[Leica] Midnight at the Oasis

[Mike Johnston <michaeljohnston@ameritech.net>]

Erwin Puts: >>>A recent X-files installment has Mulder waking up to go
to his office and on his way he goes to the bank, where a bank-robbery
takes place.He is brave as usual and tries to interfere. He gets killed.
Then he wakes up, goes to the bank and then remembers what happened
before. So he tries to act  differently, but gets killed again. He wakes
up a third time, goes to the bank and now acts so differently  that
Sculley is being killed...<snip>...You see the lesson Mike?<<<

Yes. I learned this lesson two years ago: Stop watching TV. Best thing I
ever did. It's all crap. I have no idea who "Muldaur" and "Scully" are
(unless you're talking about the woman who sang "Midnight at the Oasis"
and a former CEO of Apple Computer). I've never seen "The X-Files." And
that's only half the story.

If you wanted to be less of a pain in the ass to me, Erwin, I could
stand that. It would be okay with me. Really.


Gary D. Whalen: >>>I just want to know if there is scientific fact
supporting the need to purchase an APO enlarging lense for B&W
photography<<<

Gary,
No, there isn't....

...Isn't a "need," that is. Most decently-made 6-element enlarging
lenses (Nikon El-Nikkor, Schneider Componon-S, and Rodenstock Rodagon,
to name three brands and "models") are very good, and in some cases, for
some uses--especially if selected for sample variation and tested for
decentering and used at the optimum aperture--can be for all intents and
purposes nearly indistinguishable from "Apo" lenses.

Nikon no longer makes any consumer enlarging lenses labelled "Apo."
Schneider and Rodenstock do. Neither firm's "Apo" lenses are what Sidney
Ray (whose book may not be the standard text, if we must say it, but who
IS a far, far more distinguished expert on optics than Erwin is) calls
"true apochromats"; they can more properly be considered "deluxe" or
"luxury" lenses of generally higher quality than the main-line
Componon-S and Rodagon models; similar in spirit, say, to Canon's "L"
lenses.

I'm not an optical expert. However, I'm an expert printer. I count as a
friend Arthur Kramer, who wrote about optics for _Modern Photography_
for many years (and who designed their lens testing procedure), and
Ctein, who was trained at Cal Tech and who has written about
photo-technical matters for many years for a variety of magazines. Both
Arthur and Ctein have for many years taken a special interest in
enlarging lenses, and I've enjoyed the benefit of their knowledge. I've
also compared many enlarging lenses to each other directly. The only
lens labelled "Apo" that I've ever tried that showed any decentering was
a Schneider Apo-Componon-S 45mm. I've never tried their newer (and
current) Apo 40mm. My colleague Ctein has seen decentering in
Apo-Rodagons. Mine have none. In general (Erwin, go back and read those
two words again, please), I can say with some confidence that enlarging
lenses labelled "Apo" are indeed better than garden-variety 6-element
enlarging lenses...by which I mean, when comparing carefully-made prints
side-by-side, there are consistent, discernible qualitative improvements
in the prints made with the Apo lenses.

IN MY OPINION, speaking as the Lord High Monkety-Monk of the Pooh-Bahs
and Master of the Dunkelkammer Slam-Dunkers (which is to say, in case my
humor is obtuse, speaking only for myself), you do not NEED an Apo
enlarging lens by any means, but they ARE of visibly higher quality in
most cases. I think they're worth the investment, especially if your
take care with your technique and own nice camera lenses.

Hope that clarifies matters from my end. Sadly, only I will ever enjoy
all of the many puns, jokes, jibes, digs, insults and witticisms that I
deleted from this e-mail in a (probably failed) attempt to keep it
civil. And now if you'll excuse me, I gotta go put my camel to bed.

- --Mike