Need 80mm Lens for 23C II enlarger

[Steve Ruddy]

I just got a 23C II enlarger and will be using it for 6x6cm medium format negatives. I want to try making 20-40" prints. The enlarger came with a 75mm Rodenstock - Omagar f 4.5. It can get me started but it really looks and feals like a POS. I have done a bit of reading and it seems like the best lenses maybe Rodenstock APO and Schneider Componon S both are out of my budget right now. I am seeing Nikon EL-Nikkor for under $100 however I'm seeing a lot of versions of this lens. Which one should I go for? I'm seeing some with one silver ring, ones all black, and ones with an inset f scale. The 50mm El-Nikkor suppied with the enlarger has the black ring and external scale.
Here are photos of what I have.

 

[Steve M.]

All versions of the El Nikkor 80 5.6 lenses are 6 element, and very sharp. I recently sold one for $45 because I seldom print anything but 35mm anymore, so you can get quite a deal on the auctions if you're patient. It can also be used for 35mm printing if you don't go too big on your prints. Mine was the older version with the chrome on the bottom, and it made really nice prints.

You might want to upgrade your 50 to a Nikkor 50 2.8 while you're at it. It has 6 elements too, is sharper by a wide margin over the 50 4, and is easier to focus wide open. These go for small money as well.

That's a great enlarger you have (I have one too).

 

[Mackinaw]

I'm quite happy with my EL-Nikkor 75/4.0.

Jim B.

 

[Doug]

One interesting thing about the EL-Nikkor 80mm f/5.6 is that is covers at least 6x7 format. Having a shortish focal length for that format allows larger prints/crops on the enlarger.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

There's this Componon S for $66 on ebay
https://www.ebay.com/itm/80MM-5-6-S...981954?hash=item2a83bf5942:g:0pgAAOSwKytZHbvJ

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Another very fine lens is the Fujinon 75mm EX series. I have one mounted on a board for my Durst 138, & a Componon S 80 on a Beseler board for my cold head VC 45MXT. Both stunningly sharp.

 

[Steve M.]

The Fujinon and Componon S are good lenses (but please note the defects on that Componin in the ad). I owned them both, but preferred the Nikkor 80 5.6. Nikkor lenses tend to be sharp and contrasty, which fit my negs a little better. Never cared for the Componon S with my work, but others love them. The Fujinon 4.5 EX is a 6 element lens that is very similar to the Nikkor 80 5.6 in performance, and you get a little brighter image when focusing.

The 75 4 is a 4 element lens that is sharp in the center, so with 35mm you can usually get nice prints if you don't print too big. For any film format bigger than 35mm, a 6 element lens will give sharper prints edge to edge.

 

[x-ray]

Another very fine lens is the Fujinon 75mm EX series. I have one mounted on a board for my Durst 138, & a Componon S 80 on a Beseler board for my cold head VC 45MXT. Both stunningly sharp.

Agree that the Fujinon EX may be the best of the best. I don't currently have one but have looked to replace the 135 EX I used for many years.

A pro lab I used tested several brands and they felt the Fuji had a small margin on the Nikkor EL ( original). At the time they tested them the newer version Nikkor weren't out. I bought a new 135 EX and was never disappointed.

Thinking I was going all digital I sold my Durst 138 and lenses. Now after coming to my senses I have another Durst 138 and a set of Nikkor EL lenses. Honestly the Nikkor are as good as they get.

I've accumulated quite a few enlarging lenses over the years. I own some Componon S, Componon (original non S), Rodenstock Rodagon, old and new versions of the Nikkor EL and a Kodak and have used enlarging Raptar and Ektar lenses years ago.

Pretty much all are good lenses. I'd rank the Nikkor EL 6 element versions and Fujinon EX 6 element (plasmat designs) as my favorites with the Componon (S) and Rodagon as being extremely close. In all honesty I'm not certain one is really better than the other.

I own some duplicate EL Nikkors in both the old and new versions and see no difference although I read the newer one was improved. Don't know.

Be aware that some lenses like the Apo Rodagon are corrected for quite large enlargements. Per comments from the Rodenstock rep, the non Apo will outperform the Apo until you get up to mural size prints. I don't know about the Apo Componon.

 

[PRJ]

I've used every lens under the sun at this point. Some were a disappointment. You are wanting to make some pretty good size enlargements so you will have to test whatever lens you get. Lenses vary even among the same makes which creates an issue. If someone says one lens is good, you might buy a bowzer... It happens.

 

[Steve Ruddy]

Agree that the Fujinon EX may be the best of the best. I don't currently have one but have looked to replace the 135 EX I used for many years.

A pro lab I used tested several brands and they felt the Fuji had a small margin on the Nikkor EL ( original). At the time they tested them the newer version Nikkor weren't out. I bought a new 135 EX and was never disappointed.

Thinking I was going all digital I sold my Durst 138 and lenses. Now after coming to my senses I have another Durst 138 and a set of Nikkor EL lenses. Honestly the Nikkor are as good as they get.

I've accumulated quite a few enlarging lenses over the years. I own some Componon S, Componon (original non S), Rodenstock Rodagon, old and new versions of the Nikkor EL and a Kodak and have used enlarging Raptar and Ektar lenses years ago.

Pretty much all are good lenses. I'd rank the Nikkor EL 6 element versions and Fujinon EX 6 element (plasmat designs) as my favorites with the Componon (S) and Rodagon as being extremely close. In all honesty I'm not certain one is really better than the other.

I own some duplicate EL Nikkors in both the old and new versions and see no difference although I read the newer one was improved. Don't know.

Be aware that some lenses like the Apo Rodagon are corrected for quite large enlargements. Per comments from the Rodenstock rep, the non Apo will outperform the Apo until you get up to mural size prints. I don't know about the Apo Componon.

When you say corrected for quite large enlargements how large do you mean? Since I want to print between 20-40" should I get a specific lens for that big? Also can you describe the different versions of the EL Nikkor from earliest to latest?

 

[PRJ]

I've used pretty much everything at this point. If you want the best, get an Orthoplanar. Although putting it on a Beseler 23C would be like putting racing slicks on a Yugo. Not much point.

What you can find that will do what you want is the question Steve. How critical are you going to be? You will need to align your enlarger which is best done by a laser tool. If you don't do that, it won't matter what lens you use.

Nikkor lenses can be real good. They tend to be on the contrastier end of the spectrum. Schneider lenses have less contrast. Rodenstock lenses are in the middle. Not a lot of difference. Subtle really. Minolta made some good lenses. The CE Rokkors were excellent. Durst Neonons are as well, made by Pentax if you believe the internets. The Fujinon EXs were nice too. I have one on my Focomat right now. The one I have has slight longitudinal CA so I wouldn't use it to print color. Computar DLs were special. You can Google them. Some were even APO lenses, although they were marketed before APO became a "thing". Then you have the few modern APO lenses if you can afford to get one you might just want to do that. Rodenstock and Schneider made them until recently. They might still. And if you really want the best, get an Orthoplanar. Hard to find and suuuuuper expensive, especially for the 105mm. One final option for large prints, about the biggest size you want to make, is to get a G lens. Rodogon-G and G Componon lenses were optimized for huge prints around the 20x range. Those are really hard to find and they cost these days if you can find one....

One thing to note is that sharpness is determined more by the quality of manufacture than the actual lens itself. A lot of older enlarging lenses are not going to be centered at this point so won't produce great results right off the bat If you get a modern 6 element lens, laser align your enlarger and use a glass neg carrier you should be able to make some nice large prints.


Hope that helps you.

 

[x-ray]

When you say corrected for quite large enlargements how large do you mean? Since I want to print between 20-40" should I get a specific lens for that big? Also can you describe the different versions of the EL Nikkor from earliest to latest?

Steve I don't have exact info on each makers lenses and would suggest checking with B&H. I see they still sell enlarging lenses and they have very good people that can provide specs. They may be on their website as well. Schneider probably has specs on their website. They maintain an archive of specs on most lenses on their site.

The nikkor lenses are going to be tougher. They've been out of production for a while. I've read but can't confirm that the last cosmetic change to the modern looking mount vs the older ones that looked more like 1960's camera lenses had some tweaks to improve them. I own both old and new in various focal length and can't see any difference but I don't make 40" prints.

Like most photo equipment companies Nikon changed distributors several times which isn't going to help much in getting reliable info.

Generally I don't print bigger than 11x14 for personal work but have produced many large prints as large as 50x70". I've always used general purpose enlarging lenses like Componon, Nikkor EL or Rodagon with excellent results. I'd suggest a critical alignment of your enlarger to start. Laser???, I believe there's a system still on the market but not a laser system. I've never seen a laser alignment system made for enlargers but there may be. B&H can probably help with an alignment jig.

Second I'd pick a good used lens like the Fuji EX, EL Nikkor like the 80 5.6 ( newer version if you believe the chatter), Componon S or Rodagon. Any one will do excellent images even up to 40".

 

[x-ray]

I just looked at B&H and the Rodagon is optimized for 4-15x with the best performance at 8x two stops down. Schneider Componon S, Fuji EX and Nikkor EL are probably the same. Any of these will do the trick.

 

[Nokton48]

How are you going to align the enlarger and easel (what kind of easel?) to make 40" prints? I made 16x20s from my 4x5s on my Omega D2 and it was a challenge. I do have a Versalab laser enlargement alignment tool and it wasn't cheap.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Parallel-V...834413?hash=item23a36f47ad:g:wbAAAOSwt6xbJw13

How do you process 40" paper? In Maxwell photo mural tanks?

 

[x-ray]

One other suggestion mentioned above is a glass carrier. If you're using the standard head with tungsten bulb you may experience the negative "popping" as it warms up. As the neg heats it'll sometimes buckel throwing the image out of focus.

I have 3 enlargers, a D5 Omega with Ilford MG head, a Durst 138 Laboratory and Focomat 1C that I adapted a Chromega head to for B&W MG printing.

The Durst has a 5x7 glass neg carrier and I have several glass carriers for the Omega D5. I generally use glass carriers for two reasons. One to prevent popping and two to allow me to print the entire negative. I compose my images in CA.era to the edge of the frame and I want to print the entire frame in most cases.

Glass is a pain, you'll want anti Newton glass and compressed air and a camels hair brush. Without anti Newton glass you'll have a lot of trouble preventing Newton rings. You only need antinewton glass on the top where it comes in contact with the film base. I rarely have issues with Newton rings on the emulsion side. In my Durst I use mumti coated Schott glass rather than antinewton glass.

I use a small air compressor or a large ear syrringe might work. Canned air has a propellant that can squirt out and damage film and lenses. A camels hair brush that's super soft can be good too.

Dust is a pain at those enlargements. I'd suggest refining your spotting technique with dyes on your prints. Find some really fine poi t 0 - 000 brushes and practice.

 

[x-ray]

How are you going to align the enlarger and easel (what kind of easel?) to make 40" prints? I made 16x20s from my 4x5s on my Omega D2 and it was a challenge. I do have a Versalab laser enlargement alignment tool and it wasn't cheap.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Parallel-V...834413?hash=item23a36f47ad:g:wbAAAOSwt6xbJw13

How do you process 40" paper? In Maxwell photo mural tanks?

How about that, you live and you learn. I'd never seen a laser system. I think there was an optical system available at one time.

I have a bubble level I put in the enlarging head and adjust that way. It's not accurate to one wavelength but for real world applications it's perfectly good. I've been printing since we'll before lasers and this method worked fine.

I'd suggest remounting your enlarger on the baseboard so you can print vertically on the floor. Flipping the enlarger horizontal makes it very difficult to get the negative parallel to your paper. Vertically you can use tape on the edge of your paper or metal rods to hold the paper flat. Of you just lay the paper on the floor without securing it there's a good chance it'll curl. I've used a flat steel sheet like sheet metal and use magnets to hold the edges down. This is how I did it with horizontal projection.

I've run huge prints different ways. I've used large custom trays, huge deep tanks that hold several hundred gallons for large quantities of very large mural size prints and used a hoist to hold the paper racks. I've also made troughs out of plastic wallpaper troughs. I cut them apart and glued two together. This is awkward but it can be done. You might want to create something to support the sides of the troughs. They flex a lot

I also had a large drum someone fabricated on a home built motor base. I used it to run 60" color prints I was making from 8x10 negs.

Last, focusing is going to be difficult unless you have arms 8 feet long. Getting your head close to the focusing magnifier to see well and reaching the focus knob is a challenge. Many commercial enlargers used for large prints use servos on the focus and a remote so you can use a grain magnifier and still run focus.

You have some major challenges ahead. Is suggest trying some prints you can do on your baseboard first then get that worked out then move to larger. Printing gets much more difficult as you move up in size and much more expensive.

One more suggestion, I'm a huge fan of diffusion enlarging heads. They produce a smoother tonality, reduce the effects of dust and scratches and cold light heads like the zone VI and Aristo are cool and dnt cause neg buckling as badly. Some people feel they reduce sharpness but what they're seeing is the more subtle tones not a loss of sharpness. Prints from Diffusion heads are closer to what a contact print looks like.

Consistency is very important. Set a time like 2 min for RC and 3 for fiber paper development. Use something like Formulary TF 4 or 5 to fix. Fix times are shorter and wash times much shorter as well.

When you do a test strips, dry it in your microwave before evaluating to allow for drydown. Mistakes get expensive at that size.

 

[Steve Ruddy]

I've used pretty much everything at this point. If you want the best, get an Orthoplanar. Although putting it on a Beseler 23C would be like putting racing slicks on a Yugo. Not much point.

What you can find that will do what you want is the question Steve. How critical are you going to be? You will need to align your enlarger which is best done by a laser tool. If you don't do that, it won't matter what lens you use.

Nikkor lenses can be real good. They tend to be on the contrastier end of the spectrum. Schneider lenses have less contrast. Rodenstock lenses are in the middle. Not a lot of difference. Subtle really. Minolta made some good lenses. The CE Rokkors were excellent. Durst Neonons are as well, made by Pentax if you believe the internets. The Fujinon EXs were nice too. I have one on my Focomat right now. The one I have has slight longitudinal CA so I wouldn't use it to print color. Computar DLs were special. You can Google them. Some were even APO lenses, although they were marketed before APO became a "thing". Then you have the few modern APO lenses if you can afford to get one you might just want to do that. Rodenstock and Schneider made them until recently. They might still. And if you really want the best, get an Orthoplanar. Hard to find and suuuuuper expensive, especially for the 105mm. One final option for large prints, about the biggest size you want to make, is to get a G lens. Rodogon-G and G Componon lenses were optimized for huge prints around the 20x range. Those are really hard to find and they cost these days if you can find one....

One thing to note is that sharpness is determined more by the quality of manufacture than the actual lens itself. A lot of older enlarging lenses are not going to be centered at this point so won't produce great results right off the bat If you get a modern 6 element lens, laser align your enlarger and use a glass neg carrier you should be able to make some nice large prints.


Hope that helps you.

Thanks for all the info, very helpful. I understand everything except the comment about my enlarger being a Yugo. I'm taking that as meaning if I put a Rodagon G or Orthoplano on it, my enlarger is not good enough to see the lenses potential? If so please explain. I want a lens that will be sharp edge to edge when making a 40" print. I will be using a laser to square things up.

 

[Steve Ruddy]

I just looked at B&H and the Rodagon is optimized for 4-15x with the best performance at 8x two stops down. Schneider Componon S, Fuji EX and Nikkor EL are probably the same. Any of these will do the trick.

Thanks! Maybe this is a dumb question but how do I figure print size based on the len's magnification specification? My negatives are 2.25" x 2.25" so with a 15x magnification does that mean 33.75"? I see the APO Rodagon N 4/80 is 2-15 with 10 optimum and a Compono-S 4/80 is 2-20 6-10 optimum.

I found this data sheet linking to lens specification brochures. http://www.photocornucopia.com/1061.html

I found a Componon - S 4/80 for under $100 I'm thinking this maybe a good one to get my feet wet. After I work my way up to 40" size I can critique my work and see if I think I need an APO lens.

Do you have any 6 x 6 medium format glass carrier recommendations for my C23CII enlarger? I see they sold an optional glass medium format carrier as an accessory but they don't mention if it used anti newton glass.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

large prints

large prints

Thanks for all the info, very helpful. I understand everything except the comment about my enlarger being a Yugo. I'm taking that as meaning if I put a Rodagon G or Orthoplano on it, my enlarger is not good enough to see the lenses potential? If so please explain. I want a lens that will be sharp edge to edge when making a 40" print. I will be using a laser to square things up.

Steve, If you're aiming to do prints that large, I'd check to make certain that your camera focusing & lens alignment is spot on. If I remember you did some work on your Rolleiflex your self. If anything is amiss in your negative it will sure show up at 40". Good luck with the project

 

[Steve Ruddy]

Steve, If you're aiming to do prints that large, I'd check to make certain that your camera focusing & lens alignment is spot on. If I remember you did some work on your Rolleiflex your self. If anything is amiss in your negative it will sure show up at 40". Good luck with the project

Good advice, I had my tech fix focus issues on both Rollieflex cameras. Their focus is great and their lenses seem to have much better edge sharpness than several of my Canon pro lenses. I'm definitely up for the challenge. Thanks for the luck.