BEOON - enlarger lenses to avoid / recommended (Open thread - please add your experience for benefit of others)

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Componon S 50mm Tubes C + 16.4 + 26 = 59.54mm Negative cropped, BEOON column close to minimum but with a small amount of adjustment remaining.

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes C+16.4+26=59.54 (#7) by -Steve Ricoh-

[Steve Ricoh]

Componon S 50mm Tubes C + 26 = 43.14mm Negative not filling frame, BEOON column above 1:1 marking but approx 4mm adjustment prior to hitting bottom

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes C+126 = 43.14 (#15) by -Steve Ricoh-

[Steve Ricoh]

Componon S 50 Tubes B + C + 16.4 +5 = 47.34mm Negative doesn't fill frame, BEOON above silver scale, some 4 to 5mm of adjustment before bottoming

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes B+C+16.4+5 =47.34 (#31) by -Steve Ricoh-

 

Without negative carrier:

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes B+C+16.4+5 =47.34 (#35) by -Steve Ricoh-

Edited October 4, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Steve Ricoh]

Companion S 50mm Tubes C+D = 51.54 negative carrier sitting on top of 6mm glass which itself was sitting on top of he BEOON base plate. Negative nearly fills frame. BEOON column at 1.15 mark

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes C+D =51.54 negative on 6mm glass (#39) by -Steve Ricoh-

[Guest JMF]

Componon S 50 Tubes B + C + 16.4 +5 = 47.34mm Negative doesn't fill frame, BEOON above silver scale, some 4 to 5mm of adjustment before bottoming

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes B+C+16.4+5 =47.34 (#31) by -Steve Ricoh-

 

Without negative carrier:

 

Comp S 50-f2.8 Tubes B+C+16.4+5 =47.34 (#35) by -Steve Ricoh-

 

 

Which kind of negative carrier are you using? I need to figure one out myself .

[Steve Ricoh]

All taken with the BEOON 1:1 mask. I'm posting the results to demonstrate the difficult I'm having with the Schneider Componon S 50 f/2.8, although other BEOON users have more success. Pop asked me to provide test images.

 

I'm hoping someone will come up with a strategy allowing successful 1:1 with the Componon. I've also have an El-Nikor 50 f/2.8, but the results with this lens are marginally worse.

 

Edit: I also took one or two shots without the BEOON mask to help quantify the amount of negative visible. I did this simply by taping the negative to the 6mm sheet of glass I mentioned above.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...I could not use the 3 rings with the Focotar-2 lens, did try, no success.

 

"Just replaced the SL by the Leica MM ccd", I am  using 2 rings for a total ring length of 47mm which fits the 24x36 slide nicely..

 

Surprising considering that the BEOONs are all made to the same dimensions and I doubt that the focal length of Focotar-2 50mm lenses would vary enough to make a difference: a couple of people on the RFF BEOON thread have stated that they get correct framing and focus with full-frame digital-M cameras and the Focotar-2 50mm and the 1:1 mask by using the B+C+D rings. I wonder what the reason could be that this didn't work for you.

[Steve Ricoh]

No Steve,

I could not use the 3 rings with the Focotar-2 lens, did try, no success.

 

"Just replaced the SL by the Leica MM ccd", I am using 2 rings for a total ring length of 47mm which fits the 24x36 slide nicely..

 

D + B (= 43mm) would work as well with space around the "digitized" slide.

 

Just managed to digitize 6x6 slides with the Beoon using the 60 R Elmarit with A + B rings and the SL 601.

This is most interesting JMF. Many have reported success with the Focotar-2 attatched to tubes B+C+D. It indicates to me that the nodal point of enlarger lenses of the same make and model are not equal, ie there's variation from one copy of the lens to another. It's pot-luck whether one gets a copy that will will work with the BEOON. Edited October 4, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Guest Nowhereman]

Steve - In post #52 Pop stated that the B ring is 8.5mm. I don't think that the focal length on the Focotar-2 50mm lenses could vary by more than 8.5mm, so that for some lenses one would need only the C+D rings rather than the B+C+D rings.

[Steve Ricoh]

Mitch - if I follow correctly the simple lens equations that Pop posted earlier, a difference of 2mm in the lens nodal point would account for the inconsistency. (For the special case of 1:1 reproduction.)

Edited October 4, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Steve Ricoh]

If all else fails I could sit the negative on a 6mm sheet of glass which itself is sitting on top of the BEOON base plate. The problem then is to hold the negative flat. The 1:1 BEOON mask could be modified, but I have no wish to destroy it.

Any ideas?

[Steve Ricoh]

I'm looking for a workaround to the problem of using an enlarger lens for 1:1 reproduction using a FF camera such as the M240?

 

My 'experiments' (reported above) show that the negative needs to be elevated closer to the lens to get anywhere close to 1:1, whilst still having adequate BEOON column adjustment.

 

Based on my finding, if I can source a suitable negative carrier (donated from an enlarger) of appropriate dimensions to straddle the BEOON copier base, then it's possible to a) elevate the negative closer to the lens, and b ) hold the negative flat.

 

One example is the Durst 35mm enlarger negative carrier, part # BA62.101, however I'm unable to find the dimensions.

 

Does anyone have a BEOON and an enlarger negative carrier able to check for me - any make would do.

Edited October 5, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Guest JMF]

Steve, 

 

for the moment I am using the negative carrier from the V600 Epson flat scanner to hold my negatives and have the Beoon with its base  flat on top. 

So basically the negative sits under the Beoon base.

[Steve Ricoh]

Jean-Marc,

 

If I understand correctly, you've got the base of the BEOON sitting on top of the negative holder (the V600 film carrier).

 

With my set up, the M240 and with either the 50mm Componon-S or the 50mm El-Nikkor and with tubes B,C+D, I need to lift the negative closer to the lens, not further away. With the negative on top of the BEOON base (using a Plustek neg carrier) focusing is easily achieved with the column around the 1:1 setting. But, and its a big BUT, the set up does not make a quick way of camera scanning; it takes far too much time to adjust the position of the negative carrier and then, having done so, find it moves again as I'm about to take the shot. I've given up on that idea.

 

Everything works fine IF I use the Leica M240 with tubes A+D and the 50mm Summilux that I have.

 

I note the flange to sensor distance of the M is 27.8, whereas the Leica SL is 19mm, but the M-L adapter compensates, so flange length has no bearing on why you manage to use the BEOON sitting on top of the negative carrier. What lens and tubes are you using, and could you kindly post a test shot?

[Guest JMF]

Jean-Marc,

 

 

If I understand correctly, you've got the base of the BEOON sitting on top of the negative holder (the V600 film carrier).

 

With my set up, the M240 and with either the 50mm Componon-S or the 50mm El-Nikkor and with tubes B,C+D, I need to lift the negative closer to the lens, not further away. With the negative on top of the BEOON base (using a Plustek neg carrier) focusing is easily achieved with the column around the 1:1 setting. But, and its a big BUT, the set up does not make a quick way of camera scanning; it takes far too much time to adjust the position of the negative carrier and then, having done so, find it moves again as I'm about to take the shot. I've given up on that idea.

 

Everything works fine IF I use the Leica M240 with tubes A+D and the 50mm Summilux that I have.

 

I note the flange to sensor distance of the M is 27.8, whereas the Leica SL is 19mm, but the M-L adapter compensates, so flange length has no bearing on why you manage to use the BEOON sitting on top of the negative carrier. What lens and tubes are you using, and could you kindly post a test shot?

 

 

Steve, 

 

"If I understand correctly, you've got the base of the BEOON sitting on top of the negative holder (the V600 film carrier)."

 

you understood correctly my set up, I am using tubes B + D + 50 Focotar-2 lens, as mentioned in my post #77 

 

Best regards, JM.

[Steve Ricoh]

Jean-Marc,

With your set up as described, I'd imagine the 'scan' results in a quite a bit of wasted pixels on the M or SL. I can easily replicate your set up and check for myself.

 

BR,

Steve

[Guest JMF]

Jean-Marc,

With your set up as described, I'd imagine the 'scan' results in a quite a bit of wasted pixels on the M or SL. I can easily replicate your set up and check for myself.

 

BR,

Steve

 

 

Steve, 

 

here is the direct scan in a jpg compressed form:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Hardly any wasted pixels here.

 

Best, JM.

[Steve Ricoh]

Thanks Jean-Marc - that's a result for you, albeit a bit of a workaround from the conventional way of using the BEOON. But it works and that's the main thing, and with the weight of the BEOON + camera bearing down it will hold the negative holder in place once set.

 

I don't have a Focotar-2 to play with but I could try using the same tube set-up with the Componon-S and/or Nikkor, both 50mm.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Guest JMF]

Thanks Jean-Marc - that's a result for you, albeit a bit of a workaround from the conventional way of using the BEOON. But it works and that's the main thing, and with the weight of the BEOON + camera bearing down it will hold the negative holder in place once set.

 

I don't have a Focotar-2 to play with but I could try using the same tube set-up with the Componon-S and/or Nikkor, both 50mm.

 

Hi Steve,

 

here a shot of the Beoon stand with the Leitz 50 mm Focotar-2 lens plus tubes B + D at the height I am using it to "scan" my 135 rolls as mentioned  previously :

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Best, Jean-Marc.

Edited October 26, 2017 by JMF

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Steve Ricoh]

Thank Jean-Marc, I pleased for you that you're getting the results the set up deserves.

 

I revisited my own results at various tube lengths (I have spreadsheet for this purpose) and the only option with the Componon-S 50mm is to place the negative carrier on top of the baseplate, but as you can imagine this is not a sensible option since the negative carrier has a tendency to move around. The good news is that the Summilux 50 ASPH works fine on the BEOON offering perfect 1:1 registration, but I'm not to sure about corner sharpness.

 

I'm uncertain whether I'll keep the BEOON, but I definitely have two useless enlarger lenses to sell-on.

 

We live and learn!