Experiencing Limitations on Bigger than 16 x 20

Lorenzot · Mar 14, 2021

Hi All,

Recently been doing larger prints with my De Vere 203. Last week I was printing 6 x 7 with the Nikkor 105mm 5.6. At full height I was able to print my 16 x 20s perfectly. However in the future I would like to do some 20 x 24s. I am just trying to wrap my head around doing this, of course I could get an enlarger with a head that turns horizontal however I want to know how to do it with this enlarger

If I wanted to do 20 x 24 with the de vere is the limitation that extension height or do I just need to get a wider angle lens for 6 x 7 like a 90mm? And then I could do larger prints

Any advice on how this works would be appreciated

ic-racer · Mar 14, 2021

It can be a difficult situation. The bigger you project, the closer the lens will be to the negative and the SMALLER the effective image circle. Sometimes the only way to see if it works is to try it. "It" being a standard 90mm lens. Otherwise look for a wide angle lens (which may be rare and expensive) or some other form of projection.

The other thing not everyone thinks about is that the shorter the lens and the closer to the negative, the SMALLER the effective mixing box opening becomes. In fact sometimes it won't cover any more with a short lens.

High magnification has some paradoxes. You want a wider lens, but a wider lens has less coverage and the larger you go the MORE coverage you need.

You want the brightest mixing box for your big enlargement, but with the enlarging lens cranked back toward the negative to focus, you may need to go to less bright a 4x5" mixing box to fully illuminate the negative. Just the opposite of what you want.

One more: Many of my enlarging lenses, when used beyond the manufacturer's specs, start to have a field curvature OPPOSITE the curve a 35mm negative takes in a non-glass holder.

Lachlan Young · Mar 14, 2021

Lorenzot said:
Hi All,

Recently been doing larger prints with my De Vere 203. Last week I was printing 6 x 7 with the Nikkor 105mm 5.6. At full height I was able to print my 16 x 20s perfectly. However in the future I would like to do some 20 x 24s. I am just trying to wrap my head around doing this, of course I could get an enlarger with a head that turns horizontal however I want to know how to do it with this enlarger

If I wanted to do 20 x 24 with the de vere is the limitation that extension height or do I just need to get a wider angle lens for 6 x 7 like a 90mm? And then I could do larger prints

Any advice on how this works would be appreciated

Many 105's are really meant for 65x90mm, there are a few 90's that are intended for 6x7 (invariably expensive for the really good ones) - but lenses like the plain old Rodagon 80 (and EL-Nikkor 80) will also handle 6x7 at the sizes you want - and if you are concerned about the edges, get an 80mm WA Rodagon or WA Componon - even the 60mm WA Rodagon is worth a look for 6x7 at 20x24.

MattKing · Mar 14, 2021

Can you turn the column of your enlarge to permit projecting on to the floor?

Lorenzot · Mar 15, 2021

MattKing said:
Can you turn the column of your enlarge to permit projecting on to the floor?

Don't think I can turn the column on this enlarger unfortunately

Ian Grant · Mar 15, 2021

Lachlan Young said:
Many 105's are really meant for 65x90mm, there are a few 90's that are intended for 6x7 (invariably expensive for the really good ones) - but lenses like the plain old Rodagon 80 (and EL-Nikkor 80) will also handle 6x7 at the sizes you want - and if you are concerned about the edges, get an 80mm WA Rodagon or WA Componon - even the 60mm WA Rodagon is worth a look for 6x7 at 20x24.

I have issues with my De Vere 5108 and a 300mm lens so use a 240mm when making larger prints from 10x8 negatives it makes a very significant difference to colum height and ease of working etc.

While the numbers sound far differrent the ratios aren't comparing an 80mm for 6x7 to a 240mm on 10x8 is 3x the FL, so 105 for 6x7 is equivalent to a 315mm for 10x8. So for the OP sewitching toan 80mm will make a big change. I could go and check the exact distances later today as I have a 105mm Componon & 80mm Compomon S.

As Lachlan says most good 80mm lenses with cover 6x7, I seem to remember using my older 80mm Componon for 6x9 in the late 1990's but not for large prints.

You can't turn the heads 90 degrees on De Vere's. There some adjustment to correct verticals.

Ian

Lachlan Young · Mar 15, 2021

MattKing said:
Can you turn the column of your enlarge to permit projecting on to the floor?

No - you'd need the wall mount or floor standing variant of the 203. It's a massively more solid/ precise machine than most other medium format enlargers.

Ian Grant said:
While the numbers sound far differrent the ratios aren't comparing an 80mm for 6x7 to a 240mm on 10x8 is 3x the FL, so 105 for 6x7 is equivalent to a 315mm for 10x8. So for the OP sewitching toan 80mm will make a big change. I could go and check the exact distances later today as I have a 105mm Componon & 80mm Compomon S.

As Lachlan says most good 80mm lenses with cover 6x7, I seem to remember using my older 80mm Componon for 6x9 in the late 1990's but not for large prints.

I did actually try out my 80mm Rodagon on my 203 to find out where the edges fell apart on 6x9 (by eye and Peak focus finder) - though I didn't bother to record exactly how big that was. I have a 6x7 neg in my 203 & some 80 & 105's on hand - I guess I could probably check what the effective max enlargement off 6x7 on a bench 203 is (I recall that the floor projection one has longer 'neck' components to adjust the centreline of the projected image further away from the column).

Neal · Mar 15, 2021

Dear Lorenzot,

I did this with my Omega. I was going to use steel tube around the threaded rod but it turned out to be more than rigid enough as shown.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

Ian Grant · Mar 15, 2021

OK some height differences, at first I couldn't find an M39 adapter for my 105mm Componon so used my 100mm Componon S instead, using the long width and distance to the lnese all roughly the same barrel lenght.

80mm height for 20" print width 23"
height for 24" print width 27"

100mm height for 20" print width 28.5"
height for 24" print width 33.5"

105mm height for 20" print width 30"
height for 24" print width 36"

So with an 80mm there's no issues with 24" wide prints ans it requires 75% less height than the 105mm, and in fact 3" less than the 105mm for a 20" wide print.

I have a feeling I used a 90mm Kowa enlarging lens for 6x9 with my old Johnson V45 enlarger, however my Durst A600 6x9 enlarger came with an 80mm Rodagon and the enlarger hear is marked FL: 80mm, The A600 was a professional enlarger so Durst must have thought the lens covered 6x9 sharply corner to corner, they were quite careful with lens choices/selection for professional equipment. They were known to select lenses in the same way as Linhof, sometimes adding their own name.

Ian

Ian Grant · Mar 15, 2021

Neal said:
Dear Lorenzot,

I did this with my Omega. I was going to use steel tube around the threaded rod but it turned out to be more than rigid enough as shown.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

View attachment 269563

The De Vere 203 like the larger 5 series (504,507, 5108 etc) with it's heavier column uses a geared systenm to control head height and focus with two control wheels in the front below the baseboard so modifications aren't possible. They are fantastic enlargers to use.

Ian

M Carter · Mar 15, 2021

When I had a Beseler 67C, I just made a plywood box about 10" tall and mounted the column to it, ditched the baseboard. Depending on the enlarger, you may want to rig some sort of ceiling bracket to the top of the column for more stability with the head is maxed out. This can make a big difference and scrap plywood is all you need.

And when you get to those big print sizes, enlarger alignment can become a real issue. The Versalab Parallel is some of the best money I've spent in all of my photo gear.

Lachlan Young · Mar 15, 2021

@Ian Grant The Durst AF enlargers seem to have been available with several different lens combination choices - often 50 & 105 or 50 & 75/80 from the ones I've seen - which would tally with them being aimed at 6x6 or 6x9 users, before they largely disappeared in the 1980s to be replaced by a blizzard of 6x7 enlargers. I've always quite liked the L900 - it and the 203 seem pretty good examples of the rare breed of truly professional/ heavy duty 6x7/ 6x9 enlargers.

@Lorenzot Have now put an 80 Rodagon on my 203 & checked to see if it'll do a 20x24" on the regular bench setup - the answer is yes & the edges look fine, but you might find that the lens centreline distance is such that using an easel becomes quite challenging. You can get the wall mount hardware for the 203 (and I think Odyssey De Vere may also have the extender blocks to move the lens centre out), but setting it up is much more involved than dealing with the advanced ironmongery that constitutes a Beseler or Omega - the De Vere is very high precision in comparison.

Experiencing Limitations on Bigger than 16 x 20

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency