Using 8mm movie camera lens in enlarger

[radiant]

I wanted to try enlarging with super magnification from the negative. Got this idea from other thread.

So I bought 6mm f1.9 8mm movie camera lens for testing purpose. My handheld tests didn't produce sharp image almost at any positioning so I started to wonder if using such lens is even possible in enlarger? Should the lens be close or far apart from the negative?

This is the lens in question: https://kamerastore.com/product/other-kinotar-6mm-f1-9/

 

[Donald Qualls]

Both the distance from lens to film and from lens to baseboard must be correct to get proper focus, just as with a camera or conventional enlarging lens.

Generally, with a 6 mm focal length, the rear of the lens will be a little more than 6 mm from the film (because you're focusing closer than infinity). It might be more than that, if it's a retrofocus design (that would only be needed if the camera it's designed for is a reflex type). I'm not sure there are any enlargers (even an Enlahead) that can get that close; you'll probably have to make your own front-mount combination of film carrier and lens mount, in emulation of an Enlahead.

I'd expect a lens made for 8 mm film to be pretty sharp, since the film gets enlarged so much when it's projected on even a pretty small screen. Of course, you'll need to stop down to f/4 or f/5.6 to get enough depth of field to find focus when hand holding the lens, and that dims your projected image quite a bit...

 

[radiant]

Donald, thanks for the reply!

I will 3D print adapter for my enlarger for the Kinotar lens. I also found that the light is pretty dim already so maybe I need to add more power to my LED setup for focusing.

I will report back. I also saw from gallery that @awty had made enlargement on such lens.. Here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/the-last-flight-of-the-concorde.65369/

 

[wiltw]

Are you going to only enlarge a very tiny section of a negative? Remember the size of the image area at the focal plane of 8mm cine film! and don't forget that if you make a 20X enlargement, the GRAIN is 20X as big, too.
I personally had about 17X limit on enlargements of 135 format because the grain size of Tri-X was too obtrusive at that magnification. Results with Panatomic-X would be far better, but emulsion was discontinued a while ago!

 

[Donald Qualls]

CMS20 II ought to be fine enough to enlarge 20x (I've enlarged Copex Rapid to 8x10 from a 10x14 mm negative, that's about 20x -- I was running out of sharpness, but the grain wasn't a problem.

 

[radiant]

Are you going to only enlarge a very tiny section of a negative? Remember the size of the image area at the focal plane of 8mm cine film! and don't forget that if you make a 20X enlargement, the GRAIN is 20X as big, too.

Yes. Grain is good for health. A daily dose of grain keeps computer photography away! And also applications for membership at Grain Lovers Inc. are open.

Seriously this is to have artistic process option, and also for curiosity.

 

[radiant]

I tested 3D printed mount and holy crap that is sensitive to focusing. Also I need to keep the aperture pretty wide open to even see anything. Yes I got photo visible and could focus on the grain now.

I'm totally going to focus this with paper under the grain focuser ..

Thanks again @Donald Qualls - without you I would have probably returned the lens.

 

[Donald Qualls]

You are very welcome, and I'm glad it's going to work for you. I'd be interested in a photo of the setup -- that mount has to be the opposite of a top hat...

 

[radiant]

I quickly modeled Fujimoto lens "board" with hole that fits to the front cylinder of the lens. So the lens is dropped to this mount and the lens back element can actually touch the negative this way. How to stop the lens from falling through? With a rubber band around the lens

The lens looks like this:

 

[Donald Qualls]

Nice. 10-15 minutes CAD, an hour or so to print, and good to go! I may have to do something similar to project 16mm negatives from my D2 -- the Enlahead I have (even if I can find it) has a pretty bad lens, but I can probably get C-mount video lenses or 16mm cine lenses at reasonable cost -- and I do have a 3D printer now.

 

[Jim Jones]

Microfiche lenses may be cheaper than movie camera lenses for extreme enlargements. However, they usually lack variable apertures.

 

[radiant]

Microfiche lenses may be cheaper than movie camera lenses for extreme enlargements. However, they usually lack variable apertures.

That Kinotar lens cost 39 euros (47 dollars) which I think is pretty cheap considering that is has been made in Japan and came in pretty nice box too.

edit: I don't know anything about lenses but I think just Japan and nice box is enough to convince me that it is good. And it is heavy for such small object. Probably glass & metal?

 

[ic-racer]

I have a bunch of 8mm format lenses. Maybe I'll try this too. My short focal length ones (5.5mm) are retrofocus. The Flange Focal distance is 12.29 mm for all of them.

To mount them I might try to grab them in an iris mount made from an old enlarging lens barrel.

 

[awty]

These are way cool, the magnification is ginormous.
Some things of note, you need to be able to get the rear of lens within a millimeter of the film.
yes you need to focus with the paper, just a smidge your out.
Need a strong light source my 150 watt bulb barely cuts it, need to cram a 250 or higher into the light box.
A slightly dense neg and your into the 4 minute exposure range, slightly thin is better.
You need to hold the film between glass, anti what ever it is on top
Biggest pain is getting something the size of a pin head in the center of the film carrier, it pays to be able to move it slightly to line it up.

I'll post some examples of prints later.

 

[ic-racer]

D-mount 8mm lenses (12.29 flange focal distance) focus at infinity leaving about one CENTIMETER of space for the shutter.

 

[warden]

How to stop the lens from falling through? With a rubber band around the lens

l like how you think!

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

The film-lens distance is critical when focusing with a short focal length lens. The lens-paper distance isn't, as I think the whole "Do I put paper under my grain magnifier" thread has proven.

You might find it best to first focus the lens as best you can and then do the final focusing by moving the enlarger head up and down.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

Note to self: set up some mirrors for the 540mm barrel lens

 

[radiant]

You need to hold the film between glass, anti what ever it is on top
Biggest pain is getting something the size of a pin head in the center of the film carrier, it pays to be able to move it slightly to line it up.

Glass is needed to negative hold straight? Have you found out that the curl at the enlarging area of the film can make it out of focus? I would assume the bending is not that big on such small area.

The film-lens distance is critical when focusing with a short focal length lens. The lens-paper distance isn't, as I think the whole "Do I put paper under my grain magnifier" thread has proven.

Ok, good to know.

 

[radiant]

First test:

8x10" paper

 

[Donald Qualls]

Now that's grain!

 

[radiant]

Now that's grain!

Me likey likey, the grain!

I know this is trivial question for Grain Lovers Inc. members - but rest of you, which film & grain type are we enjoying here?

 

[Donald Qualls]

I don't have that much experience printing different films this big, or grain-peeping in general (can't scan to this resolution anyway).

 

[radiant]

If anyone is wondering what the full frame looks like, here is scan from the negative without cropping:

 

[ic-racer]

For comparison this is Minox which would have a film area about twice as big and grain in the print about half the size. (lith print)