Lenses for 8x10, only contact prints as finals...

Ai Print said:

If I do decide to enlarge 8x10, I will be building the enlarger my self around a Heiland 8x10 LED light source. Finding and buying a good up to date 8x10 enlarger is tough these days, I have kept track of them and they far and few between.

I have a good design in mind that centers around the LED light source and an 8x10 monorail camera.

Nothing is set in stone since I have not even decided to enlarge it yet. But yes, now that I am actually seeing good negs, the temptation is there...

Click to expand...

I was lucky when I decided to look for a 10x8 enlarger, it was about 18 years ago at a time when many pro labs were closing or switching direction, there would be maybe 30 De Vere 504 and 1 or 2 5108'swhen yI'd searched on ebay (UK), these days they are rare as you say and prices have rocketed up compared to when I bought mine.

John's suggestion of using a camera is one way to go, I don't know about the US but here in the UK old horizontal enlargers are cheap, they rarely sell for the asking prices on ebay, I was given mine free. While it's Quarter plate and roll film, or 5x4 (if I had the larger condensers) it could easily be used for 10x8 with an LED light source with very little work.

Ian

DREW WILEY said:

What a shame. A Couple years ago I was offered over a dozen pro 8x10 enlargers, and all went to the dump except one, and it was hell enough to move. View cameras themselves just aren't solid enough for serious enlarging work. Maybe a big stand camera or process camera. There are all kinds of issues. And unless you're strictly thinking about black and white images, I'm very skeptical about LED systems being either bright enough or accurate enough for serious color printing at this stage in their development. And frankly, a free enlarger is a lot cheaper than building your own, which can indeed be an interesting project, but can be a lot more involved and expensive to do well than you might think if you expect anything precise.

Click to expand...

I usually agree with a lot of what you reply with but I don’t agree with this being a shame. I have been toying with the idea of a dedicated mural enlarger with movements for some time, likely to be a Sinar P 8x10 with some mods. Trust me I build a lot of equipment and this will be solid. Also yes, all I do is black and white and the Heiland heads are outstanding for this.

These are the times we are in, if you can’t find it, then make it.

I used a Sinar P front standard at the bottom end of the enlarger bellows, but the axial rod support was a repurposed micrometer driven machined bronze WWII artillery sight mount far more solid and precisely adjustable than anything available from the photo industry. Got it free. I limited myself to a 15K budget on that 8x10 enlarger so had to build it from the ground up, innovating even the colorhead. I wanted to go vertical to save floor space, and the beast dwarfs my Durst L184. Horizontal units are easier to make if you have good shop skills because you can easily position them on a sheave rail and roller system if the floor is precisely flat.

Ai Print said:

I usually agree with a lot of what you reply with but I don’t agree with this being a shame. I have been toying with the idea of a dedicated mural enlarger with movements for some time, likely to be a Sinar P 8x10 with some mods. Trust me I build a lot of equipment and this will be solid. Also yes, all I do is black and white and the Heiland heads are outstanding for this.

These are the times we are in, if you can’t find it, then make it.

Click to expand...

I had a dedicated horizontal "mural" enlarger for a decade, it was based on a De Vere 54a essentially unbolting the head from the floor standing frame and building a horizontal frame to bolt it to.. It was used to put photographs on vehicles ( before modern vinyl transfers), images included life size photos of F1 racing cars, powerboats etc so up to around 15ft. The floor standing frame itself was used as a copy camera set up with a De Vere monorail camera attached

Ultimately you have to use what's available and that gets less and less these days.

Ian

I had a Durst 2000W mural colorhead in horizontal mode. It ran ridiculously hot with a huge electrical bill. Got rid of it and designed an 8x10 RGB additive head both more accurate color-wise, and much cooler, but also powerful halogen.

Intrepid is about to launch a new Kickstarter for an 8x10 enlarger add-on for their cameras to convert them into an enlarger. Just sayin'

Good for them. But it would be an easy project for any basic cabinet shop. Designing an efficient colorhead and diffusion box with efficient cooling is trickier. And wood burns, so there's that issue. I know of a lot of cabinet shops that burned down too. But for dedicated b&w printing there are cooler options.

I figure I will make images and contact print for a couple years, I need to give it due time and enjoy my great set of 4x5 enlargers as is for awhile.

As for a horizontal enlarger, it just does not work in my space, I would have to completely re-design it and that is not happening. For example, the center enlarger in the photo is wall mounted. We ripped a large patch of drywall off and made a standout that is bolted into the foundation wall of the basement in 6 places, will easily handle 300 pounds. So I will be mounting the 8x10 enlarger vertically to the existing standout in order to keep that max use of height with my 8.5' foot ceiling. The easy part will be the light source and camera as purposed for the enlarger lens, the tough part will be the film stage and associated negative carriers.

I'll get there and it will work fantastic, but for now I contact print...

That is a darkroom of a sick sick mind. Not enough junk and much too organized. We might be dealing with an AI here...

Besides that -- looks great! 8x10 contacts are a great size to work with and view.

Never seen a darkroom so neat

Can the units below the centre enlarger be slid out ? You may want to look at a 240mm or 270mm enlarger lens rather than a 300mm as you need a lot of height enlarging with a 300mm lens. The 240mm f5.6 Componon S lenses are designed for 10x8, makes a huge difference.

Ian

The build is still in process, things have not all found their home yet in the cubbies and on shelves.

The table under the center enlarger is temporary, will be replaced with a rolling one that has an align-able top. A floor easel will be made to handle the printable area which is 46” x 64”.

The rolling table is the next big project, all last week it was finalizing wiring on the enlarger wall, including the snazzy light panels on each side of the center enlarger that are used for inspecting negs during printing sessions. I also built my film loading counter that has a dedicated vac.

And yes, it is clean and organized, the room also houses my cameras and about $25,000 in computer equipment, it’s gotta be a tightly run ship....clutter makes it hard to keep things clean.

I already figured a 240mm would be the way I would need to go if and when I do replace the center enlarger for one that handles 8x10...

Sounds good. I had two enlargers 5x4 abnd MF/35mm wall mounted side by side in my old darkroom and part of the bench top could be flush or mounted at different levels including a couple inches above floor level. Then I bought my 5108.

In my new darkroom I have a storage unit (door less cupboard) with lockable wheels that fits below the 5108's drop bed which slides out easily when necessary it goes under the computer bench as an alternative location. I agree on a degree of tidiness. My only problem is over winter the darkroom also doubles as a workshop for the cleaner parts of camera and shutter restorations and repairs as it's heated which my garage workshop isn't.

Let us see it again with the 10x8 once set up.

Ian

240 lenses are certainly not ideal for 8x10 enlargement. You have more falloff than longer focal lengths, and might well have to stop it down an extra stop to get similar corner performance. But if you're shy on clearance, that's what you might have to do. A superb small lens that can now be had at bargain prices would be a 240/9 Apo Nikkor.

Drew you are forgetting 240mm isn't a wide angle lens for the 10x8 format, also far more importantly unlike with camera use to Infinity an enlarger lens is typically used in the 1:1 to say 1:6 range so the effective image circle is huge and we are using the centre of that circle not remote close to the reas at the edges where light fall off would be an issue.

Ian

Ian Grant said:

Drew you are forgetting 240mm isn't a wide angle lens for the 10x8 format, also far more importantly unlike with camera use to Infinity an enlarger lens is typically used in the 1:1 to say 1:6 range so the effective image circle is huge and we are using the centre of that circle not remote close to the reas at the edges where light fall off would be an issue.

Ian

Click to expand...

Taking lenses like the 240 are also,optimized for f22. Enlarging lenses are optimized for 2 stops from wide open. Make a big difference quality wise.

Ian - I'm not forgetting anything. I have all kinds of enlarging lenses as well as taking lenses and critically know the difference both in practice and via careful testing, plus decades of printing experience. The f/9 Apo Nikkors I often use are superb from f/11 down as enlarging lenses - better than any official enlarging lenses I've ever seen. But that applies to normal to longer-than-normal applications. With a 240 Apo Nikkor for 8x10, you need to stop down to f/16 to get the same level of performance with a perfectly even light source. But let's hypothetically imagine that wasn't the case with a faster 240 official enlarging lens. You'd still have more center to edge falloff mandating a thicker center to edge diffuser, so end up with the same issue, or else more edge and corner burning. And I very seriously doubt the corner performance would be equal to a longer lens of comparable design. The f/22 specifications for process lenses is related to printing industry convention, not necessarily to regular darkroom use. I use them all the way from 1:2 to big enlargements over a wide range of stops, depending. For very critical enlarged internegs or dupes, between f/11 anf f/16 is the sweet spot. With official enlarging lenses like Rodagons, Apo-Rodagon N's, El Nikkors, etc, I'd fully agree with Bob's assessment of 2 stops down; but stopping down to f/11 sometimes gives more even illumination, depending on the mirror box and diffuser in play. But this doesn't mean I'm badmouthing 240 lenses for 8x10. Space limitations sometimes make them a must. Not everyone has a 16 ft ceiling like I do.

As an update, both the Fujinon 250mm 6.7 and of course the Nikkor W 360mm 6.5 are turning out to be amazing lenses on 8x10. I did a one person workshop yesterday in which the student used the 360mm at 6 feet away to do a shot for an ongoing project and the results were just incredible. Both these lenses appear to resolve at the level of a good 35mm lens. I have no commercial work until late June so I will be using this setup a lot.

All the best everyone!

Ai Print said:

Both these lenses appear to resolve at the level of a good 35mm lens.!

Click to expand...

That's an interesting comment, and actually what most of us want our LF lenses to be at least close to. Some older books say that MF and LF lenses don't need to have particularly high performance because the degree of enlargement, same goes for DOF tables.

Ian

Ai Print said:

As an update, both the Fujinon 250mm 6.7 and of course the Nikkor W 360mm 6.5 are turning out to be amazing lenses on 8x10. I did a one person workshop yesterday in which the student used the 360mm at 6 feet away to do a shot for an ongoing project and the results were just incredible. Both these lenses appear to resolve at the level of a good 35mm lens. I have no commercial work until late June so I will be using this setup a lot.

All the best everyone!

Click to expand...

Very impressed with how neat and ordered your darkroom is, mine has piles of negatives everywhere at the moment...

The f9 Computar lenses are worth considering. They have substantial coverage for contact printing, but I'm not sure how they would fare with an enlarged negative.

They can be expensive. For comparison, there's a 210mm on EBay for $1100. (Claimed coverage on the LF site of 456mm at very small apertures.) But, who knows if the seller will ever get that in these times. I sold one several months ago that was in Exc Plus condition. After starting high and gradually decreasing the price, it finally sold for $850. (Or, something there 'bouts.) They were also made in focal lengths of 240mm and 300mm. (And maybe 150mm?) But, those in the 300mm focal length are extremely rare.

I did a side by side comparison between a 210mm Computar f9 and the same focal length in a Graphics Kowa lens. The coverage of the Computar was obviously greater.