Beseler 45V-XL

[sykotec]

So my current enlarger setup is a Beseler 45MXT sitting on the Beseler Adjus-Table, with a Beseler/Minolta 45a color head - yeah, the flash tube thing people seem to love or hate. Sitting in the garage at the moment is a 45V-XL that 'came along with' a spare 45a color head I was after. It seems this was left outside for a couple weeks, and got quite wet a time or two. Bellows are toast, and the baseboard is doing that bad expanding thing particle board does when wet towards the ends. Everything else, though, looks like it could clean up well. So, is it worth the time and parts vs the 45MXT?

The MXT has been decent, but it actually takes up more room/table space than the V-XL, and is an interesting beast as far as alignment goes. It's also got a motorized height adjustment that isn't the smoothest design in my opinion, and likely a long-term liability - the motor is less than great at the moment. Also, like any enlarger with non-vertical columns, the projected area moves with height adjustment as opposed to simply getting bigger with the center position remaining constant.

The V-XL has a simple hand-crank type height adjustment, as well as a nice fine adjustment for height, and both coarse and fine adjustments for focus unlike the single adjustment on the 45MXT. Baseboard size isn't neccessarily larger than the 45MXT, but it's certainly more compact, easier to work around from all sides, and looks like it will easily handle the largest prints I make/plan to make in the forseeable future.

So, any experience with these 2 beasts, and thought on whether it's worth my time and $$ to restore the 45V-XL as an upgrade? Beseler claims the single column is superior for alignment and stability, and I'll admit to liking both the non-electric height adjust and constant center projected area bits.

There's a 'spare' complete 45MXT bellows assembly in the garage as well - it 's there should I need a replacement motor for the current rig, but the bellows parts numbers are the same for the V-XL, and I'm thinking they might be swappable with suitable care. A 'proper' baseboard from Beseler is something like $200 not totally out of budget, but it'd have to be worthy. They make a wall-mount bracket for the thing as well, but that's just not in the cards for my dry-side darkroom space.

 

[sykotec]

Oh yes - if anyone knows where I can find a PDF or such of the manual for the 45V-XL, please let me know! It seems like it would be easy enough, but this is the first enlarger where I've totally struck out. I don't mind spending a few $$, but over $1/page for something that might still hit the scrap metal pile seems a bit silly.

 

[RichL]

I'm a bit of a Luddite when it comes to darkrooms, as well as a 'fine focus' fan so unless you do a lot of arm stretch enlargements I'd say go for the new one. Center-point enlarging would also be a selling point for me.

 

[Mark C]

I have the V-XL and have used the older versions of the Beseler MX's (gave one away last week). I picked up the V-XL, plus two older Beselers, from a local lab. I mostly wanted the V-XL, but took the lot in order to get all the lenses and accessories.

I can't speak for other peoples' experience (never checked the forums, etc), but I've been less than thrilled with the VXL. At a glance it seems beautifully designed, with a very impressive column, but the execution seems to be under engineered.

At the time, I thought the fine focus handles looked like a nice feature, but I'd actually forgotten about that until you mentioned it. The focus is so sloppy on mine, that fine focus is totally useless. What I have to do is coarse focus well shy of actual focus, then as I turn the focus lock it pulls in. This works fine in practice; the focus lock works as a fine focus, but sure not what it should be. The height lock is also funky and just barely locks the carriage.

Mine was definitely well used, and maybe someone with a lot of patience (and probably new parts) could make everything work as intended. Still, while this was used professionally, that was what it was sold for. And the folks I bought it from did there best to maintain it. I have pages of notes they took, apparently during calls to Beseler, plus long lists of parts they ordered in attempts to fix these same issues. That is largely why I haven't put more effort into fixing and adjusting it.

I can work just fine with the VXL and don't intend to get rid of it, but the MX seems better engineered to me. They are simple, bullet proof, and very common (for parts). Aligning it can be less than ideal, but should be manageable. One thing worth considering is an alignment adjustable lens board. They may only work with lenses longer than 50mm (not sure), but can be helpful.

 

[sykotec]

Thanks both of you for the comments.

Rich - yup, those are the 2 biggest draws to the 'new' enlarger, definitely.

Mark - thank you! I've yet to see a review that covers much in the way of issues with these, but can see what you mean. The focus, both coarse and fine, as well as the lock (so that's what that red knob is!) seem very tight and precise on the unit I've got. I would need to replace both bellows and clean EXTENSIVELY, as it literally sat out in the weather for a couple weeks, so I could tweak further if needed. Looking at the design and running it through the motions however, the elevation is my biggest concern so far. That big crank wheel is handy, but the moving section doesn't 'settle' at the same alignment if you're going p vs down, if that makes any sense. There may be play or uneven wear between the gears for the 2 sides that could be sorted, but it's something to think about. Otherwise it looks like it would be best to pull down a bit on the entire carriage after moving, and adjust the thing such that this would be the correct level. I'll have to look at the parts diagram (odd that I can find that online but not a manual!) and see how the carriage attaches and is guided - maybe that's out of adjustment, or just bad design. Agreed on the hight lock, though as long as it works even a bit, that's not really a negative to the V-XL vs the MXT, what with the latter not having one.

As for the adjustable lens board, interesting thought. I have 3 lenses each on their own board for different formats, and as they all seem flat/consistent relative each other when mounted, I spent more time aligning the lens board mounting stage - not sure if earlier Beselers than the MXT had this as adjustable or not. I was offered a nice deal on a turret a couple years back, but that looked and felt like an alignment nightmare!

 

[Mark C]

Of course the MXT doesn't need a height lock; the VXL does. I couldn't remember the advantage of the MXT over the earlier M's, but now that you mention it, I believe the square bellows models gave you an adjustable lens stage that the older ones didn't have.

And you're right that the adjustable lens boards are limited use; I just went ahead and bought one while they are still available new with the idea it might be handy for occasional fine tuning. At that point I probably had some doubts about the VXL staying in alignment, but it doesn't seem bad.

Still though, I've probably owned a dozen or more enlargers over the years, and worked as a lab rat at a University lab and at the Maine Photographic Workshops lab, and I've never seen anything as sloppy and fiddly as this. Maybe some cheap enlargers were crude, but they still worked as designed. Something (or things) may well be out of wack of mine, but nothing about the design is straight forward to sort out.

Is there some issue with the MXT? I like not having to move the easel when raising the head, but it really is not a big deal to put up with for such a solid reliable enlarger. You can still fine tune the carriage height with the knob on the motor on that model can't you? I think Ansel used the older M, and Fred Picker too until he designed his own.

 

[jmcd]

I have owned and worked with the MXT, and I currently own the 45V-XL. Either will get the job done, but neither is terribly refined.

The 45V-XL is incredibly heavy, but the MXT can be moved readily. Either will stay in reasonable alignment once set. My 45V-XL focuses easily and fine. The motors on the MXT's seem to go on forever, even as they grind and moan.

To get the most out of either enlarger it will need to be aligned. To make this process easy and accurate, I use the Versalab Parallel alignment tool. You will see the difference in your prints.

 

[jmcd]

One big point in favor of the 45V-XL. The platform on which the negative carrier sits is stationary—the top jaw clamps down. This is a good design to maintain accuracy. The design is reversed on the MXT.

 

[Mark C]

It is good to hear that my experience with the VXL isn't the norm. I'm reasonably happy using mine, but it is certainly not working as designed.

I think the fixed lower negative stage was one of the things that appealed to me, but I actually never had any problem with the older approach. If the negative carrier seats well against the top part, then you are at the same place. Still a poor design decision, especially when they made a couple version that didn't work this way (one, the CB7?, was for sale last week in the classifieds here). Neither is like my Durst where you can pop a new negative in a week after the last use and not need to refocus.

 

[sykotec]

No, nothing wrong with the 45MXT other than possibly needing the motor replaced soonish with a spare I already have lying around. It's in great shape and nicely aligned. The 45V-XL is quite filthy, though disassembling to clean doesn't look like such a big deal. Everything mentioned here about the V-XL is just tempting, along with the easier working around what with a single column that more or less stays out of the way vs the struts on the MXT.

The MXT has the adjustable lens board stage just like the V-XL - I believe the parts are the same for that matter.

Sounds like you've had the older 45 and the V-XL at the same time, and kept the V-XL - am I reading that right? You're happy other than the sloppy focus?

Cleaning the V-XL up won't be more than a few hours work, but the bellows replacement could be interesting. I doubt Beseler wants a reasonable price for them - as if they ever even answer their phone or email - so I'm thinking I can swap in the ones from the spare 45MXT bits I've got. So far, it sounds worth the effort, at least to find out for sure. Might as well swap that motor out as long as I'm at it.

Still looking for a manual tho, hopefully at least enough to cover alignment.

Of course the MXT doesn't need a height lock; the VXL does. I couldn't remember the advantage of the MXT over the earlier M's, but now that you mention it, I believe the square bellows models gave you an adjustable lens stage that the older ones didn't have.

And you're right that the adjustable lens boards are limited use; I just went ahead and bought one while they are still available new with the idea it might be handy for occasional fine tuning. At that point I probably had some doubts about the VXL staying in alignment, but it doesn't seem bad.

Still though, I've probably owned a dozen or more enlargers over the years, and worked as a lab rat at a University lab and at the Maine Photographic Workshops lab, and I've never seen anything as sloppy and fiddly as this. Maybe some cheap enlargers were crude, but they still worked as designed. Something (or things) may well be out of wack of mine, but nothing about the design is straight forward to sort out.

Is there some issue with the MXT? I like not having to move the easel when raising the head, but it really is not a big deal to put up with for such a solid reliable enlarger. You can still fine tune the carriage height with the knob on the motor on that model can't you? I think Ansel used the older M, and Fred Picker too until he designed his own.

 

[Mark C]

Yes, I'm happy enough printing with the V-XL, just the whole carriage assembly didn't seem especially well designed to me. Perhaps if I had one in perfect condition I'd feel differently about that. I've used a lot of the older M models, but not the MXT. I bought this last lot to get the V-XL.

I would think your spare bellows should swap right over, probably with the adjustable part of the lower neg stage attached.

PM me about the manual.

 

[sykotec]

The bellows themselves are the same according to the parts lists for both enlargers, but alas, nothing they connect to really swaps along with. Probably less of a detail than the fact that they're glued on - I'm thinking a razor blade will come in handy here.

Agreed on the carriage design. If that's the only bad thing, it's worth living with. I'll report back if I find any reasonable ways to improve. If it warms up a bit I'll try and get a start on things this weekend.

Yes, I'm happy enough printing with the V-XL, just the whole carriage assembly didn't seem especially well designed to me. Perhaps if I had one in perfect condition I'd feel differently about that. I've used a lot of the older M models, but not the MXT. I bought this last lot to get the V-XL.

I would think your spare bellows should swap right over, probably with the adjustable part of the lower neg stage attached.

PM me about the manual.