highscore
Hi everyone
Over the last 18 months, I’ve picked up a few vintage lenses.
Minolta E.ROKKOR 1:4.5 F=50mm
Meopta Arnaret 4.5/50mm
Meopta Belar 4.5/50mm
Neotar 1:4.5/75mm (very slight mould)
EMITAR/S 4.5/80
EMITAR/S 4.5/105
Meopta Arnaret 4.5/105mm
Which three are the best ones I should keep?
Which ones should I get rid of?
Regards, Marcus
Urnes
Best to get them all, and then buy three decent lenses.
Seriously. Take a few prints and see if you can spot any differences. If not, it doesn’t matter. Think about what print sizes you want to do and what film formats. Maybe a 50mm and a 105mm will be enough for you. Because I wasn’t satisfied, I eventually stocked up on top-of-the-range Schneider and Rodenstock lenses when prices were rock bottom. You can really see the difference.
Regards, Sven.
Wolf_XL
... the Anaret has a pretty good reputation. The E-Rokkor is likely to be good too – though it seems to be an older version because of the 1:4.5 aperture – mine starts at 2.8. If you want to be on the safe side, go for a 6-element lens from Rodenstock or Schneider – APO is nice but not essential. And the Nikkors are supposed to be good as well.
highscore
Hi Urnes
I definitely want to keep one of each. Since I shoot everything from 17x24mm up to 6x7. (6x9 would work too)
But I don’t know which of the ones I have might be any good. Let alone whether they have 3, 4 or even more elements.
I only bought the 80mm today, but the first shots are certainly better than with my fungus-damaged 75mm. I’ll probably stick with it. But does that make it a ‘good’ lens? No idea!
Thanks
Marcus
highscore
Wolf
My E-Rokkor 50mm looks as good as new.
The Arnaret 105mm also looks better than the 105mm from Poland.
Let’s see if I can get some other opinions.
One more question: the Arnaret 50mm only has 4 aperture blades – is that a drawback?
Regards,
Marcus
Renate
Hello,
I used to work with the Anarets a lot. They are decent 4-element binoculars with good optical performance. However, they are not suitable for extreme conditions. I have never noticed the four aperture blades as a negative. In tests carried out by Meopta, the 4-element lenses were actually better than the 6-element lenses from the same manufacturer. The E-Rokkor is also one of the better lenses. It is probably even better than the Anaret 50. I can’t comment on the rest.
You can use the Anarets as a benchmark and test the other lenses against them at low apertures. Anything worse than an Anaret isn’t worth keeping. These days, there are even excellent lenses available for very little money. They really should be 4-element lenses. With 3-element lenses, you’ll see significant out-of-focus areas at the edges when using a wide aperture and high enlargement.
Best regards
Renate
Urnes
OK. In that case, I’d go for the Rokkor too. With the 80mm and the 75mm, I’d probably base my decision on the image circle. Whilst the 75mm generally only covers 4.5 x 6, the 80mm should cover 6 x 6; 6 x 7 is probably out of the question. If there’s fungus on the outer lenses, you can tackle it with a bit of isopropyl alcohol from the chemist’s. You just need to check whether the paint on the mount is solvent-resistant. I haven’t had any problems with post-war lenses, though.
Otherwise, it just depends on whether you’re happy with it. I used a Leitz Focotar (the old 4.5 version) for years, but was never really satisfied; with the modern Schneider 6-element lens, I really saw the difference.
Regards, Sven.
Bonderer
Hello
Since switching to the Kienzle C 69 enlarger, I’ve bought a 2.8 40mm Focotar, a WA Componon 5.6 60mm and a Componon S 5.6 100mm
for 35mm, 6×6 and 6×9 formats over the past six months – one from classified ads and the two medium-format lenses from eBay. All under €100 and, as far as quality is concerned, beyond reproach.
You need to be patient and willing to wait. Only the WA Componon for 6x9 is rare, so I’ll start with the 100mm one for now.
Minoltas were good; that’s what I started with, and the Anaret 105mm too. The others are rather unremarkable – people like to sell them because they’re cheap – nothing more.
If you’re only going up to 20–25, or perhaps 24×30, those will probably do the job. If you want a larger format, I’d recommend the better ones: Nikon, Schneider or Rodenstock.
APO only really makes a difference with colour. For me, it’s just good enlargement lenses now because...
You put a lot of effort into taking the shot, developing the film, and so on. You buy good cameras and good – very good – lenses, only to then ruin your photos with, and I emphasise this, cheap rubbish for the enlarger. That’s a waste. Better to wait a bit and get something of quality straight away; then it’s actually fun and you can see the difference in the finished prints. For my part, I don’t have enough money to be able to afford cheap stuff.
sputnik
APO only really makes a difference with colour.
As someone who works exclusively in black and white, I can contradict that from my own experience(!).
The difference isn’t huge, but it’s visible in a direct comparison.
highscore
Hi, thanks very much for your helpful replies.
In short.
I’m going to keep the following lenses for now.
Minolta E.ROKKOR 1:4.5 F=50mm (because of its condition)
EMITAR/S 4.5/80 (for lack of an alternative)
Meopta Arnaret 4.5/105mm (based on your opinions)
Yes, the others are up for sale.
If you’re interested, please get in touch with me via the private message option.
(I think that’s what Mirko would want too)
Cheers
Marcus
