Schneider Componon-S 50mm/2.8 - 5 or 6 elements?

[Bikerider]

The Componon-S was designed to a qualitative end point, worrying about the number of lens elements is irrelevant. It's likely a situation where the design changed as available glass types changed. If you are really having an existential crisis over this, get an EL-Nikkor or a Rodagon etc.

If the number of lens elements is all you worry about then you have a peaceful life."5 elements or 6, I clean forgot!" That sounds like a line from a Dirty Harry movie. But seriously if a lens is sharp corner to corner when stopped down to your preferred aperture - who cares. I prefer Rodagon as it happens but there you are - now the 50mm F2.8 APO is sharp corner to corner and gets even better as you stop down. Even my elderly 80mm Rodagon F5.6 is sharp at F8 or 11.

 

[logan2z]

Compared to the example apbphoto posted, the barrel extends noticeably further above the serial number in the 6/4 more recent lenses. Your lens pre-dates both my example of a 5/4 and apbphoto's 5/4, so I'm not sure what's going on there...

I'll measure both lenses tomorrow & give more exact dimensions.

I had forgotten that apbphoto had included photos of his lens earlier in this thread. I just compared his lens to mine and they appear to be the same. So perhaps mine is a 5-element model as well.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I had forgotten that apbphoto had included photos of his lens earlier in this thread. I just compared his lens to mine and they appear to be the same. So perhaps mine is a 5-element model as well.

If it looks near identical to apbphoto's then it's a 5-element, the one I have at home is a 5-element and looks identical, the ones I can check tomorrow are all six-element and have a quite noticeably deeper rear group barrel.

I would not be surprised if the change happened sometime in the 1990's to replace a leaded glass or arsenic containing glass - much like Zeiss had to do with the 38/4.5 Biogon.

 

[logan2z]

If it looks near identical to apbphoto's then it's a 5-element, the one I have at home is a 5-element and looks identical, the ones I can check tomorrow are all six-element and have a quite noticeably deeper rear group barrel.

I would not be surprised if the change happened sometime in the 1990's to replace a leaded glass or arsenic containing glass - much like Zeiss had to do with the 38/4.5 Biogon.

I don't know how credible this site is, or if the results of using the lens as a macro lens apply equally well to using it as an enlarging lens, but they seem to have tested different variants of the Componon-S 50/2.8 and came to the conclusion that the 5-element lens is inferior to the 6-element and is not recommended:

https://www.closeuphotography.com/s...er-kreuznach-componon-s-50mm-f28-v-mount-lens

I have yet to try out my own Componon-S that is apparently of the 5-element variety, but I'm going to make a print with it this weekend and compare if to the results obtained with my Nikon Nikkor 50/2.8N.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I don't know how credible this site is, or if the results of using the lens as a macro lens apply equally well to using it as an enlarging lens, but they seem to have tested different variants of the Componon-S 50/2.8 and came to the conclusion that the 5-element lens is inferior to the 6-element and is not recommended:

https://www.closeuphotography.com/s...er-kreuznach-componon-s-50mm-f28-v-mount-lens

I have yet to try out my own Componon-S that is apparently of the 5-element variety, but I'm going to make a print with it this weekend and compare if to the results obtained with my Nikon Nikkor 50/2.8N.

Above all else, he's not using them for their intended purpose & stacked on another lens - his conclusions may have some vague relevance, but don't read deeply into them - if the lens he adds is sufficiently heavily/ luckily corrected to correct the abberations of his 135mm EL-Nikkor, it's going to look a lot better than a lens that while well corrected, is not able to additionally correct the 135's aberrations. As time has gone on, it has become possible to correct lenses for wider ranges of magnification and use - the High Modulation Componons being a case in point - and if a recalculation of the 50 Componon-S became necessary, it may have been judged economically worthwhile to slightly enhance its correction for broader purposes than darkroom printing. A Rodagon-G still beats it above 15x in my experience. I suspect that the Componon-S 50 that Ctein tested in the late 1980's and reported on amongst others in 'Post Exposure' and described as having the top rated central contrast of all the 50's he tested and an 'exceptionally flat field' was a 5-element.

I've attached an image of a 6-element 50mm Componon-S.

EDIT: have added a 5-element from approx same perspective. Should show the differences.

 

[jjphoto]

There are two optical versions of the Componon-S 2.8/50, a 5 element in 4 group version and a 6 element in 4 group version.

The 5/4 versions are the No.10146 and the No.14849 (see http://photocornucopia.com/archive/81/cpn_s.pdf), same optics, different bodies.

The 6/4 version is the No.16828 (see http://photocornucopia.com/archive/75/vergroesserung_e.pdf). The change took place in 1992 according to Schneider (from an email from the Schneider Product and Market Specialist in 2019).

I wasn't given a serial number to distinguish the new version. I think the serial number of the No.16828 is around 145xxxxx million and higher (possibly as low as 14.460.000), give or take a bit. See the table below from Schneider (from their web site c. 2013) showing serial numbers and years manufactured:

Seriennummer/Serial No.

Monat/Month

Jahr/Year
------------
14.400.000

Januar / January

1991
------------
14.460.000

Februar / February

1992
------------
14.480.000

Januar / January

1993
------------
14.500.000

November

1993

Note that the body length on the No.14849 (similar body to the No.16828) is 38.0mm (h1 in the spec sheet linked above) and the body length on the No.16828 is 40.8mm (h1 in the spec sheet linked above) This is a certain way to tell the difference in those cases where the serial number does not.

The latest version normally (but not always) has a green band all the way around the body of the lens but I think there are versions of the No.16828 without the green band (based on what I've seen on ebay).

Example of No.16828 https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Schneid...239952?hash=item26413c7b10:g:cIEAAOSwoQ9fGWkV

I think this is a No.16828 but not certain https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Schneid...543176?hash=item1f139561c8:g:LB0AAOSwR7JfGWs4

Also be careful when looking for these on ebay as I have seen old boxes with new lenses and vice versa so the green band on the body or serial number should be the key, not the box.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Just to add to this, I recently saw a diagram of the Vivitar VHE 50mm which appears to be the 5 element Schneider.

 

[16:9]

And just to add to John's great work on this, we've been narrowing down the numbers for Delta Lenses and have all versions of the Componon-S 50/2.8, with the main four variants dated as follows:

Version 1 [10146]: Produced 1975-1980. Five-element, concave-5 aperture. Single-coated. Serials noted from 12,973,142 to 13,678,241

Version 2 [14849]: Produced 1981-1990. Optically identical to [10146] but with aperture illumination and lever. Single-coated. Serials noted from 13,900,858 to 14,370,986

Version 3 [16828]: Produced 1990-2008 and beyond. New six-element design with convex-5 aperture. Rear cell is 2.8mm deeper with added tool-notches on outer rim. It's also 4g lighter. At least some versions seem to be multicoated (TBC). Serials noted from 14,450,475 to 14,959,746. Early versions (from around 14,5xx,xxx to 14,6xx,xxx) didn't have the green line and can easily be confused with [14849] if you can't see the rear element housing. Some sources give the catalogue number as [16282].

Version 4 [1097301]: Produced 2021 to date. Revised optical design marketed as an industrial lens in V38 mount only, but equally suited to enlarger and taking application. Max aperture now f32. All metal body. Previously marketed as Componon-S 50/2.8 V2, but currently changing name and packaging to Schneider Pyrite 50/2.8. The catalogue number is the same.

There were also M25 and V-mount Componon-S 50/2.8 from the 1980s.
If you have, or have seen, serial numbers outside this range, please PM me with details or post them in this thread. It would be nice to pin down the moments of change.

 

[apbphoto]

And just to add to John's great work on this, we've been narrowing down the numbers for Delta Lenses and have all versions of the Componon-S 50/2.8, with the main three variants dated as follows:

Version 1 [10146]: Produced 1975-1980. Five-element, concave-5 aperture. Single-coated. Serials noted from 12,973,142 to 13,678,241

Version 2 [14849]: Produced 1981-1990. Optically identical to [10146] but with aperture illumination and lever. Single-coated. Serials noted from 13,900,858 to 14,370,986

Version 3 [16828]: Produced 1990-2008. New six-element design with convex-5 aperture. Rear cell is 2.8mm deeper with added tool-notches on outer rim. It's also 4g lighter. At least some versions seem to be multicoated (TBC). Serials noted from 14,450,475 to 14,959,746. Early versions (from around 14,5xx,xxx to 14,6xx,xxx) didn't have the green line and can easily be confused with [14849] if you can't see the rear element housing.

There were also M25 and V-mount Componon-S 50/2.8.
If you have, or have seen, serial numbers outside this range, please PM me with details or post them in this thread. It would be nice to pin down the moments of change.

This is an intriguing thread and I have just bought a version that makes it even more intriguing: a Componon-S HM 50mm F2.8! It's on its way to me by a very slow shipper but it is a genuine item - I checked with Schneider though they are not giving up much info other than that it is apochromatically corrected and I 'won't need the Componon-S 50mm' if I have this! It is an enlarging lens for 35mm film, not for machine vision or the like and from the looks of it dates from the 1980s. The seller acquired a laboratory's stock of 'over 1,000 lenses' but knows (or will divulge) nothing about the specific uses. I'm wondering if this is the ultimate enlarging lens. I can but hope...

 

[Lachlan Young]

Just to add an extra comment: Ctein's enlarging lens tests republished in 'Post Exposure' were originally done for 'Darkroom Photography' and date from 1983 - and don't appear to have been updated, save for the addition of some typos. Thus the 50mm Componon-S he reviewed will have definitely been the 5-element version.

 

[16:9]

@abpphoto: Great find! We need to talk . . . that lens seems to be dated 1993 . . .
Also, I've updated my post with the main fourth version of the Componon-S, the V2 released in 2021, I believe, and midway through an identity change to Pyrite. But perhaps this resurfaced item is a fifth variant. Evidently they didn't make many.
@ Lachlan: Ctein revised his enlarger lens reviews throughout the 90s, including lenses in his recommended list that didn't exist in 1983. The second (and most up-to-date) version was published in 2011.

 

[apbphoto]

Well the seller is called Tatiana and she’s in Israel and there was only one such example. It may take 6 weeks to reach me but I’ll report back when I have tried it out!

 

[16:9]

When I bought a lens from Tatiana it only took a week to arrive, so you might not have that long to wait. Keep us posted - I've asked her if she has another - just in case! I'd like to run a little group test comparing it to the standard Componon-S and other 50s - if it's the only one, could we get together sometime and have a look? I'm only down the road from you. Thanks again for chipping in: I wouldn't otherwise have known it existed. Meantime, do I have your permission to use that picture for the Delta listing?

 

[apbphoto]

Of course. Permission gladly granted. I’ve quite an array of exotic enlarging lenses but I’m not into extensive formal testing. Maybe I should have a go though: I’ve got S-Biogon 40/5.6, S-Orthoplanar 60/4; Focotar-2 both 50mm and 100mm (my favourites); Apo Rodagon N 45mm and 50mm and more. If you’re patient and know where to look there are some treasures out there. OTOH stick with Rodagons and Componons and no-one will notice anything wrong with your prints - assuming perfection in the rest of the imaging chain. A big assumption! Most of the enlarging lenses I’ve seen in recent years need a good clean even if NOS.

 

[16:9]

Great - thanks. Sounds fascinating - perhaps we could do an exchange loan sometime? I'm sure I'll have lenses you're interested in playing with, and vice versa . . . Delta has so far recorded 2650 enlarger and projector lenses, and we've barely scratched the surface of the industrial catalogue. I have a test method that lets me reasonably quickly put optics on a level playing field for review, and so far have assessed and ranked over 120. There's quite a lot of churn, and I'm always looking for new and interesting additions. I came to this thread because I'm preparing an article disambiguating and comparing Schneider Componon-S 50 versions, so was happy to see your post!

Is that the only picture of the lens you have? Does it say Apo-Componon-S, or just Componon HM?

Off-topic, do you have a photo of your CZ Biogon and Orthoplanar showing the serial number? I'm short of serials for both. In fact, if anyone has any serial numbers they can contribute, it helps build a more useful resource for all: you can just pop it in the Review field of the relevant lens, along with anything else you want to say about it.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Ctein revised his enlarger lens reviews throughout the 90s, including lenses in his recommended list that didn't exist in 1983. The second (and most up-to-date) version was published in 2011.

Maybe. I'm not convinced. I've found the original articles in Darkroom Photography/ Camera and Darkroom & would say that there's vanishingly little revision between the 1983 review and the 2nd edition of Post Exposure other than that in 1990-ish he seems to have reviewed the Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon-N 50mm/2.8 and an Apo Rodagon 80mm/4.0 (not an -N, perplexingly - as far as I was aware, there was only a 90mm Apo-Rodagon in the non -N series [edit to add: the 80/4 Apo Rodagon (non -N) seems to have come out in about 1986]), and added a bit about the 105mm Apo-EL Nikkor. From other documentary evidence, it would appear that by the mid-90s Ctein's enlarging lenses were the 55/1.9 Computar and 105/5.6 & 135/5.6 Rodagons.

 

[apbphoto]

Great - thanks. Sounds fascinating - perhaps we could do an exchange loan sometime? I'm sure I'll have lenses you're interested in playing with, and vice versa . . . Delta has so far recorded 2650 enlarger and projector lenses, and we've barely scratched the surface of the industrial catalogue. I have a test method that lets me reasonably quickly put optics on a level playing field for review, and so far have assessed and ranked over 120. There's quite a lot of churn, and I'm always looking for new and interesting additions. I came to this thread because I'm preparing an article disambiguating and comparing Schneider Componon-S 50 versions, so was happy to see your post!

Is that the only picture of the lens you have? Does it say Apo-Componon-S, or just Componon HM?

Off-topic, do you have a photo of your CZ Biogon and Orthoplanar showing the serial number? I'm short of serials for both. In fact, if anyone has any serial numbers they can contribute, it helps build a more useful resource for all: you can just pop it in the Review field of the relevant lens, along with anything else you want to say about it.

I should probably not have shared the photo as it was from the seller but am happy to show more when I have the item in hand. As for the S-Biogon (I have two!):
6838158, 6832111
The S-Orthoplanar (not the less glamorous Orthoplanar and not the possibly superior 50mm S-Orthoplanar either) is:
5720432
These are roughly identical in performance and only show their mettle in high mag ratios: they are designed for x8 - x30 range for the S-Biogon and x10 - x30 for the S-Orthoplanar. I suspect that for my uses they are aced by the Apo-Rodagon N 45mm which is optimised for x15 and a range of 5x - 30x. i.e. somewhat higher magnification than the 50mm's 2x-20x and 10x optimum. I understand that it is likely that only the lenses designed as enlarging lenses will have the correct wavelength weightings for optimum results on photo paper so whilst the fancy S-Biogons etc may have spectacular MTF and resolution they won't always better proper enlarging lenses. These microfilm-optimised lenses may favour a different part of the spectrum. Ctein and others have proposed that the near UV is problematic for enlarging even with lenses supposedly designed for this as it is enough to make for fuzzy images. I see that Schneider (and maybe Rodenstock) on their data sheets divulge the weighting for different parts of the visible and invisible spectrum of their lenses so it is a concern. I'm not sure if I have the brainpower or patience to jump down that particular rabbit hole!

 

[apbphoto]

Great - thanks. Sounds fascinating - perhaps we could do an exchange loan sometime? I'm sure I'll have lenses you're interested in playing with, and vice versa . . . Delta has so far recorded 2650 enlarger and projector lenses, and we've barely scratched the surface of the industrial catalogue. I have a test method that lets me reasonably quickly put optics on a level playing field for review, and so far have assessed and ranked over 120. There's quite a lot of churn, and I'm always looking for new and interesting additions. I came to this thread because I'm preparing an article disambiguating and comparing Schneider Componon-S 50 versions, so was happy to see your post!

Is that the only picture of the lens you have? Does it say Apo-Componon-S, or just Componon HM?

Off-topic, do you have a photo of your CZ Biogon and Orthoplanar showing the serial number? I'm short of serials for both. In fact, if anyone has any serial numbers they can contribute, it helps build a more useful resource for all: you can just pop it in the Review field of the relevant lens, along with anything else you want to say about it.

I’ll get pictures of the lenses if you need them later. Just a bit tied up with other tasks for a while. I wrap them up and put them away safely when not using them as I view them more as investments than daily users nowadays!

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I should probably not have shared the photo as it was from the seller but am happy to show more when I have the item in hand. As for the S-Biogon (I have two!):
6838158, 6832111
The S-Orthoplanar (not the less glamorous Orthoplanar and not the possibly superior 50mm S-Orthoplanar either) is:
5720432
These are roughly identical in performance and only show their mettle in high mag ratios: they are designed for x8 - x30 range for the S-Biogon and x10 - x30 for the S-Orthoplanar. I suspect that for my uses they are aced by the Apo-Rodagon N 45mm which is optimised for x15 and a range of 5x - 30x. i.e. somewhat higher magnification than the 50mm's 2x-20x and 10x optimum. I understand that it is likely that only the lenses designed as enlarging lenses will have the correct wavelength weightings for optimum results on photo paper so whilst the fancy S-Biogons etc may have spectacular MTF and resolution they won't always better proper enlarging lenses. These microfilm-optimised lenses may favour a different part of the spectrum. Ctein and others have proposed that the near UV is problematic for enlarging even with lenses supposedly designed for this as it is enough to make for fuzzy images. I see that Schneider (and maybe Rodenstock) on their data sheets divulge the weighting for different parts of the visible and invisible spectrum of their lenses so it is a concern. I'm not sure if I have the brainpower or patience to jump down that particular rabbit hole!

The serial on my 60mm S-Orthoplanar is 160ish above yours. I have always been curious how the Biogon and Orthoplanar compare. Any thoughts? Just curious because I doubt I'd buy the Biogon. I never even use the Orthoplanar any more since I mostly enlarge 35mm with a Focomat 1c. I use a Nikkor on that usually because of the contrast, but I swap it out with the plethora of other lenses I have. I really need to just sell off most of them. No point in having all of them. I do want to pick up a 5 element Componon-S though. It was my first enlarging lens back in the day.

 

[apbphoto]

Like you, I rarely use the Zeiss lenses. Really just to mess around comparing with new lenses. They are equally sharp and contrasty in my experience though I can only use them on a diffusion enlarger (LPL in my case). I prefer Focomats and Valoy II for most negs. The S-Biogon has slight fall off in transmission towards the corners which sometimes needs correcting. I don’t have the centre filter these lenses were often equipped with. My understanding is that their primary application was copying full double page spreads of newspapers. That helps give an idea of how well and evenly they resolve.

 

[apbphoto]

Correction; it’s the S-Biogon that only works on diffusion enlargers. That’s in part because it’s a wide angle and also because it needs a 50mm mount which is impossible on my Leitz enlargers. The 60mm is fiddly with extension rings on the Focomat Ic and having to raise the head on the column for most printing. I have both new and old versions of the Nikon 50/2.8 and find the new one mediocre whilst the old one is sharper across the frame. As for the Componon-S 5 element it was one of the first lenses I used back in university days and it was paired with a Phillips enlarger. An excellent combo and preferred to the V35 by pro printers on Fleet Street I knew then.
Eventually I will thin out my collection but when you can pick up treasures for the price of one or two rolls of film why not keep them until you’re bored?

 

[apbphoto]

Some pix of the S-Biogon and S-Orthoplanar

 

[gorbas]

WoW Adrian! That S-Biogon is HUGE! It must weight at least 1kg? Does it cover more than 24x36mm? Is S-Orthoplanar regular M39 mount?
Recently I printed a few things with newest Nikkor N 2.8/50 and really liked results. Did not compare it with older, all metal Nikkor 2.8/50mm. Is Philips on your wish list? You can squeeze one more elnarger to your darkroom!

 

[apbphoto]

WoW Adrian! That S-Biogon is HUGE! It must weight at least 1kg? Does it cover more than 24x36mm? Is S-Orthoplanar regular M39 mount?
Recently I printed a few things with newest Nikkor N 2.8/50 and really liked results. Did not compare it with older, all metal Nikkor 2.8/50mm. Is Philips on your wish list? You can squeeze one more elnarger to your darkroom!

Hi Goran, no my darkroom wishlist is mainly to get rid of stuff!
The S-Biogon is heavy but not a kilo.

 

[apbphoto]

Oh and the S-Orthoplanar needs an adapter for LTM. I think it is 32mm but the copy I got had an adapter already pretty firmly attached and I have not had reason to try to remove it. I don't remember the model of Philips enlarger but it was a very smooth operating MF BW one and had some novel light tube or something that was very even and bright, as you might expect from the world's leading innovator in light bulbs! It was a big improvement over the wobbly and misaligned Durst (301?) I used at school. I do remember how surprised I was at the contrast and sharpness as well as smoothness of the Philips/Componon though it might also have had something to do with the Agfa papers I discovered at the time: Portriga, Brovira, Record Rapid. Those were the days!