-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
Saunders 670 MXL
-
A
- Thread starter CMoore
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Oleson Brightscreen MPD For Hasselblad
- Started by chuckroast
-
For Sale Nice M3 Double Stroke--recent CLA
- Started by Timothy Hyde
-
For Sale Rodenstock Grandagon 75mm f 6.8 multi-coated
- Started by Franswa
-
For Sale Mamiya TLR C33 with 65mm f 3.5 Lens - $295
- Started by J Durr
-
For Sale FS: Sinar P 8x10 Rear Standard Bearer
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
MattKing
Moderator
No.
But it is possible to have one set up better than another for your needs - configured more completely or more appropriately, and complete with more accessories. So if you are choosing between two completely set up enlargers, it may be appropriate to make your choice on issues like condition and which/how many accessories come with it.
The two enlargers deal with negative carriers in different ways. You may prefer one approach to the other. If so, I guess the one you prefer would be "better" in that way.
Some find the fit and finish of the Saunders/LPL enlargers to be more refined. Some consider the Beseler 23C series enlargers to be more robust. To me, they both seem reasonably refined, and at least sufficiently robust.
Both enlargers are still made. The 45S head is not.
If it is a true 23C, it is a really old enlarger. If it is one of the more modern variants (23CII, 23CIII, etc.) it could be brand new.
By the way, in most of the world the Saunders 670 series enlargers are known as LPL 7700 enlargers. Saunders is the US distributor.
One further difference that might be important. The maximum negative size for the Saunders/LPL is 6cm x 7cm, whereas the maximum negative size for the Beseler 23C series enlargers is 6cm x 9cm.
If it matters to you, Beseler still manufactures in the USA.
But it is possible to have one set up better than another for your needs - configured more completely or more appropriately, and complete with more accessories. So if you are choosing between two completely set up enlargers, it may be appropriate to make your choice on issues like condition and which/how many accessories come with it.
The two enlargers deal with negative carriers in different ways. You may prefer one approach to the other. If so, I guess the one you prefer would be "better" in that way.
Some find the fit and finish of the Saunders/LPL enlargers to be more refined. Some consider the Beseler 23C series enlargers to be more robust. To me, they both seem reasonably refined, and at least sufficiently robust.
Both enlargers are still made. The 45S head is not.
If it is a true 23C, it is a really old enlarger. If it is one of the more modern variants (23CII, 23CIII, etc.) it could be brand new.
By the way, in most of the world the Saunders 670 series enlargers are known as LPL 7700 enlargers. Saunders is the US distributor.
One further difference that might be important. The maximum negative size for the Saunders/LPL is 6cm x 7cm, whereas the maximum negative size for the Beseler 23C series enlargers is 6cm x 9cm.
If it matters to you, Beseler still manufactures in the USA.
voceumana
Allowing Ads
Saunders was the original import of the LPL enlargers in the USA, but it switched to Omega/Satter quite a few years ago, so they are now sold as Omega/LPL. If the enlarger you are considering is marked Saunders/LPL, then it is either NOS (new, old stock) or used. The MXL is, to my knowledge, the current design of the 670 series.
You can find detailed information on the LPL enlargers at: http://www.khbphotografix.com/LPL/ but note that they give the LPL model numbers, and Sauders/Omega modified the model names--both are shown.
If I were buying new, I'd certainly go with the Beseler 23CIII, or more likely the 67XL, as either is considerably less expensive by at least $1,000 US. Used, would depend upon the condition of the enlargers available.
The LPL is extremely smooth in its operation. The elevation is almost perfectly counterbalanced by a coil spring, so it doesn't take any effort at all to lift or lower it, except the weight of your own arm.
LPL lens boards are threaded, so no retaining ring is needed to mount a lens, Beseler lensboards need a retaining ring. Also, the LPL lensboards are round, so they can rotate. Nice if you need to position the lens to see the f-stop; on the Beseler, you need to make sure it's positioned right when you mount the lens. Also, you need to have a separate lensboard for each lens with the Beseler; since the LPL is threaded you can just screw in different lenses on the same lensboard.
Of course, one of the biggest differences is that the LPL is designed for 6x7 max, and the Beseler will do 6x9. I believe the LPL can handle some 6x9 negatives with the glass negative carrier with the masking blades removed, since the opening is about 82 mm wide, and many 6x9 cameras actually produce an image about 56 by 82 to 84 mm.
You really won't go wrong with either of these enlargers.
You can find detailed information on the LPL enlargers at: http://www.khbphotografix.com/LPL/ but note that they give the LPL model numbers, and Sauders/Omega modified the model names--both are shown.
If I were buying new, I'd certainly go with the Beseler 23CIII, or more likely the 67XL, as either is considerably less expensive by at least $1,000 US. Used, would depend upon the condition of the enlargers available.
The LPL is extremely smooth in its operation. The elevation is almost perfectly counterbalanced by a coil spring, so it doesn't take any effort at all to lift or lower it, except the weight of your own arm.
LPL lens boards are threaded, so no retaining ring is needed to mount a lens, Beseler lensboards need a retaining ring. Also, the LPL lensboards are round, so they can rotate. Nice if you need to position the lens to see the f-stop; on the Beseler, you need to make sure it's positioned right when you mount the lens. Also, you need to have a separate lensboard for each lens with the Beseler; since the LPL is threaded you can just screw in different lenses on the same lensboard.
Of course, one of the biggest differences is that the LPL is designed for 6x7 max, and the Beseler will do 6x9. I believe the LPL can handle some 6x9 negatives with the glass negative carrier with the masking blades removed, since the opening is about 82 mm wide, and many 6x9 cameras actually produce an image about 56 by 82 to 84 mm.
You really won't go wrong with either of these enlargers.
voceumana
Allowing Ads
More important than the enlarger itself is to get really fine enlarging lenses.
jimjm
Allowing Ads
I can't speak to the Beseler, but I've been using a Saunders/LPL C670MXL for a few years now and it's the best enlarger I've ever used. Really solid and vibration-free, the controls are easy to use. I have the dichroic color head, which makes split-grade printing a breeze. It'd be nice if it handled 6x9, but I've also got an Omega D2-V for 6x9 or 4x5 sizes.
voceumana
Allowing Ads
I suspect the LPL 670/7700 can handle some, many, or most 6x9 negatives--the universal glass negative carrier's opening without the masking blades is about 82mm wide, and many 6x9 cameras actually measure around 82 to 84 mm. Check the specs on your camera/film back. My Fuji GW690 provides an image of 56 x 82.6 mm; the Focal Encyclopedia lists 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 as 82 mm wide.
The universal carrier is, however, expensive. A 6x7 carrier could be routed out by a machinist to 82 mm wide as an alternative. I'll have to measure my 670's light source width.
The universal carrier is, however, expensive. A 6x7 carrier could be routed out by a machinist to 82 mm wide as an alternative. I'll have to measure my 670's light source width.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |