Taylor Hobson Ental lenses

[16:9]

Does anyone have any information (manufacturer brochures, adverts, etc) about Taylor-Hobson Ental and Ental II enlarger lenses? Or even if you have a lens, and can let me know the serial number, it would help.
Thanks

 

[Steve906]

I have an Ental II 3 1/4 inch f/4
Serial no 651746
Marked as 'Lens made in England by Rank Taylor Hobson.'
And 'TAYLOR-HOBSON r'
I've not used it much and never got around to testing it properly but they seem to be regarded as good lenses.
The box it came in has the serial number etc written on a label-
'The Rank Organisation
Rank Taylor Hobson Division
Kershaw Works,
Harehills Lane,
Leeds 8

I worked for Taylor Hobson 1979 to 92 and never saw any evidence of these particular lenses at Leicester factories.

This may be of interest too - The lens is the whole black part on the hoist!

Must have been late 70's as I worked with the man in the photo - he seemed a bit older when I was there.

 

[BMbikerider]

I have not seen one for a long, long while. When I started printing in the early 1960's the TTH Ental was acknowledged to be top of the pile, apparently better than the contemporary Leitz lenses. I know they cost a shed load of money perhaps close to £500 in todays money for a 50mm f3.5 with basic coating (1 layer)
Our works 5x4 enlarger had one but it was fixed permanently to the enlarger. I think it was a 150mm F5.6 or even F8

 

[16:9]

Thanks for that, Steve! It's difficult to establish when TH stopped producing the Entals, but from what you're saying, it was before 1979. That makes sense with regard to what I've been able to piece together for the serial number chronology, but my timeline is a bit hazy between 1965 and 1972 - which I believe was the period in which they were phased out. I can't imagine why, because that was a peak era for enlarger lens sales, and the reputation of the Entals was well established by then. As you said MBbikerider – certainly as far as English lenses were concerned – the Entals were the best available in the 1960s, and were comparable to the range-topping Nikon EL, Componons, Rodagons and Focotars of the day.

 

[Ian Grant]

I used a couple of Ental lenses at school, also a Ross Resolux at university, another superb lens of its time.

I don't remember seeing then advertised when I became more seriously interested in photography in 1969. I think Rank made changes to T.T & H around 1966, that's when Reid & Sigrist closed down, it's the period when Rank had become the UK importer/distributors of Pentax, Nikon, and Mamiya camras. I'd suspect when production of the lenses for Reid cameras ceased Rank switched the company's efforts wholely towards the film industry.

Ian

 

[simplejoy]

I have a 4 of those lenses

- Ental II 2" f/3.5 (Serial: 630539 marked Taylor-Hobson)
- Ental II 3 1/4" f/4 (Serial: 651960 marked Taylor-Hobson)
- Ental II 4 1/4" f/4.5 (Serial: 591393 marked Taylor-Hobson)
- Ental II 10 1/2" f/5.6 (Serial: 606327 marked Taylor-Hobson)

They are quite excellent lenses in my opinion... some of them (particularly the 3 1/4" one) likely among the best Tessar-design lenses I've seen, but of course I haven't used them for enlarging. Also haven't tried the longer 10 1/2" (Reverse-Heliar?) lens. The non-metric threads are not among my favorites, I have to say...

 

[Ian Grant]

I have a 4 of those lenses

- Ental II 2" f/3.5 (Serial: 630539 marked Taylor-Hobson)
- Ental II 3 1/4" f/4 (Serial: 651960 marked Taylor-Hobson)
- Ental II 4 1/4" f/4.5 (Serial: 591393 marked Taylor-Hobson)
- Ental II 10 1/2" f/5.6 (Serial: 606327 marked Taylor-Hobson)

They are quite excellent lenses in my opinion... some of them (particularly the 3 1/4" one) likely among the best Tessar-design lenses I've seen, but of course I haven't used them for enlarging. Also haven't tried the longer 10 1/2" (Reverse-Heliar?) lens. The non-metric threads are not among my favorites, I have to say...

Great images, when I was at school in the late 1960s it was recommended using enlarger lenses for 35mm macro work, if you d1dn't have a macro lens. But the at the time Schneider were selling Componons in shutters as Macro lenses.

I had a Johnsons V45 enlarger which I bought in 1997 the Dallmeyer 6" lens was not coated and not in great condition, slightly soft due to flare, so I replaced it with a 135mm Componon. I gave the enlarger away, the Dallmeyer lens was stolen along with asome other unused lenses by a lodger. I re-acquired another Johnsons V45 with the Componon, I thought it was my old one but it turned out he'd been given a secong one

Since then I've bought a Dallcoated 6" Dallmeyer enlarger lens, for next to nothing, on a V45 lens board, in near mint condition, but for a variety of reasons haven't tested it yet. I would expect it to be an excellent lens, my oldest Dallmeyer lens will be 160 next year

Your 10½" Ental II will take a fairly common British lens flange, TT&H standarised on flange sizes with Dallmeyer and I thinkRoss & Wray back in the 1880s, it was called the R.P.S. (Royal Photographic Society) standard. I have the chart of TT&H flange sizes. I would expect it to be 3", 2¾", at the smallest 2½". that's approx 76mm, 79mm, or 63.5mm. I bought a Wray Lustrar WA12" lens earlier this year and it's in a 3" flange, which is the same size and pitch as the flange for a TT&H 17½" Rapid Rectilinear and another 20" RR I own, and use.

I have a box of about 50 flanges which I've just gone through, for someone else as well. He needs a 2½" flange for an 8" Dallmeyer Serac, and I have 4, but my guess is you need a 2¾" flange based on the flange sizes the 8" Serac & 12" Lustrar take, I've nothing close unfortunately.

Ian

 

[simplejoy]

Great images, when I was at school in the late 1960s it was recommended using enlarger lenses for 35mm macro work, if you d1dn't have a macro lens.

Thank you very much! That's interesting. There are still a couple of enlarging lenses (40 years or older) which give the newest Laowa or Sigma macro lens a run for its money in my opinion, when it comes to macro distances, but of course quality varies a lot and the conditions they're in as well.

Your 10½" Ental II will take a fairly common British lens flange, TT&H standarised on flange sizes with Dallmeyer and I thinkRoss & Wray back in the 1880s, it was called the R.P.S. (Royal Photographic Society) standard.

Thanks for the info! My particular lens came with a flange, but unfortunately that's not of much use to me in this instance. My bellows lensboard has a 58x0.75 mm thread (very common in industrial settings) and the Ental II 10½" has a thread which is roughly 57 mm... so I can't use the flange because the rear end of the lens won't fit into my 58 mm adapter. Of course it's possible to make a custom one but that costs quite a lot. Perhaps I can find a solution fo tests it though, in order to see if it's even worth it. It's quite a heavy and long lens for my purpose anyway.

BTW. Tatu Korhonen (a fellow lens experimenter I know from flickr) has one of the adverts on there: