Rodagon vs. Componon vs. Focotar

dadsm3

dadsm3

Well-known
Local time
8:03 AM
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
842
Well I've tried out my new Saunders D6700....got some nice stuff. Quite pleased, but I know I can do better. The 1st thing I've learned is that the filters on colour heads are a lot more finicky than just dialing in '2 1/2' or '3' on a b&w enlarger....you really have to get a feel for the magenta and yellow mix....the recommended settings for a 2 1/2 filtration are just a starting point.
I used a Schneider Componon 50mm F2.8 for my 35mm negs....I have to say the results are definitely softer than the prints I got at school with a Beseler and a Rodagon. I've since noticed some haze in the Schneider.....I'm going to go with the new 50mm F4 Rokkor the unit came with tonight to see if there's any diff. I also noticed the clothes dryer I set my enlarger up on is a little shakey.......I'm putting a big plank and tightened the feet on it.
Just wondering if anyone has had similar softness issues with a Componon. All the non-APO 50mm enlarging lenses are really cheap now (brand new EL-Nikkors are $40!), but the only ones that seem to be retaining their value are the APO's and the Focotars.
Anyone else have softness issues with a Componon, and is it worth springing for an APO or Focotar?
Thanks,
Mike
PS: I did use a grain focuser.
 
Thanks Joe, I'll keep an eye out......
Now if I could only get my wife out of the *&@%$#' laundry room I might be able to get something done....
 
I have all Fujinons (50, 75, 105, 150) and they are very good. That said, Mike, don't discount the differences between the Beseler (depending on which model you use at the school's darkroom) and the Saunders. Also, as you have noted, stability of the whole setup is important. And if you see haze in the Componon, then you've got a bunch of variables staring you in the face. The Componon is no slouch if in good knick. I'd love to try a Rodagon, though. Everything I've read leads me to believe it might be my favourite.
 
I use a 50 or 63mm EL-Nikkor. The 63 has slightly more coverage and thus gives sharper corners, it's also useful for smaller prints due to the greater working distance. I find these indistinguishable from a Rodagon I used to use and they're nice and cheap. Alignment and stability will count for more than differences between lenses, though.

Mark
 
I have had my Focotar for 26 years and have to say it is the best enlarging lens I have ever used for 35mm. I have had El Nikkors, Componons, and Rodagons. The Focotar works for me!
 
All of these are excellent choices, you can't go wrong with either. I use a 50 2.8 & 105 EL-Nikkor, 80 Rodagon, 135 Fujinon EX and 150 and 180 Componon - S. I previously used the 50 Componon on my focomat but sold it. I worked for a company years ago and used a focomat with the focatar and found it to be very good but no better than the others.

I don't think the Fujinon EX was ever imported but I feel in the 135 focal length is the best I have ever used. The EL Nikkors are up there in my book too.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=790229
 
The Rokkor should be pretty good too.
Maybe you could take that compnon apart and clean the haze if it is not superficial.

Try cleaning it with a Q-tip with windex first.
 
Thanks gentlemen. The Rokkor seemed to be a little sharper than the Componon....but whether it's because I stabilized the unit or a lens diff is up in the air.
Once I get my school-developed shots back from marking I'll do a lens/lens comparison using the same neg....
 
I used a Schneider Componon 50mm F2.8 for ages and then bought a Focotar F4 just for kicks from Egay. I did a blind test at F4 F5.6 and F8 on both lenses and F2.8 on the Schneider. I just wrote the lens type and aperture on each test paper put them all in a box then developed them all one after each, I wasn't really expecting the result I got but placing all seven prints down on a worktop I picked the ones I liked the look of best and they were the Focotar ones. It was no sharper than the Schneider but it was far more contrasty and the prints were, well, just plain nicer to look at. I use my Focotar 100% of the time now. Sharpness in prints is affected by so many other factors I certainly wouldn't dismiss a lens on sharpness alone. (I think I paid about 70 pounds sterling for my Focotar BTW.)

Dave H
 
Is the Fujinon a late model pro lens? The 135 that I have was the top of the line around 18 years ago and was recommended by a pro lab owner. My lens is marked Fujinon EX not EP. It has illuminated f stops and rotates in the mount to orient the f stop scale properly. It's also all metal and extremely well built. I don't remember the price but I remember it was more than both the Rodenstock Rodagon and Schneider Componon-S at the time.


http://www.photo.net/photos/X-Ray

http://www.x-rayarts.com
 
my 2 fuji's were not recent models.

i'm pretty sure the designation was ex and ep, the ep being their pro line (more elements)

i sold my complete darkroom last summer to bj (from the forum).

joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom