Nikon 80mm f/5.6 EL-Nikkor: Nippon Kogaku Japan

[enricosavazzi]

2 hours ago, Doug A said:

[...]I finally found a mint 80 from Japan and look forward to using it. Does anyone know why Nikon picked a 32.5mm mounting thread? Every enlarger I've seen uses 39 or M42.

Do you mean the male  lens attachment thread? In this case, you may have bought a lens that lacks the M39 adapter with which it was originally sold. Without this adapter, the lens appears to have a smaller, proprietary rear male thread. The El-Nikkor 105 mm and 135 mm (both in old-style chrome and black barrels) also have a custom rear thread (of different sizes) and were sold complete with custom M39 adapters. See for example http://savazzi.net/photography/enlarger_lenses.htm#elnikkor, figure 1, rightmost lens. If the lens you have only has one chrome-plated knurled ring near its rear mount, the adapter is missing. With the adapter in place, two chrome-plated knurled rings are visible.

 

The 135 mm in particular has such a large rear element and thin retaining flange once the M39 adapter is removed, that it might be possible for the rear lens element to just fall off once the adapter is removed.

[dabateman]

Yes filter thread is 34.5mm. Ulf says there is a hidden 32.5mm thread to mount, but I haven't checked mine. It came as 39mm and I adapted that to m42.

[Andy Perrin]

My rear thread was 39mm, and the front thread was 34.5mm. Does seem like yours is missing something.

[ulf]

12 hours ago, nfoto said:

Oh? I thought the filter thread was 34.5mm. But memory is known to fail me sometimes.

You are correct Birna, the filter thread is 34.5x0.5mm, but he was referring to the second hidden inner mounting thread. That is 32.5x0.5mm

Enrico has all the facts above.

[Doug A]

@enricosavazzithanks for the info and link to your enlarger lens collection. My lens does have the chrome adapter ring. 

 

Strange that Nikon built enlarging lenses that don't directly fit enlargers. Looking forward to using the lens. 

 

Thanks,

Doug A

[lukaszgryglicki]

34.5x0.5mm - I needed to buy a special conversion - 40 EUR.

 

[Lou Jost]

On 1/4/2021 at 3:45 AM, Andrea B. said:

Ulf, I was probably thinking too much of early development/printing/enlargement processes which I only know by history and not experience. In more recent processes, UV light might not have been used as much? So there might indeed be some enlargers which don’t pass too much UV past 400 nm? We will leave it as an open question.

 

The generally held belief is that enlargers are good in the upper UVA range, say 370-400 nm with some few reaching deeper (as you have just shown).

 

I do think it is better to leave out attribution of “discovery” for most lenses, although links to other peoples tests or examples are of course acceptable.

Though this is an old thread, I think we can go a bit farther on this issue. Some enlarger (and normal) lenses are advertised by their manufacturer as "designed for high UV transmission" and also some are advertised as being corrected into the ultraviolet or infrared range. I think it would be very useful to start a list of such lenses, which count more or less as "dedicated UV (or IR) lenses", just with a more limited spectrum than the famous deep-UV lenses. Such a list would include the normal more recent Nikon enlarger lenses (corrected to 380nm), one of the Fujinon lines of enlarger lenses,  and especially the FAX Nikkors (210mm, high UV transmission and corrected to 350nm) and Apo Nikkors (advertised for high UV transmission and correction to 380nm).

 

On the infrared side there are also lenses designed and advertised as being corrected deep into the IR (this is especially important in IR because so much imaging contains both Vis and IR light). These include a couple of Nikon long pre-IF telephotos like their ultra-rare 300mm ED (not IF) lens.

 

It would be useful to add a note about UV or IR color correction in these lens tests.

[Avalon]

There is older el nikkor 80mm 5.6 and newer version of that has multicoating blocking UV more. Can someone show how to identify them?

https://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/2011/02/uv-el-nikkor-85mm-for-uv-old-vs-new.html

[ulf]

Both tested and measured here are both of the olde metal type.

The one in this topic is the oldest of the two.

 

You can see that by the good UV-transmission graphs.

The new type is a plastic black and  shaped like a wide tyre.

 

Such tings are very easy to find out by doing a Google search and look at the images.

Please search for EL-Nikkor 80mm and learn how to find information yourself instead of asking questions.

[photoni]

after a year I understood that the "flare" problem of my 80 mm f 5.6 is caused by internal fogging.
(hoping it's not the concrete between the doublets)
does anyone know how to disassemble it?
Thank you
Tony

[ulf]

 

 

[photoni]

Yes ! it is an opacity similar to that of the video.
Now I have to buy the tools
Thanks @ulf