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

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Steve,

 

Eureka !

 

After trying combinaisons of rings of what I have.

I've found what you can use now with what you have if you accept "only 12 Mpix" file (good enough for negative for me, see grain of film).

 

Just try without ring C.

 

M240 + Beoon + B + D + EL-Nikkor N 2.8/50 and 1:1 mask.

Negative under the mask and I focus with small margin but with large waste of field.

 

In PP if only negativ surface keeping, remain about 12 Mpix of 24 M.

You can try that to begin with what you have now.

Thanks a.noctilux, yes I tried this myself at the weekend, but as you say there's quite a bit of wasted digital capture. It should work ok for web sharing and good for showing the film gate with a bespoke negative holder.

I became a little frustrated in the end and replaced the Nikkor with the 50 lux that I have, and of course this produced a perfect 1:1 reproduction but I suspect an enlarger lens should do better. Reeray has just added his experience with the Componon S, which sounds positive.

[Avatar]

This is a good idea to have this thread and helpful to new owners of the Beoon.

 

I am using an M246 and a Rodogon 50mm 2.8. It works fine but today I received a Componon-S. Both lenses are pre owned, which might effect results. I have not done any form of exhaustive testing, as for my purposes, the Beoon with either lense gives a very good result. I am using B,C & D tubes.

 

For the more important images, I will take the time and scan them on an Epson 850 which in my opinion offers a better result.

 

My initial feeling is that the Componon S does a better job than the Rodogon but again, these are not new examples and YMMV.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Steve Ricoh]

This is a good idea to have this thread and helpful to new owners of the Beoon.

 

I am using an M246 and a Rodogon 50mm 2.8. It works fine but today I received a Componon-S. Both lenses are pre owned, which might effect results. I have not done any form of exhaustive testing, as for my purposes, the Beoon with either lense gives a very good result. I am using B,C & D tubes.

 

For the more important images, I will take the time and scan them on an Epson 850 which in my opinion offers a better result.

 

My initial feeling is that the Componon S does a better job than the Rodogon but again, these are not new examples and YMMV.

That's positive about the Componon-S. Reeray wrote earlier (you've probably read it yourself) that there was adequate adjustment either side of critical focus, meaning the copy stand doesn't bottom prematurely. Is it possible to quantify how much adjustment there is when defocusing on the short side? It would be helpful to get an idea, although it's possible that not all lenses of the same model are exactly equal.

[Avatar]

Is there anyone with experience of using the Shneider Componon-S 50 f/2.8 on the BEOON, and if so how much column adjustment remains once critical focus is nailed. In my mind it's important to be able defocus either side of critical focus - running out of column adjustment to make the assembly shorter is a non-starter.

 

Got it today and it is better than the Rodogon 2.8 50mm. But as I posted earlier it should be noted the Rodogon is preowned, the Compnon-S is also but as new. It seems clearly better in my system. And more room for column movement for fine tuning as well.

[Steve Ricoh]

Just tried the Schneider Componon S 50 f2.8 with B,C+D tubes on a BEOON mounted M240.

 

I'm afraid the results are not very good; can just about focus 1:1 at minimum BEOON column height, but as the column is at minimum height there's no further adjustment to check for critical focus, ie to be able to defocus at the short column end.

 

Can't figure this, other than tolerance build-up in the various components.

 

Any ideas anyone?

Edited September 26, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Avatar]

Just tried the Schneider Componon S 50 f2.8 with B,C+D tubes on a BEOON mounted M240.

 

I'm afraid the results are not very good; can just about focus 1:1 at minimum BEOON column height, but as the column is at minimum height there's no further adjustment to check for critical focus, ie to be able to defocus at the short column end.

 

Can't figure this, other than tolerance build-up in the various components.

 

Any ideas anyone?

 

I don't have the Beoon at my place right now but I think i had the same tubes (with same lense) and finally I had some range of focus. When I see it again, I'll check to confirm.

 

Not to be a negative or stir this pot but as you've read the results of my experience, that with 35mm Tri-Ex, the Epson in my opinion substantially was superior. I never digitized any color film or slides so I can't speak to that.

Edited September 27, 2017 by Avatar

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just tried the Schneider Componon S 50 f2.8 with B,C+D tubes on a BEOON mounted M240.

 

I'm afraid the results are not very good; can just about focus 1:1 at minimum BEOON column height, but as the column is at minimum height there's no further adjustment to check for critical focus, ie to be able to defocus at the short column end.

 

Can't figure this, other than tolerance build-up in the various components.

 

Any ideas anyone?

The BEOON has recently been discussed in several threads. In one of those I could show that the exact focal length of the lens is critical. Lenses with focal lengths of about 51.6mm will work, those with 50.1mm will not, on account of the column being too tall. Besides, for 1:1 work you use rings A+D as engraved on the BEOON's  base.

[Reeray]

@Pop. The A ring is the m39 - M mount adapter and not used with the Componon which is an m39 screw thread unless that also carries the M mount adapter. Using the Componon with such an adapter may well resolve Steves problem, but this is only a guess as I use APS-C myself.

[pop]

@Pop. The A ring is the m39 - M mount adapter and not used with the Componon which is an m39 screw thread unless that also carries the M mount adapter. Using the Componon with such an adapter may well resolve Steves problem, but this is only a guess as I use APS-C myself.

Ah - I did not notice that an enlarger lens was mentioned. Makes things a bit complicated as both the flange distance and the focal length determine the extension required. 

 

This thread and this post in particular might be relevant to the question: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/276151-beoon-advice-please-functional-checks-prior-to-purchase/page-7?do=findComment&comment=3355987

[Steve Ricoh]

Ah - I did not notice that an enlarger lens was mentioned. Makes things a bit complicated as both the flange distance and the focal length determine the extension required.

 

This thread and this post in particular might be relevant to the question: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/276151-beoon-advice-please-functional-checks-prior-to-purchase/page-7?do=findComment&comment=3355987

Thanks Pop, yes I've contributed in all three BEOON threads, but I posted my experience with the Componon S 50mm f2.8 here since this is the thread (that I started) discussing ENLARGER lenses on BEOONs. To my shock and horror I'm finding extremely marginal performance with the Componon S in terms of BEOON focus adjustment, and only purchased having read good reports from others.

 

I can only conclude that all Componon S 50mm Enlarger lenses are not equal, and quite possibly not all BEOON copy stands are equal. Everything is made to a tolerance.

 

@Pop, I'm wondering if there is a combination of extension tube (lengths) that would resolve my problem, but this has to be an empirical issue due to the unknowns, so I think it's a case of 'trial and error'. I have at my disposal the BEOON tubes (obviously) and some eBay cast offs: a ROOYH 16615 at 26mm, and the following: 4mm, 16mm and 25mm. What do you think would be a good starting point to try (there are 128-1 possible combinations). I'd hate to have gone so far and give up on the BEOON, but at the minute it's looking like an expensive mistake.

Edited September 27, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Reeray]

@Steve

 

Here's my Beoon set up with the Componon 50mm F2.8 S, M240, Beoon tubes B C D, and as you can see I:I on the column with room for more adjustment if needed. I can confirm sharp focus with this setup.

 

[Steve Ricoh]

@Reeray, or anyone else reading, how on earth can the exact same set up that I'm using result in a totally different outcome. I have absolutely no adjustment remaining at minimum focus, and as such I cannot confirm critical focus. I can only think there's a wide tolerance on the Componon S 50mm. It's less likely to be the tube lengths or the BEOON, as I would imagine they were manufactured to sub-mm accuracy.

[Reeray]

Steve

 

One thing I did notice was that on some of the tubes the Componon did not seat flat which, of course, would effect focus distance.

 

Maybe ..... ?

[Steve Ricoh]

Steve

One thing I did notice was that on some of the tubes the Componon did not seat flat which, of course, would effect focus distance.

Maybe ..... ?

Just checked the fit of the Componon S 50 f/2.8 with each of the BEOON tubes.

 

In all cases, when I've hand tightening the lens to each of the tubes I can just about push a finger nail between the rear of the lens and the base of the tubes. On inspection I can see why. The threaded section of the lens terminates on a step, an inner concentric ring to the outer body of the lens, hence the ability to insert a finger nail between the base of the lens and the extension tubes, and the inability of the lens to bottom completely when looking superficially.

 

I estimate the step to which I'm referring to be approx 0.5 to 0.75mm. Is this normal, can someone with a Componon 50mm f/2.8 check for me.

Many thanks,

Steve

Edited September 27, 2017 by Steve Ricoh

[Reeray]

Steve - agreed with your findings.

 

Let's take a look at other possible variations.

 

Fitting the lens to tubes B,C and D I have a total length from the collar of the first tube to the tip of the lens of exactly 90mm

 

When fitting the three tubes and lens to the Beoon column and 1:1 critical focus set (as per my above image) I have a distance of 80mm from the tip of the lens to the film base. This may vary slightly with some film being thicker than others. With the Beoon column collapsed to its minimum height I have 73mm. Therefore 7mm of adjustment. Removing all I have a minimum Beoon height of 153mm from the collar to the film base. The lens is 29mm from its collar to the end. The final distance is that of the top fixing where the camera is mounted. With the M39-M adapter fitted I have 12mm.

 

In all the above measurements I've excluded the thread length.

 

Assuming all your measurements agree, the only other variation is camera sensor/flange measurement I suppose but this is above my head.

 

Hope this helps

Edited September 28, 2017 by Reeray

[Steve Ricoh]

Thank for your helping like this Ray, much appreciated. I'll check the dimensions later on.

[pop]

Using enlarger lenses with the BEOON presents a number of difficulties:

1. The actual focal length of the lens might be unknown,
2. The position of the optical plane with respect to the lens mount might be unknown,
3. The lens does not have a helicoid and thus can not be used with extensions other than those provided by the extension rings or tubes.

I performed a simple test for all of my LTM lenses with a nominal focal length of 50mm:

1. Mount the lens directly on the BEOON, without any of the extension rings, leaving the lens set to infinity.
2. Mount the digital M on the BEOON.
3. Attach the M with the BEOON and the lens to a copy stand. The BEOON's base plate may be removed as it will interfere with seeing the base of the copy stand.
4. Take a photograph of a ruler lying on the base board of the copy stand.
5. Determine the height of the image plane (the sensor) above the copy stand base.
6. Determine the visible length the part of the ruler photographed.

From the length of the part of the ruler captured on the sensor and from the height of the sensor above the copy stand base you can determine:

• The distance from the ruler to the optical plane of the lens
• The distance from the optical plane of the lens to the sensor
• The focal length of the lens

These, in turn, enable you to determine the length of the extension required to copy a slide at a given scale.

 

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!

 

 

 

The lens shown is a 1:2.0 50mm Summitar. The image of the ruler has been taken with a fully open  elderly 1:3.5 50mm Elmar (S/N 244 734). The sharpness from edge to edge is impressive.

 

The thickness of the BEOON without any rings, BTW, seems to be 8mm. The measurements and calculations confirmed the actual focal lengths and the thickness of the BEOON at an accuracy of about 2.5%, which is not bad, considering the setup I used.

 

The procedure could be used to provide the data needed for using an enlarger lens with the BEOON.

[Avatar]

^ 

 

Pop is the best.

Edited September 30, 2017 by Avatar

[Steve Ricoh]

Thanks Pop, most helpful of you and I agree with Avatar's comment above.

 

The only copy stand available to me is the BEOON itself, so I'm not in a position to replicate your experiment. However, I still have measurements to perform (as per Reeray's helpful post above) before I kick the enlarger lens option into deep water (actually I have two, a Nikkor and a Componon S, so one lens for each foot). My fall back situation is the 50 Summilux ASPH at infinity and f11.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pop]

...I'm not in a position to replicate your experiment. ...

Thanks for the compliment, guys.

 

You could mount the enlarger lens on the BEOON as I described above and try to see if you manage to get any picture at all, and how far anything must be from your camera to produce a nice sharp picture. 

 

Place your camera on a tripod and measure the distance from the back of your camera to that object with a tape. If - as I suspect - the lens is too close to the sensor, the distance from camera to object will be a good deal greater than the distance I measured with my simple experiment.

 

On the other hand, you could do without the BEOON for that measurement and simply mount the lens and some of the extension tubes with an LTM-to-M adapter to your camera. Again, measure the distance from the sensor plane to the object being photographed and measure the length of the part of the object that's visible in the image. For a distance of more than about one meter, you can simply measure the distance from the back of your camera to the object.