try it.

It just seems so weird that all the care and concern in the world in involved into what camera lens you use (still have to take a good picture) yet enlarger lenses are not really that big of a deal... I understand there is zero depth of field, but still, every piece of glass an image goes through gains characteristics.

Keep the 60mm lens as a special purpose accessory, for those times when a small print is necessary, but you want just a little bit of extra enlarger height.

By the way, I bet the name on the lenses you refer to as "Nikon" isn't Nikon .

The rest of the advice above is great. With the exception of the 4 element lens, and possibly the 60mm lens, all the rest of the lenses are recognized as being high quality optics, from high quality manufacturers, so they should perform similarly. In fact, the condition of the lenses may be the most determinative factor of them all.

In my case, I find myself influenced as well by issues of convenience and ergonomics - illuminated f/stops and quick adjustments from wide-open to a particular stopped-down position are valuable features.

In addition, enlarging lenses do have their own subtle characteristics. For someone like me, who shoots with a number of different formats, having several different focal lengths from the same manufacturer and model/series can add some consistency to printing decisions.

Also, if you are going to print colour, you will find that the different lenses may have small but measurable influences on colour reproduction, so for those of us who enlarge from different formats there definitely is an advantage to standardize on one manufacturer and model/series.

I had to smile a bit when I saw you commenting on the care and concern involved in choosing a camera lens. Camera lenses do differ, but when you are talking about good quality equipment from various manufacturers, those differences are, IMHO, much smaller than the fans and the reviewers and in particular the magazines would have us believe .

And the environment within which one works with an enlarging lens is much more controlled than the environment for camera lenses.

If I were you, I would go through the lenses on hand to pick out the one or two that are most convenient to use. I would then do test prints at a few different magnifications (centre and corners) and a using a range of apertures on smaller (4x5?) pieces of paper. If there are any that jump out as giving the best results, I would use that lens.

 

[Bob-D659]

The debates on which is the best enlarger lens has been going on for decades. It's not just as prevalent now since the internet arrived and the wholesale switch away from optical printing. Except here of course.

 

[PKM-25]

The debates on which is the best enlarger lens has been going on for decades. It's not just as prevalent now since the internet arrived and the wholesale switch away from optical printing. Except here of course.

In going through the same thing, I just put up for the best out there so I don't have to second guess. That way when I am dealing with image sharpness issues, I know it is less likely the lens and more likely film flatness or alignments.

For 35mm work I have 50mm 2.8 Apo Rodagon's in N and G and a spare non-N Apo 50 for a student enlarger. By no means cheap, but also not nearly as expensive as the lens that took the image...

 

[BrendanCarlson]

I currently am using a Wollensak 135 f/4.5, it works really well for me. I enlarge up to 8x10 on my Omega DII with it.

 

[Smudger]

I have found the best,quickest way to test enlarging lenses is to put a piece of nylon mesh/window screen in the carrier -you can easily spot fall-off,distortion,poor corner performance et cetera.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

nikon,schneider, rodenstock:alll excellent!but i prefer 6-element lenses over 4-element designs.

 

[lxdude]

nikon,schneider, rodenstock:alll excellent!but i prefer 6-element lenses over 4-element designs.

Any opinion of Fujinon?