Mounting contrast filters for Rodenstock 360mm 6.8

[huntrashmi]

Hello all,

I snagged a rodenstock apo 360mm 6.8 enlarger lens. It comes with a front lens attachment with 6 holes in it. I assume this is for mounting enlarger filters. Is there an attachment to the lens attachment that will let me mount 6inx6in multigrade darkroom filters?

Thanks!

[Duolab123]

Hello all,

I snagged a rodenstock apo 360mm 6.8 enlarger lens. It comes with a front lens attachment with 6 holes in it. I assume this is for mounting enlarger filters. Is there an attachment to the lens attachment that will let me mount 6inx6in multigrade darkroom filters?

Thanks!

I suspect that is a process camera lens. That's an attachment point for a large pointer

[Len Middleton]

Hello all,

I snagged a rodenstock apo 360mm 6.8 enlarger lens. It comes with a front lens attachment with 6 holes in it. I assume this is for mounting enlarger filters. Is there an attachment to the lens attachment that will let me mount 6inx6in multigrade darkroom filters?

Thanks!

Images can greatly help in trying to explain things.

Also listing the full lens name (Apo-Rodagon => enlarging lens versus Apo-Ronar => process lens) can help identify what its original intended use of the lens was...

BTW, welcome to the LFPF,

Len

[Myriophyllum]

Hello all,

I snagged a rodenstock apo 360mm 6.8 enlarger lens. It comes with a front lens attachment with 6 holes in it. I assume this is for mounting enlarger filters. Is there an attachment to the lens attachment that will let me mount 6inx6in multigrade darkroom filters?

Thanks!

Hi and welcome here,

Rodenstock didn't sell an apo 360 mm enlarger lens.
They made repro lenses like the Apo-Rodagon f/6.8 360mm intended to make 1:1 copies...
They usually have a slot for filters close to the iris.

Best
Jens

[tgtaylor]

I believe that those 6 holes are for mounting on a lens board. CatLabs has one for sale on their website. It looks like the front element is threaded so, depending on the diameter, you could use a filter holder like the Cokin Z for field photography.

[Drew Wiley]

Many copy and process lenses make excellent enlarging lenses. At one time, a particular dealer sold a quantity of 180mm Apo Rodagons along with Durst 5X7 enlargers. I have no experience with that specific lens. Bob S., a former Rodenstock representative, claimed they were not as good for enlarging as the standard 180/5.6 Rodagon, which I do own and prize.

But I also have a number of f/9 Apo Nikkor process lenses, including a 360, which is unquestionably better than any official enlarging lens of comparable focal length at that very task. One might argue that, with a max aperture of f/9, it will lead to a slower exposure; but that is not the case at all because it's reaches extreme correction only 1 stop down, at f/11, whereas even the excellent but huge 360/5.6 El Nikkor needs two stops down before it optimizes - so just the same for sake of printing, at f/11. I used both lenses because, frankly, color negs were easier to compose with the wider aperture version, even though I still had to stop down to f/11 for best performance. I had it on a huge custom 8X10 enlarger originally built for printing large Cibachromes. But the f/9 Apo version is smaller and fits the turret on my 8X10 Durst L184, which I mainly use today, at least for 8x10 work.

Then a second inevitable argument comes up, that process lenses are meant to be used only at f/22. Well, that might have been the custom for pre-press color separations, and therefore the setting the spec sheets uses when it relates the specifics. But for enlarging or general photography purposes, many of these lenses will prove far more versatile than that, both in terms of usable aperture and scale of reproduction. Mine are superb all the way from macro to infinity.

The slots on process lenses accepted both internal filter inserts as well as specially shaped Waterhouse stops, in addition to having adjustable round apertures of their own.

[Myriophyllum]

Hi,

it is a bit confusing about the Apo-Rodagon's that some of them like the Apo-Rodagon f/4.8 180mm (and the shorter fl's 50 to 90mm) are enlarging lenses, while the Apo-Rodagon's 240, 300 and 360mm are repro lenses designed for an optimum at 1:1 ratio and f/16 (so the Rodenstock Repro Handbook says).

I have the 180mm Apo-Rodagon and found it superior to the 150 or 210mm Rodagons when enlarging 4x5" to 50x60cm.
The Apo-Rodagon-N f/4 150mm should be even better, but never tested it as I prefer a slightly longer fl...

Best
Jens

[Drew Wiley]

You get some illumination falloff with 4X5 when using the 150 Apo Rodagon N on most enlargers. With the regular 180 Rodagon you don't. The term "apo" has a more specific and generally tighter definition with respect to color separations in the pre-press industry than in the case of ordinary enlarging and taking lenses. I don't have any experience with Rodenstock process lenses, but do have a full set of Apo Nikkor process lenses (the superior symmetrical 4-element style), and if I wanted to, I could even use them on my view cameras all the way from macro to infinity (I have tested some of them). But once a shutter is added, the combination would be more bulky than the options I already use, which are plenty good enough for field photography. So I use certain focal lengths of these mainly for enlarging or other lab work like precision dupes, internegs, color separations, masking applications, etc.

There are past threads where Bob Salomon explained the differences between the 180 Apo Rodagon and the 150 Apo Rodagon N. He considered the 150 N superior for enlarging purposes. But in relation to 4x5, I get perfectly even illumination only by using the big 12X12 colorhead mirror box on my Durst L184 enlarger, and still have to stop down to f/11 to achieve it. But in relation to smaller 6x9 negs, I've used the 150N even wide open with excellent results. Bob didn't factor that kind of issue.