wa-componon 5.6/80 or componon-s 5.6/100 as standard lens for 6x7

chris77 · Feb 18, 2015

hello again.

as i am looking for a standard lens for everyday printing (11x14- 20x24inch) in B&W,
i am trying to decide on one of the two.
which one performs better? difficult to find a comparison. maybe someone here knows..
prints from 6x7cm negative with a condenser enlarger (durst m800 with unicon105)

tx for help

chris

chris77 · Feb 18, 2015

wa-componon 5.6/80 or componon-s 5.6/100 as standard lens for 6x7

hello.

as i am looking for a standard lens for everyday printing (11x14- 20x24inch) in B&W,
i am trying to decide on one of the two.

which one performs better? difficult to find a comparison. maybe someone here knows..
prints from 6x7cm negative with a condenser enlarger (durst m800 with unicon105)

tx for help
chris

JW PHOTO · Feb 18, 2015

I can't help you with the 100mm f5.6 Componon-S but I do have the 80mm f5.6 WA-Componon and 105mm f5.6 Componon black lens. I was going to sell the 80mm WA, but the more I used it the more I liked it. It works good for even 6X9cm negatives and that's the main reason I kept it. The 105mm is no slouch either and for what I paid for it will be with me for a while. I think either lens you are talking about will work just fine if you get a good copy. The only real advantage of the WA is you can make bigger enlargements with much less column height. My favorite 80mm is a Czech made Meopta 80mm f2.8 Meogon. Not very sharp at f2.8, but what a breeze to focus. At f5.6-8 it as good as it gets. I bought two of these new and they are both equal, which is a little lucky. I get very nice 11x14 and a few 16x20 enlargements from any of these three. Haven't done a 20x24 yet. Pick one and go for it! John W

ic-racer · Feb 18, 2015

I'd use some caution using a wide angle lens with a condenser enlarger. The appropriate Unicon 85 condenser set may provide even illumination for a 6x6cm negative may not be physically big enough to cover the larger format. The 105 condenser with the 80mm lens may not provide even illumination. Unless someone that has actually done this chimes in here, it may be difficult to predict if it will work or not. I'd just go with the 100mm lens and Unicon 105.

DREW WILEY · Feb 18, 2015

105 Componon S would be a much better choice in terms of evenness of illumination and edge resolution. WA enlagr lens designs are a compromise in general, and 80 is pretty darn short for 6x7, though marginally usable. I don't know how far up your enlarger column goes in terms of printing 20X24, however.

chris77 · Feb 19, 2015

JW PHOTO said:
I can't help you with the 100mm f5.6 Componon-S but I do have the 80mm f5.6 WA-Componon and 105mm f5.6 Componon black lens. I was going to sell the 80mm WA, but the more I used it the more I liked it. It works good for even 6X9cm negatives and that's the main reason I kept it. The 105mm is no slouch either and for what I paid for it will be with me for a while. I think either lens you are talking about will work just fine if you get a good copy. The only real advantage of the WA is you can make bigger enlargements with much less column height. My favorite 80mm is a Czech made Meopta 80mm f2.8 Meogon. Not very sharp at f2.8, but what a breeze to focus. At f5.6-8 it as good as it gets. I bought two of these new and they are both equal, which is a little lucky. I get very nice 11x14 and a few 16x20 enlargements from any of these three. Haven't done a 20x24 yet. Pick one and go for it! John W

thank you both..
finally pulled the trigger on the componon-s 5.6/100.
i hope it comes in as good condition as it looks on the photos.

JW PHOTO · Feb 19, 2015

DREW WILEY said:
105 Componon S would be a much better choice in terms of evenness of illumination and edge resolution. WA enlagr lens designs are a compromise in general, and 80 is pretty darn short for 6x7, though marginally usable. I don't know how far up your enlarger column goes in terms of printing 20X24, however.

Drew,
You peaked my curiosity and I did some checking on my Componon 80mm WA. Mine covers 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 just fine with very even illumination right into the corners(I measured it at between f8-11). It's also plenty sharp in those corners. I have an Ilford Multi-Grade 400HL head on my AutoOmega D3 and with the head raised to the max I can print just 31" wide on the baseboard. Truth is I've only printed with it to 20" wide, but the prints were really nice even at 16x20 from a 6cm x7cm negative. I have absolutely no complaints about the lens. It's certainly not a dog that's for sure. John W

BobMarvin · Feb 20, 2015

This isn't directly comparable, but I have no problem using a 60 mm WA Componon for 6 X 6 negatives on my condenser Omega B8. I use the supplementary condenser intended for a 75 mm lens. I too had been cautioned that a WA lens might not work well on a condenser enlarger. I initially thought that was the case, until I realized that I had mounted the supplementary condenser wrong. The wide angle lens works fine now.

BobMarvin · Feb 20, 2015

This isn't directly comparable, but I have no problem using a 60 mm WA Componon for 6 X 6 negatives on my condenser Omega B8. I use the supplementary condenser intended for a 75 mm lens. I too had been cautioned that a WA lens might not work well on a condenser enlarger. I initially thought that was the case, until I realized that I had mounted the supplementary condenser wrong. The wide angle lens works fine now.

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 20, 2015

Threads merged. It is unnecessary to create multiple threads on a single topic in different forums. Most users will see all new posts in their "new posts" view, unless they have specifically excluded a forum from view, which is fairly uncommon except for the off-topic threads and classifieds.

DREW WILEY · Feb 20, 2015

JW - I wasn't implying it was a dog. But once you've used one of the premium enlarging lenses in ideal focal length, you'll see a real difference. Whether you need that kind of thing or want to pay for it is another topic.

JW PHOTO · Feb 20, 2015

DREW WILEY said:
JW - I wasn't implying it was a dog. But once you've used one of the premium enlarging lenses in ideal focal length, you'll see a real difference. Whether you need that kind of thing or want to pay for it is another topic.

Drew,
I know you weren't and I also know there are better lenses out there. For the purpose of "BIG" enlargements when you have limited column height or ceiling height a lens like this is the only answer. I'd rather have an ugly dog that hunts than a pretty one that can't. Take care, John W

BobMarvin · Feb 21, 2015

Again not directly comparable, because its a shorter focal length, but I can't see any difference in sharpness between my 60mm WA Componon and my 80mm Rodogon. I suppose there ARE better lenses out there, but both of these are plenty good enough for me.

JW PHOTO · Feb 21, 2015

BobMarvin said:
Again not directly comparable, because its a shorter focal length, but I can't see any difference in sharpness between my 60mm WA Componon and my 80mm Rodogon. I suppose there ARE better lenses out there, but both of these are plenty good enough for me.

Bob,
Those are my findings too! I can't see any real difference in image quality between the 105mm f5.6 Componon and my 80mm f5.6 WA Componon-S on a 6x7 negative. I'd like to try one of those exotic APO lenses sometime, but for my printing I don't think it would make a ton of difference. John W

wa-componon 5.6/80 or componon-s 5.6/100 as standard lens for 6x7

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency