Sparrow
Veteran
Best 50mm
Why don’t people agonise over enlarger lenses in the same way they do with camera lenses?
Why don’t people agonise over enlarger lenses in the same way they do with camera lenses?
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
I agonize instead over the poor quality of scanners (in the down to earth price range) whose development the big brands have interrupted long time ago
pvdhaar
Peter
I guess it's because a lot of folk don't do their own printing, and leave it to a lab.Sparrow said:Best 50mm
Why don’t people agonise over enlarger lenses in the same way they do with camera lenses?
That, and because you can work at the enlarger lens' optimum aperture all the time. There's no low light conditions that require working full open to get a decent shutter speed.
Abbazz
6x9 and be there!
Sparrow said:Why don’t people agonise over enlarger lenses in the same way they do with camera lenses?
But they do indeed! Maybe you're not reading the appropriate forums...
Try googling "Zeiss s-Orthoplanar", "Zeiss S-Biogon" or "APO EL Nikkor" to read some passionate threads about the virtues of these outstanding lenses...
Cheers!
Abbazz
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Because you don't notice the difference between a normal plain Rodagon, which can be had for $50 now, and an ultraexpensive APO EL whatever lens. Unless you are doing special applications, such as very large colour prints, which most of us don't do. And even then you have to know what you're looking for. For what most of us are doing, one wouldn't notice the difference between the $50 Rodagon and a good four-element lens either. For 35mm I mostly use a 2,8/50 Anaret N which can be had for $10, and I'm happy, even though I am normally a fairly picky person.Sparrow said:Why don’t people agonise over enlarger lenses in the same way they do with camera lenses?
That said, people do agonise, but it's even more of a brandname and geek fest, unrelated to real-world photographic use of those lenses, than it is with camera lenses.
Whether your lens board and baseboard are parallel makes much more of a difference than whether you invested $10 or $1000 into your enlarging lens.
Philipp
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
That's just not true. $500 now gives you much better scanning results than $500 would have five years ago. In the down to earth price range it gets more extreme; scanning negatives with 2002's $150 scanner was not fun, today it's more or less possible with an Epson V100 or so.Pistach said:I agonize instead over the poor quality of scanners (in the down to earth price range) whose development the big brands have interrupted long time ago
Today's low end scanner may not compare favourably to yesterday's used high-end scanner for the same money, but that's an entirely different comparison.
Philipp
aizan
Veteran
what abbazz said. the darkroom forum here is a subforum of a miscellaneous topic!
Ronald M
Veteran
They should and I did finally settling on 50mm large element Focotar,
focotar 2, 40mm focotar on V35, 45mm APO Schneider for diffusion enlargers only.
Now that I did all the work, all you have to do is find them. and thay are useable more open than cheapies of similar speed
focotar 2, 40mm focotar on V35, 45mm APO Schneider for diffusion enlargers only.
Now that I did all the work, all you have to do is find them. and thay are useable more open than cheapies of similar speed
sepiareverb
genius and moron
My favorite 50 in the darkroom is the Nikon 50/2.8, old metal barrel version. I also like the 63/2.8, newer plastic barrel version.
peter_n
Veteran
I have something called a Schneider Componon-S 50/f2.8. Not sure if that is good or bad. 
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.