Cheap, but better lens than Belar 4/50 needed

[brobert]

Hello all,

This is my first message here, so I want to say a Hello for everyone first.
I am seeking an enlarger lens for my Meopta Opemus 5 enlarger. What I have is at the moment the Meopta Belar 4,5/50 lens, but I need a better one. Of course, at the lowest price, if possible... The mount of the lens isn't important, I have a turner friend, who can make any adapter.

Thanks for your comments in advance,
Robert

 

[victor]

hi robert..
if u cannot go on the german bests than i would suggest the meogon from meopta or the nikkor. do not buy the cheaper germans. they are good but at the smae price that meogon is much better.
if u limit yourself to enlargement up to x10 and use the optimal f-stop, the meogon is almost touches the outcomes of componon-s or aporodagon.

 

[Juraj Kovacik]

what is the optimal f-stop for a "regular" enlargers lean? something about 8? I've never ever tested that.

jk

 

[victor]

jk..
on the cheap ones i think it is f8. never tasted as well though.
but on the corrected lenses like meogon and i think the nikkors as well it is 5.6 (we are talking about the 50mm here)
on the german top lines u limit to the optimal only when u exide seriously the with the enlargement - something like x15+. but generally those germans will performe close to their best even at f4 or f8.
it also depends on the light sourse. if u use the cold light or deffused all the deferances are more pronounced than with the condensor.

 

[Juraj Kovacik]

thank you. I think f8 is my usual (three times click, click, click from full hole), but I must check it...

 

[brobert]

Thank you for the replies. I will look after this Meogon lens.

Robert

 

[Ed Sukach]

what is the optimal f-stop for a "regular" enlargers lean? something about 8? I've never ever tested that.

Every lens is designed according to a certain set of parameters. As a rule of thumb, the "best" performance of an enlarger lens will be at the "middle" of the f/stop range. That is, if the f/stops range from f/4 to f/16, optimum performance will be at f/8.
Another critical parameter is the optimum magnification ratio. Here, educated projections are made as to the use of the lens. 35mm lenses destined to be used for relatively small enlargements (as would be done by a beginner) will be designed with enlargement ratios of 1:6 or 1:8 in mind. These simple lenses (read: 3 element - inexpensive) will perform well in a range centered at those ratios. This is addressing "best" performance - they have some flexibilty, and do not fall off into the sunset at other ratios.
The more sophisticated designs (four, five, or more elements) will usually be designed for optimum performance at a greater ratios; 1:10 or 1:12, and have greater flexibility.
The large format lenses, for enlarging 8" x 10" or 11" x 14" formats are targeted to ratios of 1:1.5 or 1:2.

 

[Juraj Kovacik]

Thanks, Ed.

Brobert, sorry to disturb your topic.

JK

 

[Jorge Oliveira]

Just a note:

The German magazine Color Foto tested Nikkor, Rodagon and Componon 50mm lenses.
To all practical purposes, they are equal. Among these brands, choose the cheaper (in good working order).

In this same test, the Meopta Anaret-S had better marks than the Meogon.

BTW, lots of used enlarger lenses in the auction sites. My two Nikkor - N (40 and 50mm) were purchased this way.

Jorge O

 

[Erwin]

Hi,

I have been using a Nikon 50mm f2.8 on an Axomat for some years but got a the Schneider when I upgraded to an Opemus 6 which I bought secondhand with 50mm and 80mm Componons.
When I first compared the two 50mm lenses I was very surprised to find that the Componon was "terrible". I changed to a glass neg carrier and suddenly the performance of the two lenses was more or less similar.
Is it possible that the Componon has less DOF? I thought that this was determined only by focal length and f-stop, which were identical (f5.6) in this comparrison.

BTW even under best conditions I still think that the Nikon has a slight edge i.t.o. contrast.

 

[Ole]

I've used Anaret-S in both 50mm and 80mm versions for many years. I got hold of a Componon 60mm, but couldn't see that it gave any improvement over the 50mm Anaret-S. So I stick with my Anarets-

 

[brobert]

Hello all,

Thank you for the answer. Last night I made a test: I exposed the same picture part to the same paper with 3 different lenses: with Belar 50/4.5, with SMC Takumar 55/1.8, and with Helios 58/2 (old type, with 39 mm lens mount). Both lenses was stopped down to f/8. The developed paper showed the following result: The Takumar is the best in this comparison, it has the sharpest picture. The difference between the Belar and the Takumar is pretty big. The Helios is very good, more better than the Belar, but the difference between the Takumar and the Helios is very small. It is possible that I buy a Scheneider Kreuznach Componar lens from ebay, if it is arrives I will retest the lens, but 4 instead of the 3 above.

Robert