BEOON the Leitz Copy Stand

Jhausler said:
Ok, so this is weird. I got the El-Nikkor 50/2.8N in the mail today and shot some frames using A+D (with an ltm>M adapter).. its no longer 1:1 🙁

wth?

26997896690_92bcd198fb_c.jpg
Click to expand...

That's interesting.

I find the same thing with my 50/2.8 EL Nikkor (image below). I chalked it up to scanning with a Fuji X Pro 1 and the crop factor. Never gave it a second thought.

Since then I've managed to get just past 1:1 with A, B, C and a 7mm LTM extension ring. I lose the outer 1/16th of an inch on all but the bottom edge.

Your image looks very close to mine with the A+D adapters + LTM to M adapter. I'll try another lens later and see what happens.


EL Nikkor on BEOON shows masked area by Denis Lincoln, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Frankly, I remain skeptical about the Focotar 2 having obviously better edges than the DR Summicron on the BEOON, for the same reason that I wrote earlier: the BEOON was made for copying negatives and slides and Leitz was also selling Focotar lenses at the time — if the results were so much better with the Focotar it's a no-brainer that Leitz would have stated that the results with the Focotar were at least somewhat better. In this way they would have sold some Focotar lenses to people who only shot slides and had no enlarger, and also to some people who shot negatives but did not print themselves. Your response was, essentially: that was then, this is now.
Click to expand...
Point well taken...but..
See test pics in above posts...the Focotar 2 @ F5.6...slays the DR Summicron at F 11...in the corners.
And..how many Leica people (potential customers..).. do you think..were actually willing to buy an extra 50mm lens..just for the occasional copy work..when they could just use the lens they already had on their cam..
As in..
Leica wanted to sell BEOONs..so why hamper the sale..by telling their customers that their fantastic f2 50mm taking lens..wasnt going to cut it in the corners...as in..it was completely unnecessary..as people into copy work would know this already..but for the masses..it really wouldn't make that much of a difference in their everyday pics and once in awhile usage.
OK..so..
You cant get around physics...if you stop down your lens too much..diffraction happens...and..if you want the best quality..its best use a lens designed for that purpose..
The Focotar 2 is a slow lens designed for that specific kind of work wide open or close..and for flat field..
The DR is ok for this too..but not the ultimate choice..as it falls short in the corners..but whether you can actually see it in your photos..well..enlarge to 16x20..then..you may see it..
And also..back in the day..
Leica also stated that you could use any M mount 50mm taking lens for your enlargement work too..but we all know..that a normal 50mm lens is not the best lens for the job...because no matter how much you stop it down..it will not perform as well as the enlarging lens.
 
What about the other question? Can the Focotar be focused at infinity, as required by the BEOON design?
 
But, then, how do you focus the Focotar and the BEOON column. Do you mean that you simply leave the Focotar focused on whatever distance it happened to be set at? Presumably that can't be the case because it would make quite a difference depending how the Focotar was focused.
_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine
 
Does the Focatar focus at all? I'm not familiar with it. The EL Nikkor that I'm using has no helical so the focus is adjusted with the BEOON, just like it would be if attached to an enlarger.

Would any enlarger lens focus to infinity? Doesn't seem like it...

My guess is that the 50mm camera lens attached to the BEOON needs to be at infinity for the enlarging ratios that are marked on the column to be accurate, along with the masks
 
You may be right: a quick web search shows there was a helical mount for the Focotar II, sold separately from the lens, I believe, whose purpose presumably was to enable the use this lens on the Reprovit II, a large copying device. There was also the Focoslide, a sliding stage copy device — but the manual for the latter also recommends using the Elmar 50.

The questions, then, are whether the helical mount is necessary to get a 1:1 reproduction ratio with the Focotar II on the BEOON and how to focus the helical mount — and how well all this would work in the context of the BEOON manual stating that the 50mm lens used should be focused at infinity. Not sure that even the helical mount would enable the Focotar II to be focused at infinity, since that is not the characteristic of enlarging lenses.

An interesting point from the Focoslide manual: "the Focoslide can be mounted on Ball-Jointed Tripod Head which, in turn, is secured to a steady tripod;" the other way to use the Focoslide is to "attach it to to the sliding arm used as an offset support on a Leitz enlarger." That brings me back to a point I raised earlier about the BEOON: if one of the recommended ways of using the Focoslide was on a Leitz enlarger, then, I can only assume that Leitz Focoslide manual recommended use of the Elmar 50 and did not suggest using a Focotar II simply because it did not work as well on the Focoslide — and, as I wrote earlier, I wonder whether that is not also the case of the BEOON.
_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine
 
The BEOON was designed as a copy device for people who already had 50mm lenses. My guess is that there was no thought given to relative performance between a standard camera lens and an enlarging lens
 
Jhausler said:
Ok, so this is weird. I got the El-Nikkor 50/2.8N in the mail today and shot some frames using A+D (with an ltm>M adapter).. its no longer 1:1 🙁

wth?

26997896690_92bcd198fb_c.jpg
Click to expand...


I'm using an EL-Nikkor 50/2.8 with B, C & D extensions and I just get a whole 35mm frame into the sensor on my Sony A7. The BEOON is almost fully lowered with the column raised just enough for adjusting focus. However, between the base of the BEOON and the light table I'm using a .25" sheet of clear acrylic to cover my negs to prevent scratching and to keep them flat. Perfect results, really.
 
Peter - do you mean that you're focusing the BEOON column itself, or is there a focus ring on the lens itself as well?
 
Thanks, Emile. I bought the Focotar in the listing, and will let you know the results once I try it.
Click to expand...

That looked like a nice one..and a nice price too..!
My Focotar has a little haze inside..but I really don't think it makes much of a difference..someday I'll get it cleaned..
Also...I think you will have to get a DOORX ext. tube..you can find these about for around $25- or so..or you can use 39mm filters stacked w/o the glass until 25mm is reached..
But you may want to inquire if the DOORX comes with the lens..as often they do..
But..
I really like my Focotar 2's..I'm sure you will too..and..they come in handy at the most surprising moments..I've had my 3 Focotar-2's for years now..and am about to start up using them with the Leica enlargers soon..back to film..
 
Emile - Yes, the Focotar in the Japanese eBay listing looked very good. There was another one from Germany for $5 more that had a small scratch in the lens.

Do you mean that the Focotar II 50mm lens requires a 25mm spacer when mounted on the BEOON for 1:1 reproduction of the 24x36mm frame with a full-frame sensor like the M9? — (That is what one gets with the DR Summicrom focused at infinity with the A+D BEOON rings).

Measuring with a ruler I see that the B+C rings, together, are approximately 25.5mm; measuring more precisely with a Brown & Sharpe micrometer (a classic in itself), I get 25.4625mm for the B+C rings. If 25.000mm is needed for the Focotar II 50mm lens, I would think that the 0.4625mm excess can be compensated when focusing with the BEOON column. In this case, I should not need the DOORX tube — or am I misunderstanding something?


EDIT: After writing the above, a web search showed that the DOORX is 14.5mm wide; so I am not sure how that relates to the 25mm spacer that you refer to.

_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine
 
34.4mm = D
17.2mm = C
8.6mm = B
7mm = A
1mm = LTM adapter

On my EL Nikkor I use BCD and it will leave just a slight excess on the 4 sides of a transparency 'scan.'

With a 6000x4000 24mp camera, it ends up being about 22.2mp after crop of a slide, and about 22.8 after crop of a negative; 5760x3870 and 5800x3935.

When I say 'crop' I'm talking about removing the area outside the actual image.

The final determination of what extension tubes you need depends on your setup and where you place the neg/slide. In my case I have raised the BEEON very slightly on an aluminum metal frame that is a few mm thick, so that it's easy to remove and replace mounted slides from underneath. And for scanning negatives the Negatrans adds a few mm of gap as well.

I don't really care about the magnification ratio, as a 22mp 'scan' is MORE than sufficient, and to align a slide or neg EXACTLY to all four edges would be very tedious and time consuming. With this arrangement no data at the edge of the image is lost; only data outside the frame.

So before you spend more money, see what result you get with the existing extension tubes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Adjust VIDOM copy?
Replies
13
Views
890
Coldkennels
Coldkennels
J
  • Article Article
Who invented the Leica M3 and IIIg? Two great men at Leitz Wetzlar! Both projects were team efforts led by innovative engineering geniuses.
Replies
13
Views
552
Ljós
L
F
Ernst Leitz yellow / orange / yellow-green filter compensations with Ilford FP4 and HP5
Replies
18
Views
1K
Rob-F
Rob-F
R
Leica M4 Trainer?
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
JeffS7444
JeffS7444
boojum
M240 - M262, really? Does the M262 have better color science?
Replies
14
Views
424
wlewisiii
W
Back
Top Bottom