Enlarger Lenses...Which to Keep?

[Punkinhed7]

Getting back into printing after a pretty long hiatus. Going through my equipment I realized that I have six 50mm lenses and only have experience with 1-2 of them (not even 100% positive which ones they were anymore). Aside from the ubiquitous "El-Nikkors are great" comment, the first-hand info/anecdotes I've found for some of the others has been quite sparse. So I'm asking, if you've had experience with 1, 2, or any of these lenses please let me know what you think. While sharpness and quality of rendition are obviously important, I'm not only interested in these aspects--quirks/idiosyncrasies that may make these little guys unique or suited to a particular purpose are also of interest (while I want to pare it down, I'm perfectly happy keeping multiple lenses if there is good justification). Thanks in advance!

Lenses:

• Rodenstock Rodagon 50/2.8
• Kodak Projection Ektar 50/4.5
• Schneider Componar 5cm/4.5
• EL-Nikkor 50/4 (sn 325558)
• EL-Nikkor 50/4 (sn 242806)
• Computar 50/2.8

PS. I included the serial numbers from the two 50/4 Nikkors because I thought I remembered reading/hearing somewhere, once upon a time, that there may have been certain 'vintages' that were better than others? If i'm way off base here it'd be helpful to know, too.


Edit: I know this may elicit a lot of "test and see what works best for you" responses, which is quite good advice, however, I'm a bit rusty in the printing department and not really confident of my abilities to control all variables, thus ensuring good testing conditions. As such, I was hoping to get a bit more expert advice before embarking on this particular journey.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

If the Computar is in good shape I'd choose that one followed by the Rodagon followed by the Ektar. The others aren't in the same league.

 

[snapguy]

think

You need to think a bit --
1. How old are these individual lenses?
2. Could any of them be whacked out by damage over the years?
3. The "best" lens may be a wreck and the worst may make the best enlargements. You need to test the lenses yourself.

 

[MattKing]

Do any of them offer convenience features like illuminated f/stops or adjustable maximum and minimum stops? If so, you may want to factor those criteria into your decision.

In addition, which enlarger are you intending to use? If it is something like an Omega D6, some 50mm lenses are a bit of a struggle to use because of bellows compression.

 

[Punkinhed7]

I've got a Beseler Dichro 67 and a LPL/Simmons(/Omega) C6600 that they'll be used on...though I seem to have misplaced the power supply for my dichro head

 

[MattKing]

I've got a Beseler Dichro 67 and a LPL/Simmons(/Omega) C6600 that they'll be used on...though I seem to have misplaced the power supply for my dichro head

Shouldn't matter - it is the 4x5 and larger enlargers that are sometimes challenged.

I'm surprised that the Beseler head will work with/fit on the Omega.

 

[Punkinhed7]

I'm surprised that the Beseler head will work with/fit on the Omega.

Two stands: unnecessarily space-consumptive but, well...yeah.

 

[L Gebhardt]

If the Computar is in good shape I'd choose that one followed by the Rodagon followed by the Ektar. The others aren't in the same league.

+1

but you really should test them. Align the enlarger and make small and large prints (you only need small scraps in the center and corners so as to not waste paper). Check for sharpness and contrast.

 

[Neal]

Computar +2 (Including all the caveats mentioned above.)

Neal Wydra

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Ilike my EL Nikkors because of their lit f/stops and positive clicksfrom stop to stop;not sure yours are of the same design.

 

[TheToadMen]

My order would be:

• Computar 50/2.8 and Rodenstock Rodagon 50/2.8
• EL-Nikkor 50/4 (sn 325558) or EL-Nikkor 50/4 (sn 242806)
• Schneider Componar 5cm/4.5
• Kodak Projection Ektar 50/4.5

I would keep the Computar, the Rodagon and one of the El-Nikkor lenses.

BUT: I would first check every lens on technical condition, clean glass, dust, etc. before I'd decide.

 

[BobMarvin]

The Kodak Projection Ektar is a five element Heliar-type lens that should be as good as the six element Computar and Rodagon; the others are four element lenses which are not as good.

 

[MartinP]

I had an EL-Nikkor 50mm f4 and it is the budget version of their range -- it is not the same-but-slower as their higher-quality version and seems to be noticeably poor with anything larger than 8x10 enlargements.

I have a Rodagon which is very good and the Computar has an excellent reputation. I would test those two together, as the condition of the lens certainly has a large bearing on how well it performs now, compared to when it was new.

 

[Paul Howell]

I recommend that test all of the lens with a couple of differnt negatives, high contrast, low contrast, and see which one you like the best. I just bought a Federal Stow Away enlager with a 2 element lens, I found that for high contrast negatives it give a certain look that I like.

 

[fotch]

Keep the Rodenstock Rodagon 50/2.8 if only keeping one, otherwise, if keeping a few more, Kodak Projection Ektar 50/4.5
EL-Nikkor 50/4 (sn 325558), Computar 50/2.8

 

[MattKing]

In addition, one lens may be optimized more for large enlargements while another may be optimized more for moderate enlargements.

And the colour performance of one lens may be better than another (newer is probably better).

 

[John Koehrer]

The Rodagon and Computar are both six element lenses. The Rodagon is still considered a benchmark lens.

The Ektar may be good, performance is but unknown to me.

The 50 f4's either Componar or EL Nikkors are entry level lenses from their respective makers and generally not as good.
Can you see a difference? Probably not but the 2.8's will be easier to focus.