Re: enlarger lenses

[Jim Zietz <jzietz@unix1.sncc.lsu.edu>]

>From: "Garbutt, Robert" <RGarbutt@ncrpexec.telstra.com.au>
>Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 12:08:00 +1000
>Subject: Off Leica Topic - enlarger lenses
>
>LUGgers,
>
>I am finding good information on enlarging lenses hard to come by and
>there's such a wealth of experience here I can't resist asking the
>following non-Leica question.  My apologies in advance.
>
>I print my monochromes in a shared commercial darkroom and I think its
>time to get my own enlarging lens.  I'm seeing spots before my eyes and
>they won't go away.
>
>Does anyone have a recommendation for a lens in the 80 - 90 mm range?  I
>would like value for money (don't we all), but then I don't want to be
>disappointed and want to upgrade in a few years' time either.  I have
>been using a Schneider Componon-S and like it (especially the little
>lever that allows you to flip between wide open and closed down to my
>chosen f-stop).
>
>Regards,
>Rob.

The Componon-S lenses are very good, as are the Rodenstock Rodagons. The
current lenses tend to be a bit better than the older ones. The APO
versions also tend to be a bit better, even for b&w, even though they are
said to not be true apochromatics.

For 120 negatives, I once had a Leitz Elmar 100mm f:4.5 enlarging lens that
was very good. It was replaced with a 80mm f:5.6 Rodagon, which was
replaced with a 90mm f:4 Apo-Rodagon. Each time there was an increase in
quality.

I print my 35mm negatives (you know, the Leica ones) with a 50mm f:2.8
Apo-Rodagon and my 4x5 negatives with a 150mm f:5.6 Rodagon. I use a piece
of anti-newton glass on top to keep the negative as flat as possible. I
think the flat negative is more important than which enlarging lens is
used, but I've already been on this soapbox.