Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: APO vs non-APO enlarger lense
From: drodgers@nextlink.com
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 12:45:43 -0800

I've learned two basics facts In my experience with enlarging lenses.
Sample variation may be just as important as APO vs non-APO, especially
where older lenses are concerned. Secondly, most newer lenses are pretty
darn good.

I say this having used a dozen or more different lenses over the years. APO
lenses are probably more consistent in quality, since they're more
expensive. But price ususally relects quality, so two similarly priced
lenses are probably going to be equal, regardless of whether or not one is
labeled APO, and the other not.

Sometimes one can get lucky with an inexpensive lenses. I had a Bessler
Color 50/2.8. It was inexpensive, but a real gem. I regret that I sold it,
especially for the reason I sold it (I blamed the lens for what turned out
to be a poorly aligned enlarger).

 The Focotar on my Ic is darn good for an older lens. It holds it's own
against my my newer El-Nikkors. But the Focotar is slow at 4.5. That's not
so much a problem on the autofocus Ic. But focusing is a bit dim on my
Saunders enlarger. I bouth a new  El-Nikkor  50/2.8 to print 35mm on the
Saunders and on my D2.

Several years back I got rid of most of my older enlarging lenses and moved
to newer El-Nikkors. They are all tack sharp. I have a 135, 105 and 50/2.8.
I also have an 80/4 APO Rodagon. I can't tell any difference between the
APO and the 105/5.6 Nikkor, aside from the fact that there's more light for
focusing the Rodagon. IMHO, a good focusing tool  is just as important as a
good lens. I use a Peak III.

Poor enlarger misalignment has, over the years, caused more problems for me
than anything else.  Vibration is a close second. I used temporary
facilities for quite some time. I was always setting up and taking down
enlargers. I went through three different enlargers. The were light, but
flimsy and impossible to keep aligned.  The only exception was a Leitz
Valloy. It was light-weight, but very solid.

My printing improved considerably -- in terms of both quality and enjoyment
- -- when I got a good enlarger. I've heard people say that an enlarger is
just a can to hold the light, but I disagree. A cheap enlarger takes all
the fun out of darkroom work. Also, when I built a permanent darkroom in my
basement I anchored my enlarger table into a half yard of concrete. I use a
vacuum easel, but the motor is far away and I pipe the suction in via  PVC.
No more vibration.

Just when I got everthing I wanted in a wet darkroom,  I transitioned to
digital. However, I still like doing b/w printing in a conventional
darkroom.

David