Nikon D700 mounted on Sinar to assert exposure

[Leo Salazar]

Hello,

I came across an accessory to mount a Nikon body on a Sinar F back.

With a 75mm lens on the Sinar, the Nikon D700 will still see about a 120mm LF lens's view and the exposure can be evaluated to decide if to shoot with film.

My main areas of work are very high contrast areas (deserts mainly) and so using this method I cut on set up time and am able to work a lot faster.

I do use help carying the cameras and extra stuff so weight is not an issue for me.

I have noticed that the Nikon exposure system will tend to overexpose more through the Sinar lens than the internal meter indicates if one "just" uses the Nikon meter indication.

Does anybody else have any experience similar to the one I am having?

I do use hand held meters too and for most of my work the Nikon is an amusing accesory, but interesting to be able to pre-see your final shot.

Comments ?

Many thanks !

Leo

[vinny]

you won't see much of the view that the 75mm sees on 4x5 film. put a lens on the nikon and meter with that if you're in too much of a hurry to use a light meter. don't waste your $$ on the accessory.

[domaz]

I think to get an accurate test you should get the Nikon's meter and shutter out of the equation. Put the Nikon on "B", use a spot meter to get a meter reading and then take the picture with the LF's lens shutter. Then you get the exposure exactly as the film would. Whether the Nikon's sensor will have the same characterisitcs of film well that's another story.

[engl]

With a 75mm lens on the Sinar, the Nikon D700 will still see about a 120mm LF lens's view and the exposure can be evaluated to decide if to shoot with film.


If you want the same view as a 120mm lens and 4x5 film, in terms of diagonal field of view, you will need a 32mm lens with your D700.

I use a digital camera as a meter myself. It is very useful once you figure its characteristics. I also use it as a viewfinder. But, I would not look at the LCD of the camera and expect the digital image to be anything like the the image on film in terms of exposure, tone curves and dynamic range works very differently between film and digital.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

One reason your D700 might seem to overexpose relative to film, is that digital sensors do not exhibit reciprocity failure, versus a great many films that do suffer this with exposures of one second or longer.

Either that, or you need to learn how to use the spot meter.
All recent pro and semi pro Nikons have exceptionally good metering.

[rdenney]

From just looking at the devices that adapt DSLR bodies to view camera, it appears to me that they place the sensor plane the depth of the body behind where the ground glass would be. They are apparently intended to be focused using the DSLR finder and focus screen (or by using live view), and make no attempt to provide focus at the same plane as the 4x5 screen. If that is correct, then you'll have to refocus after using the DSLR, which could require a fairly complicate repeat of movement adjustments.

Sounds like a lot of bother to me.

Rick "who might use a DSLR as a meter if it's handy anyway, but not mounted on the view camera" Denney

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Readyload Polaroids having gone by the board might be enough reason to utilize the DSLR one already has to LF (say for instance, to save on film bracketing and or the cost to reshoot cost of blown out film highlights for product or interiors shot with electronic flash).
But for field work an SLR adapter for the back won't have much additional utility-- at least not without geared rises and shifts for stitching.

[Noah A]

This sounds like a very cumbersome solution to me. If I were going to use a digital camera for previewing composition and exposure, I'd probably just use an SLR lens that closely matched my view camera lens in angle of view. (Of course the aspect ratios are different. You could always mask your DSLR's lcd with gaffer tape.)

Fuji's instant film is quite good for proofing, though I use it more as a record of what I've shot and to see how a shoot is progressing rather than to check exposure or composition.

[Leo Salazar]

Many thanks for all who have taken time to answer !
It is sort of an indecent proposal to forfeit your light meter over a dslr... mainly when in general, exposure determination is simple while subject selection and composition are really the aspects that add the most value.
The accessories to mount dslr bodies on view cameras do not intend to place the sensor on the film plane but I doubt that much more than refocusing would be needed if using this method to determine exposure.
The dslr cameras can serve as a "digital polaroid" but only for the part of the image the sensor would see.
Since the "polaroid" would not be of the whole image we have selected on the ground glass, I think this loss makes the exercise less interesting.
Still, I think in some difficult cases, using a dslr camera mounted to see through the view camera's lens to help determine exposure could be of help.
Thank you all, I really agree with all of you said here.
Regards !
Leo

[Corran]

I use my D700 with appropriate lens to help meter. I don't see the point of using the DSLR on the actual view camera.

BUT

I have thought about getting one of these adapters to first use really long lenses on the DSLR and also to use movements on a DSLR, albeit only with normal or longer focal length lenses. But only if the adapter wasn't that much cash.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

With such an adapter, you might also look at the Sinar as a tiltable, swingable, shiftable macro bellows for the D700. Depending on which Sinar model, it might have some real utility for focus-stacking (i.e. shifting focus by moving the back in precisely measurable increments).

[rdenney]

With such an adapter, you might also look at the Sinar as a tiltable, swingable, shiftable macro bellows for the D700. Depending on which Sinar model, it might have some real utility for focus-stacking (i.e. shifting focus by moving the back in precisely measurable increments).

Only with long lenses, though.

The sensor of the camera is still buried behind the mirror box, which means it will be 40-something millimeters behind where the ground glass would be. This is the real deal-killer for me--one would have to significantly refocus when moving from the DSLR body to the sheet film. Thus, it really would not test anything at all except exposure, and even at that it's no better a test than using the DSLR with it's own lens.

Except for the high-dollar digital lenses in short focal lengths, none shorter than probably 90mm are retrofocus enough to focus at infinity. I would rather adapt medium-format shift lenses using a tilting adapter, which I can currently do with 45 and 55mm lenses on my Canon. Or just use tilt with longer lenses.

A DSLR isn't like a digital back for a Hasselblad, which puts the sensor at the normal film plane of the view camera.

And for stitching, I'd be worried that the mirror box would cast a shadow on the sensor, limiting how much shift is possible. That would also be worse with shoter lenses.

Rick "seeing many fatal limitations for most applications" Denney

[Ari]

For years from Jackson to Weston to Kenna photographers have been getting good exposures without doing this. Why not just use the light meter and concentrate on the image rather than the toys? Seems to me most of us would be slowed down going from one to the other and back again in the field.

+1+1+1
I wholeheartedly agree with this. There's enough gear, large and small, to carry around as it is.
Losing sight of your photo, before it's ever taken, is the first casualty when there's too much going on behind the scenes.
Keep it as simple as possible.