Just bought some new enlarger lenses, worth it?

[punkzter]

I just purchased 3 new (to me) enlarger lenses on ebay. I've been slowly gathering the gear to setup my enlarger. Last year, I purchased a few 50mm and one 80mm lens, but this year I decided to do the flashlight test. I should have done it last year. All of my lenses have some stage of fungus in them. So I decided it was back to the drawing board.

Here is what I bought:

Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 (paid $76)

Rodenstock APO-Rodagon 50mm f/2.8

Rodenstock Rodagon 80mm f/4.0

All are supposedly from the estate of a professional photographer and have been checked out. The claim is that they are free of scratches/scuffs/fungus, etc.

I'm a little worried that I paid too much, especially for the Nikon/Nikkor. Now that I look, it seems that these sell for as little as $20. Any thoughts would be appreciated (especially if they make me feel good about the purchase)!.

Thanks!

 

[Dali]

These lenses were used by professional labs for decades so they should be more than decent for you. Remember: The best lens is the lens you use. All other recommendation is worthless.

 

[Chan Tran]

All the three lenses are good lenses but I don't know the going prices for them these days.

 

[ozphoto]

I have one of the 50mm f2.8 Rodenstock's and it is awesome!

Bought it used back in the late 80s for $AUD295 (that's equivalent to $AUD770 today!) Best money I have spent on used darkroom equipment other than my current LPL enlarger. Bright, sharp, smooth - it's an absolute joy to use in the darkroom, you won't be disappointed with that one.

If you got it for less than the current B&H price of $USD430, you got yourself a nice bargain.

 

[jim10219]

Yeah, you overpaid for that Nikkor, by about twice it's typical going value. And that's made even worse since you have the APO Rodagon in the same focal length and aperture. Not that the Nikkor is a bad lens (I use one and am quite happy with it), but the APO Rodagons are usually considered superior. And I've never seen any advantage to owning two enlarging lenses of the same focal length. You'll just end up using whichever one is better for everything, and the other will collect dust in a drawer. Even with multiple enlargers, I'll still switch lenses between them.

 

[Neal]

Print with them in good health! Tiny amounts over or under payment are not worth worrying about.

Neal Wydra

 

[punkzter]

Okay, thanks all for the comments. I probably shouldn't have bought both 50mm lenses, but it's not that bad, I suppose. I'll try both, and maybe sell the nikkor for a loss if I don't see any benefit to having both.

 

[Eric Rose]

If you got a good copy of the Nikkor EL you probably won't see any difference between it and the APO. APO's come into their own when colour printing. Do your own tests and if you can't see any REAL difference on YOUR prints then sell the APO and put some jingle back in your pocket.

 

[Martin Rickards]

You can't really go wrong with the Schneider or Rodagon lenses unless you buy their versions with the type name ending in "ar" which are their budget range. The Nikkor should be of similar quality. Other commonly available good brands include Fuji, Meopta, Minolta etc, The truth is that any 6 element or more lens from http://www.photocornucopia.com/1061.html (see under "lens construction") should do a good job.

 

[MattKing]

The APO may also be better for very large enlargements.
You may also find that the results from the two Rodagons will be more consistent than if you have one Nikor and one Rodagon.
If you had two lenses from the same model line, their mechanical operation and the functionality of the aperture adjustment would most likely match, which can be nice if you regularly switch back and forth between lenses.
But all in all, the best ones to keep will most likely be the ones that are in the best shape.

 

[punkzter]

Those are some great ideas. So I'll wait and see after I get some prints made.

 

[BMbikerider]

The APO Rodagon is at the top of the tree with the other two not far behind. The Apo is still available new and in UK it costs in excess of £500. You won't be able to by a used one for much less than £200 so you have a good deal. The Nikkor is no longer available and as the cost of film equipment is on the up and up $76 is not a bad price. we would pay around £40-£50 in UK

 

[Svenedin]

I have the APO Rodagon-N 50mm f2.8 (a more modern version than yours). It cost £175, second hand, some years back and it is a wonderful lens that is a joy to use. I don't consider £175 ridiculous money when compared against the cost of lenses on the camera. There is no point using high quality equipment to take the photograph only to try to try to print it with something sub-standard. I agree with the comment that it is slightly easier to stick with the same manufacturer for different focal lengths. They then all have the same design and it is a bit more straightforward in the darkroom but it is a minor issue and by no means essential. My other focal length lenses (80mm WA and 105mm) lenses are also Rodenstock Rodagon but the 50mm is the only APO that I have. All of them were second hand. I managed for years with Schnieder Componar-S lenses in 50mm and 80mm and although they are considered entry level I loved them (and I still have them). I never actually felt that my prints were lacking as a result of the enlarging lens (more lack of my skill). I have actually printed comparison prints between the Componar-S and the Rodagon APO and for an 8"x10" from 35mm I am not really convinced that I can tell the difference. I must try it again. Your lenses are very good and I hope you enjoy using them in the darkroom and show us some of your prints.

 

[John Koehrer]

With fungus you've paid too much for them. Return them if you can, pick up lenses
in better shape.

 

[Svenedin]

With fungus you've paid too much for them. Return them if you can, pick up lenses
in better shape.

Perhaps I misread the OP’s post but I understood he bought some lenses last year that turned out to have fungus and so he has just bought some more (that don’t have fungus).

 

[ic-racer]

Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 (paid $76)

Just the other day I was looking at my EL-Nikkor 50/2.8 and noticed I still had the receipt in the box: $79.95, July 2, 1977.

 

[Eric Rose]

 

[jtk]

Fuji made a wonderful lens with preset aperture ring. In columnation it rivaled Nikon and whupped Componon.

 

[punkzter]

My original lenses aren't pictured. I posted pics of the new ones.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I just purchased 3 new (to me) enlarger lenses on ebay. I've been slowly gathering the gear to setup my enlarger. Last year, I purchased a few 50mm and one 80mm lens, but this year I decided to do the flashlight test. I should have done it last year. All of my lenses have some stage of fungus in them. So I decided it was back to the drawing board.

Here is what I bought:

Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 (paid $76)

Rodenstock APO-Rodagon 50mm f/2.8

Rodenstock Rodagon 80mm f/4.0

All are supposedly from the estate of a professional photographer and have been checked out. The claim is that they are free of scratches/scuffs/fungus, etc.

I'm a little worried that I paid too much, especially for the Nikon/Nikkor. Now that I look, it seems that these sell for as little as $20. Any thoughts would be appreciated (especially if they make me feel good about the purchase)!.

Thanks!

Nikon enlarging lenses have an excellent reputation and are of great build quality; no problem there.However, they may need a professional cleaning job if they have internal fungus.

 

[EdSawyer]

That's the earliest version of the Apo Rodagon. It's about a $50-75 lens, if that. The Nikor is nice, and probably on par, it's the latest version of the Nikkor. The later Apo Rodagon 50 came in a more modern barrel, and was superseded by the Apo Rodagon-N 50mm, which itself was superseded by the Apo Rodagon-N 45mm.

 

[Svenedin]

That's the earliest version of the Apo Rodagon. It's about a $50-75 lens, if that. The Nikor is nice, and probably on par, it's the latest version of the Nikkor. The later Apo Rodagon 50 came in a more modern barrel, and was superseded by the Apo Rodagon-N 50mm, which itself was superseded by the Apo Rodagon-N 45mm.

The current APO Rodagon-N is 50mm f2.8 not 45mm. http://www.rodenstock-photo.com/Archiv/e_Rodenstock_Printing_CCD_43-62__8230.pdf

 

[EdSawyer]

The Apo Rodagon-N 45mm 2.8 was in their last line of enlarging lenses, which came out in the late 90s/early 2000s. It superseded, and was better optically, than the -N 50/2.8. Rodenstock discontinued these a long time ago, the series had a short life, and included the 45, 75, and 90 -N lenses. The current rodenstock stuff is sold/made/branded by Linos for other applications (but probably still work fine for enlarging), and is not the equal of the series the 45N was part of.

 

[Svenedin]

The Apo Rodagon-N 45mm 2.8 was in their last line of enlarging lenses, which came out in the late 90s/early 2000s. It superseded, and was better optically, than the -N 50/2.8. Rodenstock discontinued these a long time ago, the series had a short life, and included the 45, 75, and 90 -N lenses. The current rodenstock stuff is sold/made/branded by Linos for other applications (but probably still work fine for enlarging), and is not the equal of the series the 45N was part of.

Thanks for explaining that. It appears the APO-N 45mm f2.8 was also distributed by Linos.

 

[Arklatexian]

Print with them in good health! Tiny amounts over or under payment are not worth worrying about.

Neal Wydra

+1, In my experience, it is far worse to pay too little for crap than to pay too much for quality. I too question the reason to buy two lenses of the same focal length, especially if both are of similar quality........Regards!