Best lenses for Omega B-22

Mike Kennedy · Sep 10, 2007

A great yard sale find for $20.00. Came with 2 Rodenstock Omegar lenses,50mm & 75mm. Are there better quality lenses around that would fit the B-22?

Thanks

craigclu · Sep 10, 2007

Had one of the B-22's many years back and liked it very much. Pause after touching the head as it will vibe for awhile. A 6 element El-Nikkor, Rodagon or Schneider would be a good match-up for your machine and nice examples are quite affordable now. Your Omegars are likely 4 element Rodenstock-sourced and are quite sufficient for smaller prints but I would promote getting a notch up in glass to make enlargements more gratifying to produce.

Nick Zentena · Sep 10, 2007

Almost anything you'd want to use should fit. 39mm LTM mounts. I'm assuming the two you've currently got are on 39mm lensboards. Yes?

pnance · Sep 10, 2007

I tested the 75mm Rodenstock against a 75mm Nikkor and a old Kodak Ektar 75mm. Surprisingly, to me, the Rodenstock was the winner, sharper at f/4.5 and f/16 than the others. It also had the best accuracy of f/stop. (Test procedure was a 4x5 print made from the corner at max height of enlarger)

raucousimages · Sep 11, 2007

To make a long story short I started with Rogonar (same as Omegar) and was never happy with the results. I switched to Rodenstock Rodagon and was very happy.

k_jupiter · Sep 11, 2007

With the price of enlarging lens what they are today, the minimum you should be using is a Componon-S or a Nikon 50/2.8. I have a Nikon 50/4.0 that isn't worth the cost of shipping. And it's at least as good as your Omega/Rodenstock.
With that enlarger, did you receive the supplementary condensor for printing 35mm? It evens out the light with those small negatives.

tim in san jose

Mike Kennedy · Sep 11, 2007

Yes I did get the supplementary condenser.
The enlarger was actually packaged in it's origional box with all the paper work.

Neanderman · Sep 11, 2007

What format do you shoot most (or are likely to adopt in the future?) If you shoot mostly 35mm and some 2 1/4 x 2 1/4, get a good, 6 element 80 mm and use it for both. It will somewhat limit the size of enlargement for 35mm, but you'll also be using the sharper, center portion of the lens.

If you shoot a lot of 2 1/4 x 2 1/4, get a good, 6 element 105mm. Again, the longer than 'normal' focal length lens will limit your size of enlargement a bit, but you'll be using the center of the lens.

I favor Rodagons, but a Componon-S or El-Nikkor will be comparable.

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Sep 11, 2007

Neanderman said:
What format do you shoot most (or are likely to adopt in the future?) If you shoot mostly 35mm and some 2 1/4 x 2 1/4, get a good, 6 element 80 mm and use it for both. It will somewhat limit the size of enlargement for 35mm, but you'll also be using the sharper, center portion of the lens.

... And negating any theoretical sharpness enhancement by bigger vibrations in the enlarger column due to the need to set the head higher.

Mike Kennedy · Sep 12, 2007

About 80% of my worh is 35mm.

ignatiu5 · Feb 16, 2008

If I may tag along this thread, I'm looking for advice on an either/or situation for my B-22XL. I currently print only 35mm with a 50/2.8 El-Nikkor, but am thinking about venturing into 645 or maybe 6x6 territory. I already have two lenses of the appropriate (give or take) focal length: an El-Omegar 75/3.5 and a Rodenstock OMEGAR 75/4.5. I only need one, so which one to keep? Is there a significant resolution/sharpness/contrast difference between them (I know that they're both lower end lenses, so it may very well be six of one/half-dozen of the other)?

The obvious answer would be to make prints with both and judge by my eyes, however 1. I don't have any 120 negs to try out, and 2. I only have a lensboard for one of them and don't want to bother getting the right size lensboard for the other to test if the conventional wisdom here is that there's little difference between the two lenses.

Thanks for your insight,

ignatiu5

k_jupiter · Feb 16, 2008

ignatiu5 said:
If I may tag along this thread, I'm looking for advice on an either/or situation for my B-22XL. I currently print only 35mm with a 50/2.8 El-Nikkor, but am thinking about venturing into 645 or maybe 6x6 territory. I already have two lenses of the appropriate (give or take) focal length: an El-Omegar 75/3.5 and a Rodenstock OMEGAR 75/4.5. I only need one, so which one to keep? Is there a significant resolution/sharpness/contrast difference between them (I know that they're both lower end lenses, so it may very well be six of one/half-dozen of the other)?

The obvious answer would be to make prints with both and judge by my eyes, however 1. I don't have any 120 negs to try out, and 2. I only have a lensboard for one of them and don't want to bother getting the right size lensboard for the other to test if the conventional wisdom here is that there's little difference between the two lenses.

Thanks for your insight,

ignatiu5

The obvious answer is neither one is going to make you any money so you keep them both.Or you get rid of them both and buy a Componon S.

Is someone with a shotgun holding it to your head and telling you to get rid of one?

tim in san jose

selenium96 · Feb 16, 2008

I bought a B22 in 1974 and installed an Aristo cold light head in '93. I am using El-Nikkor lenses instead of the El-Omegars and still making nice prints with this setup today. I found the El-Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 to be sharper than the El-Omegar.

Best lenses for Omega B-22

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency