Laborator 900: BWL450 diffuser vs BIMAKIT-BW condenser

Hello to all enthusiasts of analog photography!

My colleagues and I are planning to purchase the Laborator 900 just for b/w photography. Overall, it's the type we want, but we wonder which head is better: the BWL450 diffuser head without a filter pocket or the BIMAKIT-BW condenser head with a filter drawer. And we can't decide.

From the one hand, a filter drawer means much to us, because we all usually work with multigrade papers.

From the other hand, I've read some opinions that the diffuser is better type of head, because it gives softer, less contrasting image, nicer than the condenser, and it doesn't produce dust points so much.

How is it actually?

Anything else we should pay attention to when choosing between?

Thanks for any advice!

Diffusion is kinder to the highlights and really does reduce dust and scratches. Contrast is lower but with Multigrade you can probably print a wider range of negatives.

There are optical quality filters used below the lens, they just need a little more care.

Are you aware that you will need 3 sets condensers? For 6x9, 6x6 and 35mm (or for whatever format you will print).
That is what I have for my Durst M800, not sure that L900 is the same, but they are about from the same era.
With colour head you can use the biggest diffusion box for the all size negatives.
Also you then don't need filters either in drawer or under the lens, because you have Yellow and Magenta (+ Cyan) filters already built in.
From my experience using the filter drawer for MG filters is too slow and inconvenient.
You can use multigrade filter holder under the lens too, it's much faster and easier.
When you look for the deal, be sure that you have there as much additional (and necessary) accessories as you can. Those small bits tend to be now very, very expensive and hard to find. Like negative inserts, glass inserts, Lens holders, diffusion boxes, condensers etc.... Did you find instructional manual for L900 so you have and idea what do you exactly need for it?

If you print with a glass carrier you will have less trouble spotting prints with a diffusion head.

Seems the BWL450 was designed at a time before multigrade paper, so oddly without a filter slot. In fact the manual seems to recommend pulling the White Light lever on the CLS450 color head when printing B&W (rather than using the filters for contrast control).

Though, you will be just as successful with fitration under the lens using the BWL450 with multigrade paper.

Good news! All condensers are supplied as well as lens holders.

Thank you all for respond! Those new information you gave me both helps and hinders us with the choice

Mal Paso said:

There are optical quality filters used below the lens, they just need a little more care.

Click to expand...

gorbas said:

From my experience using the filter drawer for MG filters is too slow and inconvenient.
You can use multigrade filter holder under the lens too, it's much faster and easier.

Click to expand...

ic-racer said:

Though, you will be just as successful with fitration under the lens using the BWL450 with multigrade paper.

Click to expand...

So, suspending other doubts for now, you suggest, that under the lens, somewhere near the red filter maybe (?) I can mount an additional drawer for multigrade filters? Do i understand correctly? Do you have any example of something like this? Do you buy it or do it yourself?

gorbas said:

Are you aware that you will need 3 sets condensers? For 6x9, 6x6 and 35mm (or for whatever format you will print).

Click to expand...

Yep, and 3 mixing boxes for different formats to work with diffusor head BWL 450:

gorbas said:

When you look for the deal, be sure that you have there as much additional (and necessary) accessories as you can. Those small bits tend to be now very, very expensive and hard to find. Like negative inserts, glass inserts, Lens holders, diffusion boxes, condensers etc.... Did you find instructional manual for L900 so you have and idea what do you exactly need for it?

Click to expand...

Thanks for that list! We are carefully studying the manual . All mixing boxes, lenses, lens holders ect. seems OK on pictures. What we are particularly concerned is the lack of TRA 450 Transformer (we will ask the seller for a photo).

gorbas said:

With colour head you can use the biggest diffusion box for the all size negatives.
Also you then don't need filters either in drawer or under the lens, because you have Yellow and Magenta (+ Cyan) filters already built in.
From my experience using the filter drawer for MG filters is too slow and inconvenient.
You can use multigrade filter holder under the lens too, it's much faster and easier.

Click to expand...

ic-racer said:

In fact the manual seems to recommend pulling the White Light lever on the CLS450 color head when printing B&W (rather than using the filters for contrast control).

Click to expand...

I've already come across this method before - to print B&W with color head - and you confirm that, but because of that we also have to rethink what enlarger we want to buy

Jakub_Te said:

I can mount an additional drawer for multigrade filters?

Click to expand...

When I used under the lens filters, I just took a bit of copper electrical installation wire, bent it into an appropriate shape to make a 'filter holder' and put the filter there. Just to illustrate that you can make this as simple as you want. Or as complicated! But fitting a multigrade filter under a lens ain't rocket science. The closer you mount the filter to the lens, the smaller its potentially negative impact (due to dust & scratches) will be on image quality as you'll take any defects on the filters as far as possible out of the focal plane.

Jakub_Te said:

to print B&W with color head

Click to expand...

Works fine; many people do this. I've done it for years. You can easily mimic the effect of true multigrade filters using a dichroic filter head by appropriately adjusting its magenta and yellow filtration. There are several tables out there that give the appropriate filter settings for e.g. Durst heads for each half grade.

As to the condensor vs. diffusor - that's a potentially long debate with no clear outcome. Some prefer one while others prefer the other. They all have valid arguments. Condensors give a tiny edge in image sharpness which may or may not be visible and relevant to you. They also tend to give a bit more contrast; half a grade or so. Diffusor enlargers are slightly less finicky when it comes to very tiny dust (although larger on the negative dust will image in any enlarger setup!) There's just no definitive answer to the question which is best.

One thing is pretty clear though: if you go for a Durst condensor enlarger and you need to hunt down the additional condensors for your preferred film formats because they're not included in the initial deal, be prepared to either look for a long time or pay big money for them. They are out there on the market, but all sellers are perfectly aware of how common and desired Durst enlargers are, and many buyers are perfectly willing to pay crazy money for spare parts.

My Durst at one time had a 10x10 inch filter holder above the negatrive. Since those filters are very expensive, I made an under-lens holder for the smaller 6x6" filters. You could do the same or maybve just lay the filters on top of the FEMOBOX diffuser.

You can place filters on top of the Femobox. There are extra clips to hold the filter in place.