My Sinar F 4x5 + Canon 20d digital back

I misspelled the title. It should be Sinar F, not sinara
I recently tired of shooting fixed lens. I am unable to afford a Sinar digital back but am addicted to the freedom of expression that the monorail view camera gives.
Therefore I fabricated an adapter so that I am able to use the digital camera as a digital back for my Sinar.
The quality of images that I am able to generate this way is amazing.
I am using a Rodenstock 180/550 convertable lens on a Copal 1 shutter.
For those who like large format but have financial restrictions this may be a solution
The first picture is the adapter. The second is an image created using this setup
By the way the image size is 6" x 9"
'
Attachment 73773
Attachment 73774

I fixed the thread title.

How did you make the back please ?

Aye. I am curious how you solved focusing with movements?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken Lee

How did you make the back please ?

---

1. Materials needed: Hacksaw, macro adapter, wood, paint, glue.
2. Using the hacksaw, cut off the part of the macro adapter that doesn't connect to the SLR body.
3. Cut the wood to the dimensions of a 4x5 holder, and take some off the sides so the Graflok slides will hold the wood.
4. Cut a hole in the wood for the macro adapter.
5. Glue the macro adapter into the wood.
6. Paint the wood black.
7. Attach the SLR and go forth and photograph.

Added: these have been made "commercially" for the Pentax 6x7 and a number of other SLRs. If your SLR has an "overhang" above the lens mount then you'll need to get a longer macro adapter.

I have a commercial one from Fotodiox with a sliding mechanism and Canon EF mount.

There are cheap Chinese ones that slide to take 6 photos on eBay.
I have yet to play w/mine...

How many photos you can actually take depends on the focal length and subject distance, since you'll get some vignetting from the barrel of the adapter and the mirror box. If you use a short lens and slide with the back and use rise/fall movements, you can take at least a square of four or six overlapping frames with a full-frame DSLR (maybe 48 mm square, minimum), I've found, and more with longer lenses.

To shoot this way, I find it's best to compose and focus on the groundglass using only the available image area (so you may mark off the usable frame area on the glass or make a mental note of the borders, if you have grid marks), but then move the rear standard closer and refocus using the DSLR. Tilt/shift movements shouldn't change. You also need a consistent light source, or if you want to shoot with available light, you've got to work quickly to avoid slight shifts in exposure.

Can anyone provide a link to one of these images at more substantial size, or post some larger images here ?

Sliding and stitching aside, I'd like to see what I could get in one image, with my 600mm APO Nikkor. Depending on sensor size, the equivalent "magnification" should be rather large.

Example==
After I tilt I focus with the fine focusing tool on the Sinar.
I leave the lens open at the correct aperature and the exposure time is controlled by the 20d.

I took the connecter ring off an old lens. I cut a board from thin plywood. I cut a hole in the plywood. I mounted the ring on the plywood. I sealed the ring with thick water based enamel. I sanded a groove to allow the 20d to mount. I then mounted it on the Sinar where you would normally mount the ground glass.
Due to the difference in focal lengths there are some restrictions but I am able to use the 20d effectivily as a digital back.
I hope this answers your questions.
By the first of June I will try to post detailled instructions on my blog.
Goto hiddenhousestudio.com and select "check out my blog"
I am new to this forum so I apologize for any mistakes.
Today is thurs 05-17-12.
I will check back on Saturday and try to answer any other questions you may have.
Remember KEEP SHOOTING

Ken Lee asked:

Can anyone provide a link to one of these images at more substantial size, or post some larger images here ?

Sliding and stitching aside, I'd like to see what I could get in one image, with my 600mm APO Nikkor. Depending on sensor size, the equivalent "magnification" should be rather large.


Here's an example I've posted before with a long lens, but the goal isn't super-high resolution really. The lens is a Verito, and the objective was more about making use of the visual qualities of the lens by using the sliding back and the stitching technique--

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidag...57611396218001

Since I got my 5DII, I haven't really needed the kind of resolution I could get by stitching images from a sliding back on a view camera. Maybe the largest image where I might have used such a technique was a still life that ran a half page tabloid sized on paper that was a bit smoother and whiter than newsprint, and a 21 megapixel image was more than enough for that usage.

I have some still life test shots, too large to post here to show anything meaningful, from when I had a 40D with an APS-C sized sensor, and I could make a still life of around 9000x10500 pixels with a lens like the Zeiss 135/3.5 Planar, stitching 24 images. Shots with tilt or shift are likely to have some color fringing that may be reduced in Photoshop, but that probably depends in part on the lens. Here's a JPEG, half size, which makes about a 9Mb file.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/46160586/Ras...0D%2C50%25.jpg

A full sized 16-bit TIFF is about 100Mb.

Going back and reading your question, I realize you were just asking for an example of a single image, rather than a stitched image with a long lens. That would be no different, really, from an image with a lens of the same focal length made for a 35mm camera or DSLR (though the dedicated SLR lens would likely be faster and of higher quality for the format), and since I have long lenses for Canon, I wouldn't take the trouble to set up a view camera for that purpose.

I have not forgotten my promise for more information.
I apologyze I have been very busy.
I will try to get this done in a couple of days

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb

I have some still life test shots, too large to post here to show anything meaningful, from when I had a 40D with an APS-C sized sensor, and I could make a still life of around 9000x10500 pixels with a lens like the Zeiss 135/3.5 Planar, stitching 24 images. Shots with tilt or shift are likely to have some color fringing that may be reduced in Photoshop, but that probably depends in part on the lens. Here's a JPEG, half size, which makes about a 9Mb file.

---

I'm not sure that I can see too many advantages to using a DSLR on a view camera, compared to using a DSLR with a panorama head. It might be easier to list the disadvantages; on the board I have, for a Nikon on an Arca, I'm limited to using lenses longer than 90mm, at least, I can't focus a 90 at infinity. A 150 works ok; I haven't tested with anything in between.

Using a lens in the shorter focal length range, it's difficult to see the image in the camera since it's way off axis for everything but the central frame. This has an effect on the image on the sensor too, that fringing you mentioned, caused by the oblique incidence of the light on the sensor. This will improve with increasing focal length, of course.

Your angle of view is limited too, I haven't tested for maximum width, it seems like there's little point. As you also mentioned, it does seem more suitable for longer shots.

In addition, carrying a view camera and a DSLR kit is a not insignificant load, if I decided to take out a big camera, I'd much prefer to expose a sheet of film.

Stitching multiple frames from a DSLR can produce fantastic results, but it can be done without the extra load of a view camera. Using a panorama head, the width of your shot is only limited by your choice of perspective, which can be projected in different ways- determined, to a large extent, by your subject matter. There's no need to use slower lenses, you can use quite fast lenses optimized for the sensor. The panorama head, while not insubstantial, is nowhere near the weight or bulk of a view camera, never mind the extra lenses that would be needed.

Stitching has to be performed whatever capture method you use- and it's simply a matter of selecting a projection setting appropriate to your equipment selection.

I think that planar stitching has its place, but I think it's more suited to digital backs, and not the more deeply recessed DSLR sensor.

I've stitched frames from a DSLR attached to a view camera, and rotated on a pano head, and in my opinion, the latter method is far superior...

Of course, on the downside, you lose the ability to use a preselected fixed tilt with the latter method- and I like the picture of the tree in your first post, so it's not that it's not without its benefits-

It's true that the sliding DSLR adapter is a very specialized tool, but it depends what you're shooting.

If you want to shoot still life, the movements of a view camera are more flexible than a TS lens (for which 90mm is usually the most appropriate with a full-frame sensor), not to mention that you get a bigger image canvas with a stitched image, and you can compose on the groundglass for the exposure area you're using, apply movements, etc., attach the back, refocus, shoot your multiple panels and stitch. On a studio camera like a Sinar P, this is easy to do.

I can see a pano head for landscapes and panoramic interiors, but not really for still life. Then again, I have 24mm and 45mm TS lenses, and I can stitch with the shift movements to create wide panos for landscape subjects (if I wanted to shoot them digitally, which I usually wouldn't) that stitch easily. I also do sometimes use the 45mm for still life, where I don't need the resolution of the view camera stitched image, and the perspective of the 45mm lens doesn't introduce a feeling of distortion. I don't know, maybe if Canon comes up with a "II" version of their 90mm TS lens with the full movements of their newer TS lenses, that will be good enough, and it will be one less use for my sliding back. Then again, maybe it will be comparable in price to a 90mm Digaron-W or comparable Digitar, and that will still have an edge over the TS lens, and probably can shoot some wicked sharp 6x7 on film.

In the other example, my goal is to get a larger image canvas for use with a historic soft focus lens by sliding and stitching--another application where a pano head isn't relevant.

Attachment 74188
Here is the Sinar And the 20d
I would have put this up sooner but I have been quite busy.
Since I only have 1 digital camera I had to make an image of it and PS it to the sinar.
This is exactly how it looks.
The picture capture size is actually 6"x9"x350dpi.
I use this setup everyday and it works for me.

That looks naughty. Any pics of the hybrid offspring? :p

Attachment 74189
Here is an offspring
Shot raw
Converted to jpg

I see people running all over the forrest. My point and my only point was that I am able to use the 20d as a digital back on the Sinar F.
I use all of the shifts and tilts and rises and falls.
I readily admit that there are some physical restrictions. However the benefits of being able to shoot with the monorail view camera when I could not otherwise afford to buy and process film far outway some minor annoyances or restrictions.