Leitz 2C image size quandary

[FredRose]

I've recently acquired a 2C in great condition that somehow doesn't focus to an image size smaller than 14" with either lens. The answer must be too obvious for me to see, but it's got me flummoxed. What am I missing? (That sure is a straight line via any comedy duo in history.)

 

[Hilo]

Do you know if this IIc has been yes/no used over the past years? If not, it is possible the lens stage does not drop down (all the way) when you bring down the parallelogram. By repeatingly bringing the enlarger up and down quite decisively, you may wake it up. Which is a good thing. When it does drop down as it should, you'll hear a schklunck sound and the entire stage drops further down (stretching out the bellows more than they were).

I assume it has the Bowden cable? Does this cable look okay? In particular at the front nearest to you where it enters the lens stage. Or is it hanging down at that point, with a knick in the cable?

When positioning the 60mm by sliding the lens stage to the left, it is important to follow the instruction arrows indicated on the front of the lens stage: to push up first and only then move sideways. Especially when changing from the 100mm to the 60mm lens as that activates the Bowden cable. This may have nothing to do with your problem, but you may put unnecessary strain on the cable if you don't follow these instructions.

Now I am not at work with the enlarger, later on I will have a look to perhaps describe this better.

If the above does not help, can you post some pictures of the enlarger? Of the entire Bowden cable where it is attached at both ends? And a picture of where the parallelogram sits attached to the collumn.

 

[Hilo]

When positioning the 60mm by sliding the lens stage to the left, it is important to follow the instruction arrows indicated on the front of the lens stage: to push up first and only then move sideways. Especially when changing from the 100mm to the 60mm lens as that activates the Bowden cable. This may have nothing to do with your problem, but you may put unnecessary strain on the cable if you don't follow these instructions.

This I can explain better, the "unnecessary strain on the cable" in particular. But let's first try to solve your problem

 

[FredRose]

Thank you for your reply. Enlarger hasn't been used in years, as far as I know. Everything moves smoothly, Bowden cable is sound and the lenses move as they should. Lens stage at 11" from deck bellows is at 3" extension and stays at that length till it reaches it's closest distance. Hope that helps. Photo, too.

 

[Focomatter]

What happens when you raise the enlarger head so the wheel running on the dolphin shaped cam is down near its tail? With mine the bellows in compressed and hard to even see.

 

[FredRose]

What happens when you raise the enlarger head so the wheel running on the dolphin shaped cam is down near its tail? With mine the bellows in compressed and hard to even see.

Yes, mine is the same.

 

[Focomatter]

Sounds like it is working fine as that is the auto-focusing in action. To go bigger you can raise the enlarger using the column but then auto-focus goes away.

 

[FredRose]

Sounds like it is working fine as that is the auto-focusing in action. To go bigger you can raise the enlarger using the column but then auto-focus goes away.

Indeed. It's the going smaller that's the issue! It seems like the helicals are upside down: the smaller the image, the closer the lens to the lens stage; the larger the image, the closer the lens to the base board. I know I'm going to be embarrassed when this all sorts out.

 

[Focomatter]

There are accessories to go smaller. I do not have them and have no experience with them.
Think of an enlarger as a camera in reverse. Doing close-ups with a camera the bellows is extended and the field area is smaller so is like making smaller prints.

 

[summicron1]

my experience is entirely with the IC but I wonder if you have the lens mounted correctly -- there's an extension tube you need to put between the lens and the lens stage, as I recall. If yours doesn't have that it would throw everything off, but I'm also confused about your description of the helicals since you don't touch those when changing the image size, at least on mine.

interested to see how this works out. The IC is a marvel of construction and simplicity. The IIC, of course, is another beast entirely so forgive me if I'm way off kilter.

 

[Focomatter]

I have a IC as well - the lens mounting is quite different. No extension tube with the IIC. Moreover I have yet to find an extension tube that will fit into the deeply recessed and narrow mount. The dedicated Leitz lenses are rather narrow for this fit. That said the 100mm goes into the longer tube!

 

[Hilo]

I've recently acquired a 2C in great condition that somehow doesn't focus to an image size smaller than 14" with either lens.

14" is about 35cm. If that's a rectangular negative, is that its smallest or largest size? Which size negative are you using? 135mm or ?

When we know that, we can check our own situation and compare to yours.

Is your 100mm installed on the left, 60mm on the right?

Can you also show both lenses, photographed standing in front of the enlarger?

---

Re Summicron1's remark, there's no extension ring needed for the IIc. That's only for the Ic and the Valoy II.

 

[FredRose]

I'm enlarging 35mm film. The photo including the easel is the closest the 60mm lens will focus. That distance gives an 11+" long side image. The closeup shows the lens fully against the lens stage. Should it not be extended? Perhaps this machine violates the laws of physics.

 

[Hilo]

Ok, this gives us a better comparison. I will do that tomorrow (now at home, it is 7pm here).

Today, I used a 35mm negative with the 60mm and the IIc remained in focus to postcard size, plus or minus. I didn't have time to measure but the longer side was plus minus 15cm (5,9in.).

So, you're right there's something not okay. Sofar, I don't think my 60mm is further extended than yours.

I always forget the precise action of the small wheel doing its part on the cam . I will also look at that tomorrow.

Have you looked critically at your Bowden cable, the part at the rear in particular? When the black protection has come loose from the shiny aluminium, there's a problem.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Is the compensation ring for the baseboard thickness set correctly?

 

[FredRose]

Is the compensation ring for the baseboard thickness set correctly?

It's set to 25mm.

 

[FredRose]

Ok, this gives us a better comparison. I will do that tomorrow (now at home, it is 7pm here).

Today, I used a 35mm negative with the 60mm and the IIc remained in focus to postcard size, plus or minus. I didn't have time to measure but the longer side was plus minus 15cm (5,9in.).

So, you're right there's something not okay. Sofar, I don't think my 60mm is further extended than yours.

I always forget the precise action of the small wheel doing its part on the cam . I will also look at that tomorrow.

Have you looked critically at your Bowden cable, the part at the rear in particular? When the black protection has come loose from the shiny aluminium, there's a problem.

Bowden cable is sound, moving the lens stage with ease.

 

[NB23]

Pull out this pin

 

[FredRose]

Pull out this pin

View attachment 367855

BINGO! You win the prize! I knew it was going to be simple, even though I doubted physics for a moment. Thanks so much and thank you to all of you who took this on to help. Much appreciated.

 

[NB23]

Of course I win 🫠

I own two of those Babies, one of them being Tom Abrahamson’s, I believe. I use them EVERYDAY. Printed over 35k prints on one.

I also use the 2C asTHE MOST PERFECT scanning device ever created. I scanned over 1000 rolls of film on it. I can tell you how. Once this goes public, the 2C should soar in Price at least 2.5x.

Focomat IIc is the best Photo money I ever spent.

Those are the Very, very, very best.

 

[Hilo]

Arggghh, that pin again!!! Bravo NB23 !

 

[FredRose]

Of course I win 🫠

I own two of those Babies, one of them being Tom Abrahamson’s, I believe. I use them EVERYDAY. Printed over 35k prints on one.

I also use the 2C asTHE MOST PERFECT scanning device ever created. I scanned over 1000 rolls of film on it. I can tell you how. Once this goes public, the 2C should soar in Price at least 2.5x.

Focomat IIc is the best Photo money I ever spent.

Those are the Very, very, very best.

You're The Man. Whisper the scanning technique, it'll keep the price down. I'm all ears.

 

[Hilo]

Focomat IIc is the best Photo money I ever spent.

Those are the Very, very, very best.

I share your enthusiasm. I use this enlarger since the late seventies. When a moment comes, that I have to downsize my darkroom, it is the IIc that would stay.

And, I do feel there are more as good enlargers around. Some do good things one can't do with a IIc.

Large darkrooms help, but are not a must. Sofar, I am just lucky in that respect.

 

[NB23]

I share your enthusiasm. I use this enlarger since the late seventies. When a moment comes, that I have to downsize my darkroom, it is the IIc that would stay.

And, I do feel there are more as good enlargers around. Some do good things one can't do with a IIc.

Large darkrooms help, but are not a must. Sofar, I am just lucky in that respect.


View attachment 367888

Byourraful

 

[FredRose]

Impressive!