Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Diagnosing a problem with Kodak Master View front standard

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA, USA
    Posts
    1,414

    Re: Diagnosing a problem with Kodak Master View front standard

    Because of the design of the front, and the tolerance gaps between parts, your #1 and #2 will never perfectly line up - ask any deardorff or Gibellini user. That does not cause the loss of coverage. In fact, nothing does. Are you getting 4 clipped corners or only 1-2 clipped? If you are getting 4 clipped corners with the 240, something else is wrong, if only 1-2, the lens is high/low enough on the rise plane.

  2. #22
    ryanmills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    292

    Re: Diagnosing a problem with Kodak Master View front standard

    I am struggling to find that it was just part of the design. I have not seen any field camera with hash marks that are designed not to be used. Plus I might debate any Deardorff or Gibellini have a +6mm variance in height anywhere. It's just such an odd thing to see on more than one KMV.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA, USA
    Posts
    1,414

    Re: Diagnosing a problem with Kodak Master View front standard

    Quote Originally Posted by ryanmills View Post
    Plus I might debate any Deardorff or Gibellini have a +6mm variance in height anywhere.
    Debate it all you want. Get a V8 or look at photos and let us know when you find one with a prefectly aligned front frame. How does a twist in the front frame change coverage of a lens?

  4. #24
    Sean Mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Dublin. Ireland.
    Posts
    58

    Re: Diagnosing a problem with Kodak Master View front standard

    Quote Originally Posted by ryanmills View Post
    I am struggling to find that it was just part of the design. I have not seen any field camera with hash marks that are designed not to be used. Plus I might debate any Deardorff or Gibellini have a +6mm variance in height anywhere. It's just such an odd thing to see on more than one KMV.
    I doubt it was part of the design. The execution is obviously questionable.

    From the surface texture I would imagine the part into which the index mark is cut is a sand casting. A technique with a wide latitude.

    If the index is not aligned with the pivot it has been filed in the wrong place. The designer and the pattern maker are unlikely to be responsible.

    Handmade things are variable. Especially on Monday mornings and Friday afternoons.

    More than one example of this doesn't make it a design feature.

Similar Threads

  1. Wista 45 SP front standard alignment problem
    By mmo in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-May-2011, 16:43
  2. Master Technika normal front standard height?
    By Jordan in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-Apr-2011, 20:34
  3. Problem restoring Kodak Master View 4x5
    By cyberjunkie in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 15-Oct-2010, 12:15
  4. Problem with wisner front standard
    By dpetersen in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 28-Jul-2007, 05:06

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •