Opinions on the Saunders/LPL 6700 Enlarger?

[logan2z]

I've been toying with the idea of getting another enlarger to at least partially replace my Beseler 23CII XL. The Beseler is a good workhorse and I get pretty good results with it, but I think I'd like something that isn't so, mmm, rough around the edges in terms of adjustability/alignment and general fit and finish. I used a Saunder/LPL enlarger at a community darkroom for a while before I setup my own darkroom at home and it felt like a quality machine. Unfortunately, I can't recall which model it was.

Someone is selling a 6700 locally to me at a reasonable price and I'm considering purchasing it. I've done some research online to learn more about the model and what I've read has been mostly positive, although I have heard that some people had some focusing issues with it (not much more detail than that).

I generally print from 35mm and 6x6 negatives so it should have me covered for formats. I'll probably keep the 23C in case I ever start to shoot 6x9.

Could anyone who has personal experience with this enlarger share their thoughts? Can it be fully aligned easily, does it stay aligned, what is the overall build quality of the enlarger, etc.

Thanks in advance.

 

[markbau]

I've had several over the years. (I moved countries so had to sell and re-buy them twice, last time I shipped it)
Overall I would say they are a wonderful enlarger, well built and there always seems to be parts available for them even now.
I now have two, a condenser and a colour head. The condenser seems to have an alignment issue that is driving me crazy as there aren't many adjustments available.
As long as it hasn't been dropped or abused I think you'll be more than happy with a 6700.

 

[logan2z]

The condenser seems to have an alignment issue that is driving me crazy as there aren't many adjustments available.

So the 6700 is not easily aligned? That's one of the things that I don't love about my 23C II - limited alignment adjustments. I'm hoping my next enlarger will be better in that regard.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have one with a color head, as mid level enlarger it is not easily adjustable. Last I checked mine is in good adjustment, if you decide to take a look at the one you are considering take a small level with you so you can check.

 

[markbau]

I should add that almost every enlarger I've ever used, except for the top end Durst enlargers, didn't have much in the way of adjustments for alignment so don't think it's just an LPL thing. Even the LPL 4500 doesn't really have much in the way of alignment adjustment.

 

[logan2z]

@Paul Howell @markbau thanks for the info. I'll take a look at it and do my best to assess the condition and how well aligned it already is.

 

[Paul Howell]

My D3 is easy to keep in alignment I think the Besseler 4X5s were also designed to be kept in alignment. Most of the entry to mid level enlarger I've owned or used had few if any adjustment points.

 

[markbau]

I've just spent about 3 hours messing around with my 6700 with condenser head.

After changing out baseboard/colums and then neg stages (I've got two 6700s) I have come to the conclusion that any problems with alignment will be how the neg carrier sits onto the neg stage. We are always told that the critical thing is neg to lens. Neg/lens to baseboard isn't that important, and I agree, by adding some electrical tape to one side of the neg stage, where the neg carrier sits, I got perfect alignment.

BTW, I don't know how useful the Versalab alignment tool is. It kept telling me that everything was ok but my grain focuser was telling me different. I used to own a Salthill alignment tool which was brilliant (lost it in the divorce). If anyone wants to make some money, build and sell a copy of the Salthill alignment tool.

 

[ic-racer]

Versalab simplifies alignment. Alignment by visual inspection is not only conceptually difficult ( when corner focus is above baseboard, the opposite corner of the negative needs to be moved closer to the lens ), a perfectly corner-to-corner focused negative can still be highly askew.
Also, normal 35mm negative curl is opposite the field curvature some (all?) enlarging lenses at high magnification, so trying to align a enlarger to get sharp corners without a glass carrier can be futile.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I used to have a 670 (not 6700) which was a great enlarger. Even though I have the 4550xl now I wish I still had that 670. On the other hand, the 4550 with the 35mm mixing box is the best 35mm enlarger I have used. Better than my Focomat. I'd encourage you to just get the best enlarger you can find and set it up for the way you want to print. So a VC head if you only want to print black and white for example. If you have the space for it, a 4x5 enlarger is future proof. Personally I've never liked Beseler or Omega enlargers. They work fine but they always seem clunky to me and they are a pain to keep in alignment. Back in the 90s a friend of mine switched from a 23c to a 670 and he said it was the best thing he ever did. He went on to sell a few million $ in prints with that enlarger. If you are serious about printing then it is worth it to get something that is really good. Good enlargers make printing that much more enjoyable. So I'd skip the 6700.

 

[logan2z]

I used to have a 670 (not 6700) which was a great enlarger. Even though I have the 4550xl now I wish I still had that 670. On the other hand, the 4550 with the 35mm mixing box is the best 35mm enlarger I have used. Better than my Focomat. I'd encourage you to just get the best enlarger you can find and set it up for the way you want to print. So a VC head if you only want to print black and white for example. If you have the space for it, a 4x5 enlarger is future proof. Personally I've never liked Beseler or Omega enlargers. They work fine but they always seem clunky to me and they are a pain to keep in alignment. Back in the 90s a friend of mine switched from a 23c to a 670 and he said it was the best thing he ever did. He went on to sell a few million $ in prints with that enlarger. If you are serious about printing then it is worth it to get something that is really good. Good enlargers make printing that much more enjoyable. So I'd skip the 6700.

Clunky is the right word for the 23C. It's not bad, I have a bunch of accessories for it and it's nice to know that Beseler is still around (and their CS is excellent), but I'd like something better.

I'll keep my eye out for a 670, but I almost never see one come up for sale locally and buying an enlarger online and having it shipped is not something I'm excited about.

 

[MattKing]

The LPL 670 is only badged that way in the USA. It is known as the LPL 7700 in the rest of the world. I have two of them - one with a colour head, the other with the VC head - badged as the 670, most likely because they were bought from the USA by the school I bought them from.
Their quality is excellent. I see enough similarities with the 6700 to make me think that the 6700 would be worth considering as well.
If you were local, I'd be offering you my fully equipped Beseler 67C + colour heads for your alternate consideration .

 

[logan2z]

Their quality is excellent. I see enough similarities with the 6700 to make me think that the 6700 would be worth considering as well.

The thing that turned me off of the 6700 were the comments about stability and ease (or lack thereof) of alignment. My 23C is already a bit awkward to align but is quite stable, so I feel like the 6700 is at best a lateral move. I'd like to move to an enlarger that is a marked upgrade.

Truth be told, I am still a little tempted by the local 6700 because the seller seems very nice, and she offered me the enlarger with a 35mm negative carrier and the Saunders digital timer (which I don't really need) for the grand total of $100. But if it's no improvement over the Beseler then I see little point.

 

[MattKing]

How often are you making large enlargements - 16x20 and larger?
I ask, because that is where alignment is most critical.
When I've used Beseler 23C series enlargers in the past - in a shared darkroom - they have been quite satisfactory.
FWIW, while I like the LPLs, and particularly like the VCCE head, I would have been happy to have stayed with my colour head equipped Beseler 67C if it didn't have such a large footprint.
And I would have been even happier keeping my even larger Omega D6, if our downsizing move hadn't made using either the Omega or the Beseler impractical.

 

[logan2z]

How often are you making large enlargements - 16x20 and larger?
I ask, because that is where alignment is most critical.
When I've used Beseler 23C series enlargers in the past - in a shared darkroom - they have been quite satisfactory.
FWIW, while I like the LPLs, and particularly like the VCCE head, I would have been happy to have stayed with my colour head equipped Beseler 67C if it didn't have such a large footprint.
And I would have been even happier keeping my even larger Omega D6, if our downsizing move hadn't made using either the Omega or the Beseler impractical.

I never make prints that large, 11x14 max. But I have seen the results of less-than-ideal alignment even on my 8x10 prints. Maybe I'm particularly sensitive to it.