[LargeFormat] Not seen very often... 8x10 Enlargers

[Richard Knoppow]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "philip lambert" <philip.lambert@ntlworld.com>
To: <largeformat@f32.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 6:53 AM
Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Not seen very often... 8x10
Enlargers


> If you had a wide angle enlarger lens (if such exist at
8x10) you might
  Because the magnifcatio of the prints will usually be
small the coverage of the lens will be considerably larger
than at infinity focus. At 1:1 the coverage of a lens is
twice that at infinity, i.e. a lens which covers 4x5 will
cover an 8x10. For an 8x10 enlarger about a 10" lens will
do. The only drawback is that the fall off of illumination
will be greater than for a longer lens. Again, since the
fall off varies with field angle, and since field angle will
be reduced as you get closer to 1:1, it may not be
significant although I must say that I routinely burn
corners when making even 8x10 prints using a 135mm lens for
4x5. It seems to me the standard lenses supplied for 8x10
Elwood enlargers were 10" or 10.5"

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com