cargosteve

Got it, thank you!

The bulb in my Omega Super Chromega Dichroic II just burned out. It was a 22.5v 250w Bulb, part 471-029. I have a 30v 80w bulb that I could use to replace it, but I wanted to know if there would be any ill-effects to the enlarger if I use the incorrect replacement bulb. Thanks in advance.

I’ve been overexposing tmax 100 by one stop and pulling by one stop in hopes that the negative would be flatter, less latitude in terms of contrast and easier to print (been doing the same with HP5+, usually with similar results). When I compare negatives shot at box speed and pulled 1 stop (same scenes exactly), I don’t notice a visual difference between the negatives. Is this a situation where the paper I print on will reflect the differences even if I can’t see them in the negatives, or is it usually pretty obvious in the negative that pulling gave less contrast?

5 hours ago, Jochen1664876637 said:

Is your building antique and your ceiling higher? Are you planning giant prints on irregular paper stock?

Wouldn't say antique, I'm working out of the bathroom in my apartment but I've got decent space in there. Hoping to print up to 20x24" with this enlarger. Not sure if that qualifies as irregular paper stock.

3 hours ago, AJG said:

It was possible to rotate the enlarger column and project on the floor for larger prints with lots of counterweight on the baseboard.

Interesting, didn't realize the unit could do that. Might open up a whole lot more possibilities!

Thank you both!

Anyone know the maximum printing size for 4x5 you can make with this enlarger? (Either with 135mm or 150mm)

Thank you all for your help! 
 

On 10/19/2022 at 8:59 PM, randy_boren1 said:

The 80mm lens is designed for the 6x6 format, while it can be used with little problem for the 6x7 format, it won't be optimum. The 105mm lens is designed for the 6x9 format, you will have better image quality with the 105mm at 20x24 size enlargement. The OP will have to check to see if the 105 will actually enlarge to 20x24 with his version of the enlarger, it should, but it may be close.

Ok this is good to know. I checked and it seems like I won’t be able to print quite 20x24 with the 105 on my current enlarger.

Thanks conrad_huffman! I was thinking of investing in the versalab laser alignment tool, but maybe I’ll try the mirror trick you mention. Sounds cheaper.

On 10/20/2022 at 5:14 PM, Jochen1664876637 said:

f45?!? - Diffraction alert. 

20x24" from 6x7 seems more enlargement than 8x10" from 35mm. 

I wasn't happy with HP5 135 for landscapes. If you love that film, maybe scale up your camera or viewing distance, for those posters you are planning to print.

I worried initially the images wouldn’t be usable but they seem pretty sharp to me 🤷‍♂️ Yes, I reckon you’re right that it is a greater enlargement factor, I was curious if better technique would be enough to get better results given the specified conditions. I’ve generally been pleased with HP5, but I’m open to others! Again, I’ll have to try other film stocks and compare side by side.

Thank you all for your input!

8 hours ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Then why are you using 400 ISO films? 

When T-max 100 first came out I was previously shooting FP4, and the difference with T or delta-grain films was like moving up a format size.

Good question, I guess I like the color profile of Pro400h for landscape. As far as HP5 goes, I suppose I like the latitude and find the grain with that specific stock pretty nice for a 400 speed film. I also love the way it pushes and pulls so effortlessly. I'll have to try T-max 100, I can't say I've shot anything on that. Would you say Ilford Delta 100 is pretty comparable to the T-max 100? The Ektar as laurencecochrane mentioned is 100 speed.

16 hours ago, randy_boren1 said:

I would suggest using the 105mm enlarger lens

Is there a particular drawback to using the 80mm lens in this situation? As rodeo_joe1 mentions, the enlarger head would need to be way up there for 20x24 prints.

Thanks again.

I have the Mamiya 645 super and I have had similar issues to what you're describing. Unfortunately I've never figured out why it does this. Like you said it's so sporadic that it's hard to know if it's going to do this or not. I've owned two of the 645 supers and both have had weird issues with strange, inconsistent light leaks and film advance. I'm beginning to suspect the 645s just have problems like this. When these problems are absent however, they are fantastic little cameras!

Hi all! New, here, I've noticed similar versions of this question asked here before, but I wanted to ask for myself with more concrete details including my technique and equipment. I'm curious to know what the maximum enlargement from 6x7 before visible softening becomes an issue. For reference, I've printed 35mm at 5x7 and 8x10 and found the 8x10s very soft compared to the 5x7s. However, the negatives I've tried this with were shot handheld and using a lens that was not particularly sharp. All of the 6x7 negatives I've shot so far (Mamiya RZ67 Pro II) have been on a tripod, mirror locked up, using a shutter release cable, at apertures usually between f/11 and f/45. Ideally, I'd like to make prints up to 20x24 from these negatives, but I don't want the type of softening that I've noticed between 5x7 and 8x10 from handheld 35mm. Subject is landscape, so details are important to me. I've mostly been shooting HP5, Ektar and Pro400h. The enlarger I'm using is a Beseler Dichro 67 head mounted to the rail system from a 23c series model. Enlarger lenses I have for MF are EL-Nikkor 80mm f/5.6 and 105mm f/5.6. I currently don't have an easel large enough for 20x24, but when my darkroom is back up and running I plan on testing on 8x10 paper at the desired enlargement size. In the meantime, I was hoping to get input from this wonderful community! Thank you in advance for your help and input!