Cheap enlarger lenses

[BetterSense]

Which one of these lenses is the least-crappy? I need a 6x6 capable lens and I don't really want to spend money. I figure for $6-12 they are probably as good as the Beslar lens I use for 35mm anyway. Other than the popular auction site, where's a good place to get lenses? What are some good ones to look for? In cameras, it's easy--you just look for fast camera-brand lenses. I'm not sure about shopping for enlarger lenses.

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

 

[Slixtiesix]

Don´t be scrooge when it comes to enlarging lenses! You should use a 6-element lens like the Rodenstock Rodagon or Schneider Componon.
There exist also lenses with 4 elements (e.g. Rodenstock Rogonar) but good lenses are so affordable today.
I bought a Rodagon 80/5,6 for less than 50 bucks from ebay some years ago. If you want to safe money, go for the smaller apertures like f5,6,
f4 are priced significantly higher, but they do not offer better image quality.
If you use a crappy lens for enlarging, your images will be crappy no matter how good the camera lens was.
Greetz, Benjamin

 

[ann]

i would have to agree with the above response , also all three of those lens are going to need a jam nut, and unless you have one already that will cost about 10 dollars. So figure that in the cost.

 

[Fotoguy20d]

I'll agree with the above comments as well. Another lens to consider for 6x6 is the El-Nikkor 75mm. You can't go bigger than 6x6 but it's a bit cheaper than the 80mm lens.

Dan

 

[Anscojohn]

If your enlarger has a direct screw in mount, you won't need a jam nut. I am as certain as possible that the Komura, being a 5.6, is at least a four element design.
At this state of your work, you need to make pictures. A "better" lens at a proper price for you shall doubtless come your way. But at this juncture, if you need a lens, (and let's face it, you can't print through the bottom of a Dr. Pepper bottle, can you) the Komura should be the better lens. The Omegars, by the way, are low end Rodenstocks and triplets like your Beslar doubtless is.

 

[David Brown]

Another lens to consider for 6x6 is the El-Nikkor 75mm. You can't go bigger than 6x6 but it's a bit cheaper than the 80mm lens.

The 75mm Nikkor is cheaper than the 80mm because the 75mm is a 4 element lens and the 80 is a 6 element. Get the 80. In addition to the rodagons and componons, any EL Nikkor, except the 4 element 75mm and 50mm f4 (not the f2.8, it's a 6) will do.

 

[srs5694]

Just to toss out another perspective here: Even a pretty low-end lens will make prints that 99% of viewers will find more than acceptable. This is particularly true of the lenses are used at their middle apertures and at moderate enlargement (say, 8x10 inches). I did some tests on my 50mm lenses, which include 4-, 5-, and 6-element designs. In 11x14 prints (or fragments thereof), center sharpness was hard to discern even with a loupe, and even edge sharpness differences would be hard to spot at normal viewing distances. In 8x10 prints, only the worst of the lot (an f/4 EL-Nikkor) produced prints that were easily distinguished from the others when held in the hand. (I suspect that lens was a bad sample or was damaged in a way that wasn't obvious by visual inspection of the lens itself.)

I'm not really debating that posters who advise getting a 6-element lens are wrong; those lenses are likely to be superior to 4-element designs. It's just a question of the extent of the differences; reading this thread to date, it's easy to walk away with the impression that prints made with a 4-element lens will be extremely bad. IMHO, the difference is more like that between "very good" and "excellent."

 

[23mjm]

Having used both the 75mm and 80mm Nikkor I can report that I could not see a difference in the two lenses, printing a 645 neg to 11X14. So while the 75mm may be a "cheaper" lens the image quality it produced is on par with the 80mm. I had to get a 80mm because I got a RB-67.

I would look at eBay for an enlarging lens they are quite cheap there. That's were I got all mine and never a disappointment.

 

[Arvee]

The Komuranon-E should be a six element and, while not that popular (a minor brand), is an excellent lens. I have a pair of 50mms that are as good as most my other six el. enlarging lenses. I'll bet it's a six element and will be an excellent performer.

Do some research on the lens.

-F.

 

[Paul Howell]

Both Wollensack (sp?) and Kodak enlargering Extars 90mm, both 4 element lens and rather good at F 8 or F11, and are in the $10.00 to $20.00 range. In the $5 to $10 bracket you will mostley find older 3 element uncoated lens or odd ball brands some of which may be decent. I do agree with the earlier post, if you can scrap up the money get a recent 6 element lens. But if all you have is $10.00 all you have is $10.00.

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

I've used the El Omegar, it's not great but it forms an image. It was my first enlarging lens and I was happy with it until I got a 50mm/f2.8 El-Nikkor.

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

I'd go with the komuranon too, it looks to be the most substantial chunk of glass. They made very high end copy lenses for a while, that's a good sign.

 

[ricksplace]

I have a 75/4.5 Ektar that is a heliar five element design. Every bit as good as my 80mm componon.

 

[archphoto]

I have checked Ebay and there are a couple of Rodagons for not too much.
You should be able to pick one up around $20,-

Peter

 

[JRJacobs]

The Komuranon-E should be a six element and, while not that popular (a minor brand), is an excellent lens. I have a pair of 50mms that are as good as most my other six el. enlarging lenses. I'll bet it's a six element and will be an excellent performer.

Do some research on the lens.

-F.

The Komuranon-E is a four element lens. The Komuranon-S is the 6 element version and is a very good lens.

 

[BetterSense]

I have checked Ebay and there are a couple of Rodagons for not too much.
You should be able to pick one up around $20,-

Peter

So are the Rodagons good lenses, then? See the thing is I don't know what lenses are good, so it's hard for me to shop on ebay for lenses. It's like there is a guy on local Craigslist selling a "Fujimoto E-Lucky 75mm f 1:3.5 Enlarger Lens" for $20, but i don't have any idea if it's a junk lens and overpriced or if it is some super-awesome lens and a steal. In most cases google doesn't know much about the reputation of enlarger lenses. The only thing I've heard is that Nikon lenses are good but I don't know about other brands.

 

[archphoto]

There are 3 major brands: Rodenstock, Schneider (Germany) and Nikon (Japan).
I checked for the Rodagons because I have been using them since 1980: 6 lens optics of great performance.
Check-out nr: 130293318404, no bids yet, starts at $20,- closes in 22h.

Peter

 

[Anscojohn]

Better,
You are asking the right questions; we are all giving you the right answers.
Of the "name brand" enlarging lenses, you shall not go wrong with Nikkor, Rodenstock, or Schneider. That is in alphabetical order, not quality. I have all three; all three are just fine--if you are comparing the same number of lens elements, f/stops, etc. Of the three, my GUT FEELING is that the Rodenstocks are the Rodney Dangerfields of the three. Every bozo off the street saying "now I are a photographicker" will know the Nikkor name; some the Schneider, also. It takes the real APUGer to appreciate the Rodenstocks. That's my opinion.
Of the three you linked us two--as stated, all things being equal, the Komura is PROBABLY the better lens. If all are scratch and fungus free.
And some sytrofoam and a glue gun and you can get along without a jam nut if you have to.
Have fun.
As one poster said, a nice clean triplet, stopped down to f/8 or f/11 gives totally acceptle professional results that your clients will find acceptable--but the more elements, generally, the better; and the dinosaurs who taught me said that, given the same number of elements, the slower lens (i.e. a 5.6 rather than a 4.5, 3.5, or 2.8) SHOULD be the sharper lens.

 

[BetterSense]

Yeah, I'm very close to ordering the komura lens from keh along with a bunch of cheap filters I need. I almost always print at f/16 (4x5 proofs) f/11 (5x8) or f/8 (8x10). The only time I use the lens wide open is when making contact sheets. Maybe if I printed way bigger it would be different.

My enlarger has threads, but I actually have a jam nut too.

Check-out nr: 130293318404, no bids yet, starts at $20,- closes in 22h

Ahh, but I'm most in need of a medium-format lens. I'll keep my eye on it regardless.

I thank everyone for their help and advice. In a different world, I might have experienced photographers and printers to get advice from. Thankfully I do have an internet full of very helpful people just the same.

 

[MattKing]

If I was choosing between these three, I would choose one with 39mm threads, as that is the most common.

Is that the size of your jam nuts, and the threads on your enlarger?

One point of clarification. You need to pay attention to both the brand (Rodenstock, Schneider, Nikon, Fuji, Minolta, Kodak, etc.) and, in some cases, the lens line or lens model.

Schneider is a good example - there are the Componars, the Componons, the Componon-S's and (correct me if I am wrong) the APO-Componons.

Rodenstock is known for the Rodagons and Apo-Rodagons but they also used to have a budget line of lenses called Ysarons - for years I used a 75mm Ysaron with good results, and as far as I know the APUG member I gave it to is still getting good results from it.

The Fuji lenses have different letter designations for the different lines.

Nikon are, to my mind, the most confusing, because there is less of a correlation between their names and the quality of the lenses.

There are also re-badged "house brands", and they add to the confusion. Beseler has/had both the Beslar which you have, and Beseler Colour Pro lenses, which are quite good.

If you can get both a lens and a lensboard to put it on, it definitely makes swapping lenses easier, and reduces the potential for damage.

Have fun.

Matt

 

[srs5694]

The number of elements and the condition of the lens are probably at least as important as the brand name. As an example, I own five 50mm lenses from various manufacturers. The best and the worst of these are both Nikons: an f/2.8 (6-element) and an f/4 (4-element). My second-best lens is a 5-element Russian Vega-11U, and two other 4-element lenses (a Durst Neotaron made by Rodenstock and a Russian Industar-96U) come in-between these. This is all based on subjective judgments of sharpness done in side-by-side tests of the same negatives. So, do I recommend a Nikon enlarging lens? That's a definite "maybe."

Note that my lenses happen to fall in quality order to match the number of elements; however, wear and tear and even sample-to-sample variation when the lens left the factory can be important. I suspect, but am not positive, that my f/4 Nikon is sub-standard for its model. I've seen claims that enlarger lenses have traditionally varied a lot in quality off the manufacturing line. Thus, if you want the best quality, particularly in a used lens, you may need to just plan on buying two or three. You don't need to do so immediately, of course. Having multiple lenses has an advantage: In case of an accident, like a bad drop or hitting the lens's glass with a sharp object, you'll have a backup.

Unfortunately, the manufacturers make it hard to tell what a lens's design is -- or at least, the information has become obscured with time for used lenses. Some manufacturers use -on suffixes for their 6-element lenses and -ar suffixes for their 4-element designs, but this practice isn't universal.

Also, although Nikon, Rodenstock, and Schneider are the "big three" of the lens world, other manufacturers make excellent lenses, too. Certainly I'd rather use either of my two oddball Russian lenses than that f/4 Nikon. Fuji makes some excellent enlarging lenses, too (go for an EP or EX model; the ES models are the 4-element designs). Others have mentioned some other manufacturers' products.

 

[BetterSense]

I bought a Fujinon EP f/5.6 75mm from keh for about $20 in EX+

 

[Trond]

Too much emphasis is put both on the number of elements and brand names. The only thing that matters is if a lens performs well or not. A good 4-element lens is a good lens. For 6x6 I use a cheap 4-element Meopta Anaret 80mm 4.5, which is very sharp. The Hanza 6-element 50mm 2.8 I use for 35mm is also very good, and it was quite inexpensive when I bought 15 years ago.

But, on the other hand, lenses that used to be very expensive, can be had for next to nothing these days.

Trond

 

[BetterSense]

Can one use a 105mm lens satisfactorily with 6x6 negatives?

KEH shipped my order to someone else in an internal error. I was looking forward to that Fujinon lens. I am now looking at choosing a replacement for them to send me at the same price as the fujinon lens. Of course, their selection isn't very good right now, but they have a El-Nikkor f/4 75mm lens and an El-Nikkor f/5.6 105mm lens as well. Would you consider either to be a good substitute for the Fujinon 75mm lens I originally ordered as far as quality is concerned?

 

[Nige]

The 75/4 might be the 4 element one everyone is saying to try to avoid if possible... A 105/5.6 would be 'better' but will limit the size of enlargement you can produce. I'd be waiting for a more suitable lens to become available, or get your money refunded. I have a Fujinon EX 90/5.6 that I reckon is pretty good... however I use a Schneider Componon-S 80/4 as it has better operational abilities (mainly the quick full aperture lever for focusing, you can also disengage click-stops but I never do that)