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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
Hi Goran, no my darkroom wishlist is mainly to get rid of stuff!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!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?