Is it possible to use a 9cm LTM lens to enlarge 6x6?

M

mooge

Well-known
Local time
3:29 AM
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
1,023
Hi friends,

would it be possible to use a 90mm LTM lens like a 9cm elmar (for example) to enlarge my 6x6 negatives? 'cause that way, I could use the lens on my M2 as well...

would it work at all? I guess the performance would not be optimal, but it would probably be better than the 50mm lens I have used...

I usually print my 6x6s to 5x5 (cropped from 5x7) but maybe I'll go bigger...



kippis!
-Eugene
 
Yes it is possible, just remember that you can damage your camera lens coating and cemented surfaces by the heat generated by the enlarger lamp. Much better to use a proper enlarging lens that is made for this purpose. . By the way the correct focal length is 75mm for 6X6.
 
I don't think there would be any heat danger to the lens because the negative would be more sensitive to heat and it is between the lamp and the lens.
 
maybe... but I kinda want a (fast... like f/2) tele for my M2.

come to think of it, even at $200, that's probably out of my budget...
 
I see no reason why you can't do this. The camera lens will not be optimized for the close working distance, and is a little long for the job. But it will work.
 
Ok, I call Foul! With 80mm Nikkor lenses going for $25, more or less, why would anyone even ask such a question? BTW, an 80mm lens for 6x6 will work much better than 75mm lenses. Better quality & coverage.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
 
Last edited:
I've also read about possible heat problems causing decementing in a lens. And I also agree that enlarging lenses are very inexpensive and should do a better job.
 
OK I see a potential problem. The lens barrel could be too long. The flange to film distance may or may not be the same on the enlarger as on the camera. If there is a bellows, and it can be set close enough to make up for the extra length of the 90mm lens barrel, then you are OK. If the lens head comes off, and can be mounted that way, that may be the solution. Oh, and the barrel would just about have to cause vignetting.

Whether the lens will cover 6 x 6 is something you would have to try. The more we talk about this, the more reasons come up to use an enlarging lens!
 
venchka said:
Ok, I call Foul! With 80mm Nikkor lenses going for $25, more or less, why would anyone even ask such a question?
Click to expand...

I thought a good 80mm enlarger lens would cost more like $75... if they're really that cheap, it's not worth it to cut corners. problem solved, I guess.


thanks everyone!
 
mooge said:
I thought a good 80mm enlarger lens would cost more like $75... if they're really that cheap, it's not worth it to cut corners. problem solved, I guess.


thanks everyone!
Click to expand...

Ah, so you want "good". You won't get "good" with your intended setup using a camera lens.

If you think about it, an enlarger is a macro camera. It takes life size (negative) and enlarges it several times. So an enlarger lens has to be optimised for very close focussing. Your camera lens is optimised for much greater distances. It will NEVER give good results even comapred to the cheapest enlarger lens.
Then if you are only making small enlargements, say 4X from your neg, an enlarging lens such as the cheaper Rodenstock Rogonar 75 or 90 which were optimised for 4X enlargement will give very good results for next to nothing in cost for the lens. i.e. they are perfect for 8x10 prints from 6x6 negs. You wouldn't notice the difference with a more expensive rodagon at that magnification ratio.
Even a Rodagon 80 can be had cheaply these days.
 
Rob-F said:
OK I see a potential problem. The lens barrel could be too long. The flange to film distance may or may not be the same on the enlarger as on the camera. If there is a bellows, and it can be set close enough to make up for the extra length of the 90mm lens barrel, then you are OK. If the lens head comes off, and can be mounted that way, that may be the solution. Oh, and the barrel would just about have to cause vignetting.

Whether the lens will cover 6 x 6 is something you would have to try. The more we talk about this, the more reasons come up to use an enlarging lens!
Click to expand...

That was my immediate thought, too: mechanical vignetting.

Cheers,

R.
 
venchka said:
If you get really lucky, you can get an entire darkroom with enlarging lenses for free. I did. Twice.
Click to expand...

I was, actually. 2 50mm lenses though...
thanks for the tip on APUG. I'll check back there when I havea job I guess...

thanks, everyone.
 
I totally agree that an enlarginglens would be best. I was interested in the "is it possible" angle. I have heard/read that the 90mm Elmar has been/can be converted to use on the older Bronica 6x6 SLR's, so the coverage is there.

edit: I just tried it with my 90 Elmar and Bronica C, removing the Bronica's Nikkor lens and holding the Elmar in the throat of the Bronica body. I see no vignetting on the focusing screen, but the head of the lens would have to be used without the focusing barrel in order to get infinity focus.
 
Last edited:
You might want to consider using the 80mm as your standard lens for enlarging 35mm. My experience in the 70s-90s when I did quite a bit of darkroom work was that longer focus lenses typically do a better job of rendering an image sharp edge to edge since they do not see the edges of the film quite so obliquely. Also gives you more room between the lens and the paper to burn and dodge. My "standard" lenses were an 80mm for 35mm, a 105mm for 6x6, and a 180mm Rodagon for 4x5 blowups to 30x40.

About using a camera lens for enlarging - nothing wrong with if it is the right lens. When I was starting out and didn't have extra cash for a top quality 50mm enlarging lens, I used a 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkor. I screwed a nikon mount to an Omega D2 lensboard and it gave fantastic quality edge to edge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom