Paul wrote:
> Thanks for the info, Mike. Do you know how much one would expect to pay
> for a Saunders 4500 II VCCE?
Current B&H price is $1,318 without lens (at least it was in the B&H ad in
the December, 2000 _POP Photo_). I believe that's also _sans_ carrier,
although it includes the baseboard. It's a fair amount of money, but still a
very good value IMHO. It's a wonderful machine.
The differences between the 4550 and the 4500II are: 250W vs. 200W lamp; the
4550 has a somewhat taller column and the lens axis is further from the
column, both of which enable you to make somewhat larger prints given the
same format and lens focal length; and the 4550 supposedly has a quieter and
more vibration-free fan. However, there's no vibration problem at all with
the 4500II and the fan is already quiet, so I can't see that being much of a
problem. The brighter bulb is a moot point with B&W, being mainly useful for
more denser color filter packs. And, certainly for reasonably-sized prints
from smaller formats, the 4500II is plenty big enough.
I wouldn't count on finding either enlarger used, and, if and when you do,
they're seldom much of a bargain. They're in high demand and not common on
the used market. When I sold one a few years ago I was inundated with offers
that kept coming in until well after the unit was sold.
> I'd love to print some of my 4 X 5 negs.
That's the problem. Enlargers that are best for 4x5 are usable for 35mm, but
seldom optimal.
> With the right lens and lens board can this enlarger be used for 35 mm
> and 6 x6 as well?
Pretty much. I've never found that 6x6 needs a half-glass carrier, since the
film stays flat without it; the stock carriers work fine. But for 35mm, you
really need a half-glass carrier.
I can tell you how to modify a half-glass carrier for 35mm for the 4500II,
but it's a bit of work. First, you take a regular glassless 35mm carrier.
Unscrew the bottom half. File out the opening until it will give you the
full frame, assuming you want that (I recommend it, if for no other reason
than so you can see the entire negative on proof prints). Smooth down the
burrs using wet emory paper. Next, using a high-speed drill with a metal
bit, drill out the four pins that are guides for the 35mm strip. Cover the
holes with tape. Finally, take the top half of a 4x5 glass carrier and
attach it.
Unfortunately, the carrier will cost about $150 total and you'll still need
a carrier for 4x5, but that's the best way to use the big Saunders for 35mm.
The medium-format Dursts and Saunders can be configured with 35mm half-glass
carriers from stock parts at less cost.
BTW, if money's an issue and you want to print 4x5, the best bargain in an
enlarging lens is a gray market 135mm El-Nikkor for c. $325. (As a high-road
option, I think the 150mm Componon-S ($511) and Rodagon ($460) are virtually
as good as the much more expensive Apo-componon-HM ($880) and Apo-Rodagon
($1,190) for B&W.) If $325 isn't cheap enough, I'll share a little-known
secret: In the '70s and '80s, Omega marketed a line of lenses called the
Omicron-El. These were rebadged El-Nikkors. If you keep alert for a 135mm
Omicron-El, it will probably sell for less than $100, and also less than
half of a what a similar-vintage, similar-condition used El-Nikkor would go
for. There is generally much less difference in performance between
different brands and vintages of 4x5 lenses than there is among enlarging
lenses for smaller formats, so you're generally safer going with older or
less well known lenses (although it still helps to know what you're doing).
Big blanket statement coming up:
I really think that if you're serious about darkroom craftsmanship, a
one-time investment in a really good enlarger and enlarger lens will repay
you constantly over years of printing. What really costs you are the hours
of your life you spend interpreting your own negatives. I've used literally
hundreds of enlargers of dozens of different makes and model; I've made my
living as a custom B&W exhibition printer; and I've managed professional and
school darkrooms (although that's been a while now). Believe me, a fine
enlarger that's convenient and pleasurable to use is a constant advantage,
and a badly set-up, poorly-performing enlarger and/or lens is a constant
annoyance--and, in terms of the potential quality of your results, can be
like running a footrace in shackles. A good enlarger will no more guarantee
you fine prints than a good camera will guarantee fine pictures, but,
without one, your prints are not likely to ever be really great.
I guess I've gone on long enough here. Sorry for taking up all this
bandwidth.
--Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
