Hi Detlev,
I’d agree with Dieter. Whether the lens remains good enough for you depends on the magnification. From 24x30 onwards, you can see differences, though the areas that are out of focus and that you can avoid by working carefully are astonishing:
- possibly stop down by 2 stops,
- after the final focusing (with a magnifying glass), don’t cough, don’t fidget, etc. When enlarging Minox negatives, I’ve seen real miracles in terms of what a careless slam of the enlarger frame or a clumsy stop-down can make a difference. And I work with a Durst 138, which, whilst no longer the youngest, is certainly not worn out, and above all has considerable heft. A popular trick for causing camera shake: set a timer on the positive table and press the shutter release vigorously ;-).
So, before you spend a fortune on a new lens, I’d suggest working on that first, and perhaps even borrowing an expensive one to see if it makes a difference (only once you’ve got the hang of it).
Furthermore, there may be significant ‘quality issues’ in the exposure itself and in the negative processing.
And finally, unfortunately, enlarging your own black-and-white prints is one of the biggest motivations for switching to a larger negative format.
Bottom line: don’t make a big fuss about it for now, and practise.
Have fun
Martin
Martin,
Thank you very much for your tips. I will indeed start by getting to grips with it, as it’s been years since I last did any enlarging in my father’s darkroom.
I wanted to start with PEMultigrade paper, because from what I’ve read, you can experiment a lot with it without having to buy a whole stack of paper straight away.
What would be the best and most affordable combination of paper, developer and fixer? Ilford or Tetenal, or something else?
I’ve bought the book ‘Ilford Positive Techniques’, which is very good, but of course they recommend Ilford in it – what else would they do? :blink:)
Regards, Detlef
