Elget 135mm f4.5 Colorstigmat enlarger lens

Anyone had any experience with these? I just scored an Omega D2 with a cold light head (I LOVE THE PRECISION NEGATIVE CARRIER, THAT THING IS CARVED OUTTA SOLID ALUMINUM). Anyway, the only suitable 4x5 enlarging lens I have is this old Elgeet, and seeing as how I didn't have a retaining ring, I just put it in my cone-lensboard-thingy upside-down and made a print like that. The results were incredibly soft. Is it just a soft lens, or is that a property of being upside down? Is this a good lens? Where can I get a retaining ring?

I experimented with an upside down lens once and the results were similar to yours. The same lens in the normal orientation makes crisp prints.

You might try using duct tape to temporarily mount the lens in the correct orientation. It should make the best image closed at f/8 to f/11. You can make a print and decide if the image is satisfactory. If the lens passes this test (it probably will), then it makes sense to look for a flange.

You’ll find that most of the old Rochester, NY made lenses: Kodak, Bausch & Lomb, Wollensak, Elgleet, and so forth used a common threading standard of 30 threads per inch 60° Unified V-thread. Some of these lenses are branded DeJur, Burk & James, Federal and others.

I have a 162/4.5 Wolensak Enlarging Raptar (4-element Tessar design) that uses 2” diameter x 30 tpi mounting threads and have the proper flange. I’ve also handled theses flanges in 1 3/8” diameter x 30 tpi and 1 1/4” x 30tpi. If you measure the flange with a micrometer or dial caliper, the diameter will likely be one of these common fractional inch sizes with 30 tpi thread. The flanges are hard to find but not impossible.

Most people who have the flanges and might want to sell them have no idea of the diameter and pitch and don’t have the tools or the knowledge to measure them.

Step one is to get an accurate measurement of the diameter. It will probably be a few thousandths of an inch smaller in diameter than some common fractional inch size.

For example, the male 2” x 30 tpi threaded shank on my 162/4.5 Wollensak measures 1.994” outside diameter.

SK Grimes might have a flange in stock.

This is currently on eBay.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/OMEGA-B22-lens-board-and-mount-ring-/170686137422

The seller claims that the hole is 39mm. It might be, but a flange marked “Burke & James” is more likely to be 1 1/2” diameter by 30 tpi. You’d have to contact the seller and request them check it with lens to be sure.

I see many old inch sized flanges with 30 tpi thread mismarked as a metric size because the seller is unaware that many of these older mounts and flanges were for older US made lenses using inch diameters and thread pitch.

I make impromptu lens flanges with fimo modelling clay. Form it, leave it to cure a few days. I then smear the outside with hot melt glue to give it strength in tension. Not pretty, but worthwhiel to confirm the setup before committing to something more permanent.

The other option when dealing with flat lens boards is to wind a few turns of self amalgamating electrical tape around the threads that protrude though the lens board. After a day it is one peice of rubber, that will cling to the threads and hold the lens in place, but the lens can still be turned free of it.

I have the Elgeet 135/4.5 Colorstigmat and have only ever used it as a taking lens, not enlarging. I find it quite sharp and with typical enlarging lens 'funky' Bokeh. I see no reason why you wouldn't get a sharp image from it in an enlarger, used the correct way around of course.

JJ