• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Compact Enlargers

miha said:
You also got a bunch of yummy papers! See if there is a pack of Gevaert Gevaluxe paper hidden somewhere in the box?
Click to expand...

No luck, just Gevatone and Gevaortho. 2 small opened packs. Cool old packages with a blue Gevaert logo on a gray paper base.
 
cl3mens said:
No luck, just Gevatone and Gevaortho. 2 small opened packs. Cool old packages with a blue Gevaert logo on a gray paper base.
Click to expand...

Too bad... the Stradivari of papers some say.
 
cl3mens said:
No luck, just Gevatone and Gevaortho. 2 small opened packs. Cool old packages with a blue Gevaert logo on a gray paper base.
Click to expand...

Gevaluxe packaging too has that grey cardboard and a basically blue label.
Though with bronze trim.
 
Another thing to keep in mind (just found this out, actually), that with an adapter, my B&J (or any press camera) bolts right into my Durst enlarger right where you would normally bolt the head in. Using semi-crude measurements, it seems alignment is quite good, though you'd need a plate or a macro rail to get the lens far enough away from the baseboard for anything bigger than an 8x10 If you found a graflarger, that would allow you to do 4x5 on a compact Durst, too.

Actually, building a graflarger type attachment wouldn't be difficult either. Seems my Durst is based off of a frosted bulb reflected off a white plate 90* into a condensor. A straight diffusion head would be even easier.
 
Last year I lost DR space and wanted to migrate to a smaller enlarger. After much thought I bought a like new Durst 601. I can recommend either the 600 or 601 as the best bet for a quality 35mm/MF enlarger. If you need a small footprint a condenser enlarger avoids the transformer which can go bad. The 600/601 easily breaks down for storage.

Get everything you need with the Durst enlargers as parts are expensive. The beauty of the Durst is their universal glass carrier. One part holds small and medium format negs. I doubt you need a glass carrier if enlarging to 8x. The Durst uses a reflex mirror system which resists buckling the neg when in a glassless carrier.

LF is a hassle, especially for beginners. Its not jut the size of the enlarger, consider the size of the camera/developing equipment.

I tried processing prints using a color drum. I work with fiber and ultimately decided 11x14 single tray development worked better for me. You must completely wash out the tray between prints. I use 2L plastic paint pails to hold the chemicals.

The ultimate quality, small 35mm enlarger is the Valoy II.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My Darkroom instructor suggested the Omega B-22 (which has been mentioned here too). It doesn't look like it'll go as small as the Durst, but there is a company in the province that can service them and get parts, which I can't say for the Durst. There's a complete darkroom kit, including a B22 w/ 35mm and 6x6 lenses and carriers, for sale about two hours away. Even counting gas, it's not expensive. So, right now that's my plan.

Next step, convince my better half to let me do this
 
If you can keep the enlarger assembled between uses, like keeping it on a microwave cart, the B22 would be fine.
IMHO, the Omega enlargers are not meant to be taken down between uses. Whereas the smaller Durst are easy to take down and store.
The B22 is a nice enlarger, as long as your max film format is 6x6.
 

I'm looking at storage ideas that will let me leave it assembled. Space is at a premium in my basement. If a Durst comes up locally before I get the B22, I'm sure I'll be happy with it too.

Given my space requirements, the 6x6 limit is acceptable. My only MF camera is currently a 645. If I add to my MF fleet, it would probably be a 6x6. Even that would be more for the square format than for the extra detail/enlarging capability. I'm going to be limited to 11x14 in my basement anyways. If I get to the point where I'm making 16x20 prints, I'll need to figure something else out
 


The Durst 600 and 601 will shoot to a wall, the Omega B22 if like all the other Omega I have used shoot to the floor for 16X20 or larger.
 
Since you mentioned print size.

The Durst F30 (35mm) is limited to 8x magnification with 50mm lens, for 8x10 on the baseboard.
I do not have the specs for the Durst F60, but it might be slightly larger. The key is how tall the column is.

According to specs, my Durst M600 will do 15x for 35mm film and 50mm lens, and 9x for 120 film with 80mm lens on the baseboard.
I have done 11x14 from 35mm film, so I do know it can do that size.

The Durst 605 without the head extension piece will do 12x for 35mm and 50mm lens, 5.3x for 120 and 80mm lens on the baseboard. The extension piece (if you can find it) will raise the max mag to 16x and 8.9x.

For the B22 check which B22 it is, the B22 or the B22-XL. Then check the specs for that enlarger, specifically the height of the column. The XL models have a taller column to allow you to make larger prints. But that runs into another limitation...your ceiling. You might hit the ceiling before you get the head raised to the top of the column. Or the column itself might hit the ceiling or the top of the door frame, in which case you need a lower table/cart.
I have this low ceiling problem, so I cannot use an enlarger with a tall XL chassis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Not sure I'd believe these specs, as I've printed decently cropped 8x10s, as well as 11x14s with mine. The key is that they allow the column to be raised about 2". An easel will slide right under the column and you can do 11x14s.

Moot point if you need to enlarge MF, though.
 


Do you mean on the F30?
I set up a F30 with the column and head as high as it could go, and a 50mm lens.
Then I measured the image on the baseboard. It was just a bit bigger than 8x10, but definitely short of 11x14.
Maybe you have the extended base, that hold the column higher.
 

Perhaps I do! Mine came in the original box, all for $25. It says nothing about any extended base.

I just measured and double checked-- I get a height from baseboard to lens of 59cm with the column pushed up in the mount-- which gets me (with my easel) just shy of 11x14.

I looked through my notes, and the 11x14's I did, I did not use my easel. When measured from the front of the column, the baseboard has exactly 11x14" of usable area, so I just lined the paper up by hand.

I've thought about springing for a WA Rodagon, as this would let me do 11x14's on this no problem, but I rarely do 35mm anymore, and when I know I'm going to be making anything beyond 8x10, I'll break out my ETRS or 4x5.

These things are great for wall projection, too, if you don't mind the long exposures. I (very foolishly) did a couple large prints for a friend of mine (miscommunication on the format I used... I had no idea he wanted 16"x20" prints). It worked great! Wish I could say the results were great, as even on a tripod Fomapan 100 in 35mm barely holds itself together at an 8x10...

Anyways, based on my experience, I would not hesitate to recommend any of the Durst F and M series enlargers.
 
The F30 is now in the hands of my nephew, so I can't do any measurements of it. But it sound similar, as the baseboard is about 14x14 inches.
He does not print large, right now, so I figure the 8x10 max should be OK for him. And he only has 8x10 trays.
If he does want to print big, he can figure out how to rotate the head to do a wall projection.

BTW, did you figure a way to secure the filter drawer.
It seems quite easy to pull the drawer out, and I worry that my nephew might drop the drawer and crack the condenser lens, when he is setting up or taking down the enlarger. I told him to use masking tape, to tape the drawer in when moving the enlarger.
 

One thing I wish I would've done sooner (or had the room) is that it is very easy to spin the column around and put the baseboard on a short table or stool and project to the floor. Being the physicist I am, I seem to always gravitate toward the more difficult solutions...

On the occasion I drag out the 35mm kit, I still prefer using my F30.

Also, to other Durst users out there,

Does anyone know if the head of an M600/601/F60 will bolt onto the column of an F30?

I've found a couple deals on just heads from those enlargers, and wouldn't mind having a compact MF system for proofing and portfolio prints.
 
I instructed in a community DR using B-22s. They were not designed to be portable like Durst. B-22s are rugged but dust migrates to the top of the negative after placing the carrier in the enlarger. Alignment and MF negative popping are issues. The print times are often too fast. The B-22 non XL column enlargement factor is limited as an easel aligned to the verticle hits the column. You can not correct for verticals as you can with a Durst 601.

The Durst M601 is ingenious as you can move the head out on the bearing mitigating the easel issue. The 601 glass carrier is a dust hassle and requires more care. Because of a loss of light from the Durst reflex design I use a bulb higher in wattage than 75W. You can buy the small color head insert for a 601 giving flexibility in which type of light source you wish to enlarge with. A diffused light source minimizes and makes spotting easier. On the other had good technique avoids dust. A condenser will better separate low tones if a goal in printing. I appreciate the thoughtful Durst design but the carrier is fiddly compared to my LPL 670 and therefore harder to use.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks Richard.

Is the negative carrier in the B-22 similar to the B-23, in that it can rotate smoothly to any angle? In which case, if you want to do a portrait/vertical alignment, can't you just turn the negative carrier instead of the easel?

When you say negative popping, do you mean coming out of the carrier, or just bending/flexing? If it is bending upwards, can you place a piece of ANR glass on top of the carrier to help hold it flat?

I really like the looks of the Durst M600, but there aren't any available near me currently. I've found the space where I can store the B-22. The only issue is weight, as I will need to carry the entire assembly into and out of the bathroom when setting up or taking down (so no Besler 23 for me). I may try adding wheels to whatever tabel setup I end up using, but I'll worry about that later.
 
Richard,
You must be using a different setup than I had used on my M600.
I originally got the 150w bulb when I bought my M600, but that gave way too short exposure times. I think it was less than 5 sec, leaving no time to dodge the image.
I then switched to the 75w PH211. That was better, but there were several times when I wished I could reduce the light level even more.
 

That is the filter drawer pulled out in one of the photos in the link, the drawer is smaller then the normal Ilford multi filters so you need scissors.
The thing below the lens is a red filter for setting up the borders on the paper before you do a print.
It is a bit primitive but ok for small enlargements.
 
The B-22 neg carrier is hinged. The later Omega carriers are spring loaded so when you raise the head the carrier opens...nice. The carrier will not rotate like the B-23C. We had a B-23 in the DR and I liked it...especially the rotating carrier. But, it is not portable and frankly clunky looking....a good choice if you will enlarge 6x9 negs.

You can rotate a B-23 carrier from a horizontal to vertical orientation.

A B-22 heat can bend a medium format negative while in the carrier.

Concerning the Durst exposure times....I replaced the 75w with either a 100 or 150w bulb. After the change the Durst nearly matches the illumination brightness of my LPL 670 condenser. The LPL light source is directly on top of the condensers and more effiencent than a reflex system.

I much prefer a Leitz 1c or Valoy 2 to the 601 because of the semi-diffused Leitz light source and how the neg is squashed flat in the carrier.

I enlarge with Galerie fiber and seldom use RC paper. I open the enlarger aperture to one or two stops from full open. May explain differences in experience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Omega model with a rotating negative carrier, similar to the 23C, is the B-8. I use one and love it, but it's as large as the 23C, so not too portable.
 
I regret parting with my Durst F-30 a decade ago, but these days use enlargers are give away cheap. I have a Leitz ValloyII and a Meopta Opemus 4x4, whch are pretty fine machines. The Opemus handles 35, 120 & 127 negatives. IIRC I got tm fpor around $25ach and the Leitz came with the lens
 
I picked up the B-22 & accessories today. It is smaller and lighter than I expected (yea!). In fact, everything is smaller than expected. If I stick to developing 5x7s in the included 8x10 trays, I don't need a vertical rack, as I can fit all three trays on the shower floor (not the classiest option, but it'll do for now).

Thing is, three trays. Three trays seems to be the norm (patterson sells three packs of trays). But in class we use four: Dev, stop, fix, and rinse/wash. So, how do people use three trays? How do you rinse?
 

Not everyone uses a tray for the wash step - some use dedicated print washers, while others use plastic bins or cat litter trays or ...

And trust me, having trays on the shower floor will get really old, really fast (just thinking about it makes my back hurt).

See if you can find something to raise them up a bit. And you can put the wash tray on the floor.
 
Congrats on the enlarger.

I second Matt's recommendation, get some kind of table or bench or platform to raise the trays to a half-way comfortable height. Or that will end up being one of the reasons you will give up printing.

As I recall your layout, I would make a platform for your enlarger over the tub. You can sit on a stool as you work the enlarger.
Then make a counter extension over the toilet, so you can stand as your are processing the prints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register