Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

best enlarger lens ever
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2024 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:


In general, most enlarging lenses need to be reversed for magnification above 1:1.


My Schneider Componon-S 40mm HM is a bit better reversed for over 2:1.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2024 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
a question above ad source for Leitz buying from Schneider; Most likely from one of the books of production numbers by mr. Thiele, (but NOT the leitz lens numbers volume which I just checked-) possibly a schneider version which has disguised itself somewhere outside its allotted space in my many bookshelves.

Further to the issue of reversng the lenses; enlarging lenses are usually specified for one range of enlargement so if the bellows- extension stays within this and the subject is at the normal filmplane to lens center distance when reversed, no ill effects should be encountered. The simpler "tessar" types often specified 5 times enlagement while the double gauss types had some 3 times the range. Whn using my 50mm apo-something to digitize diapositives I do reverse it even if not making crops. It works-.

p.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2024 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
e6filmuser wrote:
My attention having been directed to Fotocar lenses, a search resurrected this topic.

As a result, I have just purchased a "Leica Leitz Focotar 2 50mm f4.5 Enlarging Lens - L39 Screw mount", which I hope to have next week.

When reading through the claims for various lens here, I find that it in not clear as to the application contexts. For macro, there might be a different ranking. Also, should any particular lens be reversed e.g. for the higher magnifications?


It's so funny that this topic resurfaces in irregular intervals... even after more than a decade and all the additional testing and comparisons, it hasn't been answered... And it still feels as unlikely as ever. Why?

1.) Every ranking you could possibly come up with has to be specified as "used for enlarging" or "used as a taking lens". They don't necessarily match. Certain parts of the construction, materials etc. can be benefitial for one or the other.
2.) Enlarging lenses are made for different magnification-ranges, so you're always going to be using some of them far outside of its optimized area.
3.) Different focal lengths are very hard to compare fairly in general.
4.) Many people are interested in using enlarging lenses as macro lenses. Above 1:1 many of them should be reversed, as Ray has mentioned... adding another metric complicating things.
5.) A good number of lenses which make up the "stuff of legends" among enlarging lenses are rare and/or expensive enough to not show up in any comparisons at all (Focotar II, Apo-El Nikkors, Goerz Magnar II, S-Orthoplanars, S-Biogon etc.)
6.) There are lots of more-or-less unknown industrial lenses, which could likely match or even beat some of the best enlarging lenses, which have never been tested by some of the big reviews (like Ctein's)
7.) To get a ranking you would have to specify each and every parameter tested and rate all of them among all of the lenses... (Shooting at various distances, check resolution, sharpness, contrast, color etc. and that doesn't even factor in more subjective parameters like, OOF rendering, flare handling, adaptability etc.) Attempting even a fraction of those would necessarily exclude a number of lenses ot begin with (some can't focus to infinity, some are very slow wide open or stopped down intentionally, some can't even be stopped down...)
8.) One of the most important questions: Is price a factor?
9) (there might be more...)

Mark Welsh (16:9) has started the biggest undertaking I know of to date, in trying to create a database for all of these lenses, and in addition also testing and comparing as many as possible on https://deltalenses.com with somewhat comparable parameters. Here's the Hall of Fame: https://deltalenses.com/hall/
As far as I know Mark has even tried to factor in some of the usual distances for "enlarging purposes" in his tests, but of course shooting on a modern camera can't replicate the use in a (particular) enlarger 100%.

And in addition there are still lots of important lenses missing on there for sure and despite all the effort which went into it, these lists will never be able to show you what's the "best enlarging lens". The meticulous testing of Robert OToole ([url]closeuphotography.com[/url]), Ray Parkhurst (http://www.macrocoins.com/100mm-lens-shootout.html and many others will give you very diverging answers/rankings in many cases, because the parameters/use cases are so different.

But on that particular lens: I think Mark has recently tested the Focotar-2 (or is still currently doing so), so if he decides to jump in here, he might have at least some hints for you in regards to that lens.

I have my personal experience with that lens and some opinions on it as well, but have never done any rigorous testing, so it would be highly subjective.


e6filmuser wrote:

My Schneider Componon-S 40mm HM is a bit better reversed for over 2:1.


Do you mean the Apo-Componon 40 mm f/2.8 HM? Or is there a Componon-S variant as well? I know there is one (though very rare: https://deltalenses.com/product/schneider-componon-s-hm-50-2-8/) in 50 mm, hence the question.

Ray Parkhurst wrote:


I have a couple of 50mm Focotars that I inherited and need to evaluate.

In general, most enlarging lenses need to be reversed for magnification above 1:1. Some lenses are very particular about this, while others don't care much. It seems to depend on how optimized the lens is for higher reproduction ratios. More symmetrical lenses that are designed for lower ratios often don't need to be reversed. The 75mm and 105mm EL-Nikkors are good examples.


Thanks for the information. I'm looking forward to your findings. Is the Focotar-2 among those as well?


paulhofseth wrote:

a question above ad source for Leitz buying from Schneider; Most likely from one of the books of production numbers by mr. Thiele, (but NOT the leitz lens numbers volume which I just checked-) possibly a schneider version which has disguised itself somewhere outside its allotted space in my many bookshelves.


I think Leitz buying from Schneider is a very reasonable assumption in the case of the later Focotar 50 mm (LFE) f/4.5 version, isn't it? https://deltalenses.com/product/leitz-wetzlar-focotar-50-lfe-4-5-v5/

But I honestly don't know any written source. Do you mean you've read about that definitely happening in a book by Thiele or am I misunderstanding this?


PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2024 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
simple.joy wrote:


Thanks for the information. I'm looking forward to your findings. Is the Focotar-2 among those as well?


No, all the ones I have are original Focotars.

Coincidentally, I ran across a Focotar at an estate sale yesterday and brought it home. Now I have 3 to test.

Last edited by Ray Parkhurst on Sat Sep 07, 2024 8:54 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2024 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As to written source, I still believe one of mr. Thieles books to be the source, but having an uncatalogued library spread oround in more than 120meters of bookshelves on various subjects, but with new material constantly requiring reshuffling, I have not found that book. When i find time to search, the ISBN and page nr. will follow.

p.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2024 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="Ray Parkhurst"]
simple.joy wrote:
e6filmuser wrote:


Thanks for the information. I'm looking forward to your findings. Is the Focotar-2 among those as well?


No, all the ones I have are original Focotars.

Coincidentally, I ran across a Focotar at an estate sale yesterday and brought it home. Now I have 3 to test.


This needs editing. This quote has nothing to do with me. I assume it was a simple slip.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2024 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
simple.joy wrote:


Do you mean the Apo-Componon 40 mm f/2.8 HM?


Yes. My apologies. My 150mm is a simple Componon-S. A senior moment?


PostPosted: Sat Sep 07, 2024 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
e6filmuser wrote:

This needs editing. This quote has nothing to do with me. I assume it was a simple slip.


Oops, double quote. Fixed.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2024 3:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
e6filmuser wrote:

This needs editing. This quote has nothing to do with me. I assume it was a simple slip.


Oops, double quote. Fixed.


Thanks. Easily done. The number of times I nearly...


PostPosted: Sat Sep 14, 2024 8:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I recently purchased a Fotocar 2 50mm f4.5.

I do not "test" lenses. I like to see how they perform as I would use them.

There are some stereo pairs here, with the lens on my Sony A7r3 and them on my Olympus EM-1, my main camera.

https://forum.mflenses.com/3d-stereo-experiments-with-adapted-mf-lenses-t85090,start,625.html#1587231

https://forum.mflenses.com/3d-stereo-experiments-with-adapted-mf-lenses-t85090,start,625.html#1587248
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4