rodenstock omega lens question (what have I got)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Printing & Finishing : One Thread

I have just bought an omega b22 enlarger, it comes with a Rodenstock-Omegar lens. Part of the reason I bought this enlarger was because Rodenstock makes a quality lens. However, I am now having some doubts. Does anyone know about this lens, is it really a Rodenstock or is it one that is made for Omega and so inferior ? Any thoughts would be appreciated

N

-- nick ure (nure@zephyr.net), January 26, 2000

Answers

This is a cheapo, aka "Crapogon," similar to other brands of three or four-element lenses. IOW, no great shakes.

You'd do very well to replace that lens with a Rodenstock Rodagon, Schneider Componon or Nikon EL-Nikkor.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), January 27, 2000.


Your Omegar is probably a re-badged Rogonar, and is as John says only a 3-element job.

I don't like bandying trade names, or bad-mouthing them, but I'd go for the Componon-s. I've heard a lot of people complain of being disappointed with their expensive Rodagons, and there's been some poor reviews of them too. Whereas I've never come across a bad Componon, or heard anyone complain about buying one.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), January 28, 2000.


In addition to what Pete said, I like the f-stop lever on the Componon-S better than the weird ring on the Rodagon

-- Tim Brown (brownt@ase.com), January 28, 2000.

Sure, it's an inexpensive 3 element lens, but let's not plant too many seeds of FUD (fear, uncertainty, & doubt). Borrow a decent lens as described above and make a print with each lens. Then, knowing exactly what improvement can be expected, replace it or keep it. Depending on your magnification requirements and need for high sharpness in the corners, it might be OK or not. I've noticed that most of my shots have grass or out of focus areas on the corners, and enlarging lenses are less critical than you'd think. On the other hand, if you shoot buildings, street scenes, or technical photos, buy the best lens you can possibly afford and hope it's good enough!

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), January 29, 2000.

I have to agree with Conrad, having used a Durst Neotar (made by Rodenstock) for years. I've also got a Schnieder Componar-C and and recently inherited a EL-Nikkor f4 and in smaller print sizes (5x7) which I've done direct comparisions I can't tell much difference.

-- Nigel Smith (nlandgl@eisa.net.au), January 29, 2000.


I also agree with Conrad. One other suggestion. Before ditching the current lens, run a set of test prints with it at each f-stop setting, and at two or three levels of enlargement. You may find that there is an f-stop at which it performs better than otherwise. If you then compare with a high quality lens, use that f-stop. If you keep the lens, the only real penalty you pay by using one f-stop is that you need to make all your exposure changes with the timer, or if you can vary the bulb brightness, and aren't using variable contrast paper,that is another control possibiity.

-- Richard Newman (rnewman@snip.net), January 31, 2000.

We in the photo industry have a name for the Omegar: the "Ohmygod" lens.

Seriously, the Componon-S lenses are the industry standard. El- Nikkors are good too but, IMO, not as good as the Componon-S. Rodagons just aren't in the running; for the same price you can have a Schneider. Anything but these three just isn't worth using. Remember, regardless of what you shot with, your photos will never be sharper than your enlarging lens allows.

-- Peter Hughes (leo948@yahoo.com), February 02, 2000.


I just replaced a 75mm 3 element Omegar with a 105mm 6 element Rodagon. At viewing distance for a 6x6 inch enlargement the resolution improvement is not visible. Get close and you will see a big difference in improved details, contrast and corner sharpnes. 3 element enlarging lens will make a expensive taking lens average. At current E-bay prices, any used 6 element lens in good condition is worth it.

-- Richard Jepsen (rjepsen@mmcable.com), September 06, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ