Want to Buy WTB: A better 50mm enlarging lens

[Martin Rickards]

It only costs a little more to go 1st class!

Xam you honestly see amy difference in print quality between six element enlarging lenses from quality manufacterers and, say, an apo Rodagon. I'd say the price difference is substantial.

 

[ChuckP]

Don't forget that an APO or HM lens will continue to hold a good resale value. It's not like you're buying a new couch or something. At least that's what I tell my wife.

 

[Martin Rickards]

Well, used El Nikkors don't seem to be gettimg any chaeaper either.

 

[chip j]

Just putting it out there, I do NOT think the Hoya/Yashica/Osawa-Tominon (same lens under three different brands) is the same as the Computar/Kowa dL 2.8/50. Am I missing something?

Hoya Syper EL 2.8/50

Computar dL 2.8/50, also, Kowa 2.8/50

Not to be confused with an early 'Computar' 2.8/50 which preceded the 'dL' line of lenses (shown below). This is a rebadged Japanese lens (I've seen the same lens under another brand name).

The bottom Computar looks exactly like my Honeywell Lumentar.

 

[bvy]

So I made a purchase from an off-line offer -- a nice looking Rodagon at a very reasonable price. Until I start producing mural size prints from 35mm, I think this will serve me for some time. I'll keep the El Nikkor as a back up. Thanks to everyone for the offers.

@chip j , nice collection you have. I'll keep you in mind when I'm looking again, probably for a nice 40 or 105 next.

 

[benveniste]

Top of the line enlarger lenses still go for $250-$300. Makes me wonder, who is still using these things?

They still find use on bellows for macrophotography. I just ended a heated discussion with a couple of guys who made quite exaggerated claims about why standard macro lenses were unsuitable for such use. (I have a 50mm APO-Rodagon and a 28mm Schneider for bellows use at higher magnifications and for (*gasp*) digital focus stacking).

Nikon still manufactures 4 El-Nikkors, but they are rebadged as Rayfact Industrial Lenses and sold through that channel. Nikon states they are "suitable for various inspections including appearance tests."

http://www.tochigi-nikon.co.jp/en/products/lens/il.htm

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I could have sworn I threw my 2¢ in here yesterday. Oh well.

The Computar DLs are the ones you want of the different Computars. They are amazing lenses, usable wide open. Can't say that for others. As far as the 50s go, on smaller enlargements they are all pretty much the same, or should I say, all are more than adequate. Some people like aspects of one manufacturers lenses over the others, but that is just taste. I have used practically every "great" enlarging lens over the years except the APO EL Nikkor, but I doubt I am missing out. I have an Orthoplanar that I don't even use these days since I got the Focomat. My favorite of all of them is the Fujinon EX probably, or maybe the Computar DL 65mm. Or it could be the Minolta Rokkor-x which was uber sharp in a test I did. I made some 8x10s a few weeks ago with an old Elmar I had laying around. The prints looked pretty good. The grain wasn't super sharp, but the prints were nice. I doubt anyone would notice unless it was pointed out, which I guess is my point.

One thing to consider BVY is if you are making small enlargements, sometimes it is better to use a longer lens if your enlarger can handle it. When I print 35mm on the Saunders 4550 I will usually use at least a 65, but more often than not I will use a 105 Nikkor. Basically there are two reasons. One is that you are using the center of the lens, and two, you aren't as likely to smash your head into the enlarger when trying to focus after a cocktail or two. I do it because of the second.....

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Before you spring for a new enlarging lens you should check the rest of the system. Is the negative carrier parallel to the baseboard? Do you use a good grain focuser? Is the enlarger steady with no chance of vibration? Are the optics of your present lens clean. When is the last time you had your vision checked? Perhaps a new prescription is needed. I bring up this last point because I was having trouble focusing my camera. Nothing wrong with the camera but I needed new glasses.

 

[Martin Rickards]

There seems to be a lot of subjective opinions on which enlarging lenses are the best, but little facts to support what is otherwise anecdotal evidence. Even the best lens is unable to reproduce details that are not on the negative.

 

[jjphoto]

The bottom Computar looks exactly like my Honeywell Lumentar.

Thanks! I couldn't remember which brand I'd seen the Computar under, but it was, as you say, the Honeywell LUMETAR (not Lumentar). I'm fairly sure that at that time Computar was just importing gear and not designing their own lenses so this Japanese lens has nothing to do with Computar except the name plate.

Have you used it, is it any good? I haven't even tried it.

 

[bvy]

One thing to consider BVY is if you are making small enlargements, sometimes it is better to use a longer lens if your enlarger can handle it. When I print 35mm on the Saunders 4550 I will usually use at least a 65, but more often than not I will use a 105 Nikkor. Basically there are two reasons. One is that you are using the center of the lens, and two, you aren't as likely to smash your head into the enlarger when trying to focus after a cocktail or two. I do it because of the second.....

These are good points. I wonder if I have the height to eek an 8x10 out of my 80mm. And yes, we've come "head to head" a few times. No cocktail necessary.

 

[chip j]

Thanks! I couldn't remember which brand I'd seen the Computar under, but it was, as you say, the Honeywell LUMETAR (not Lumentar). I'm fairly sure that at that time Computar was just importing gear and not designing their own lenses so this Japanese lens has nothing to do with Computar except the name plate.

View attachment 174132

Have you used it, is it any good? I haven't even tried it.

Haven't used it yet--it's at the bottom of my list of lenses to try--I have SO many.