wide angle convertible for 4x5

[Dan Fromm]

Re the Horseman converter, I have one. Used as intended it is a 2x TC, doubles the focal length and the extension required. Users' reports about how well the TC + prime lens performs disagree.

It works as intended only with 150 mm lenses in #0 shutters. The instructions list a moderate number of 150s that will work with it.

Three parts. The first is a replacement for the shutter's retaining ring. The second is an extension tube that attaches to the replacement retaining ring. And at the rear the TC, which screws into the extension tube. To set it up, unscrew the prime lens' rear cell, remove the retaining ring, reattache the shutter to the board with the replacement retaining ring, replace the prime's rear cell, attach the extension tube and finally attach the TC.

The combined focal length -- prime lens + TC -- depends of the prime's FL and on the distance between the prime's rear surface and the TC's front surface. When used not as intended the results are quite unpredictable.

Not what the OP wants.

[mdarnton]

90mm Angulons, as well as the other focal lengths, were originally sold as triple convertibles (!!), if that is really what you want to do. Which I would not.

Read page 8 and 9, here: http://cameraeccentric.com/html/info/schneider_3.html

[Mark Sampson]

I'd look for a 100/6.3 Kodak Wide Field Ektar. Small and sharp. Or our own Kerry Thalmann has a late-production 90/6.8 Schneider Angulon for sale, and he knows his lenses; I'd buy from him anytime. Either one would let you shoot wide-angle without adding too much weight and bulk.

[Jim Andrada]

+1 on the Wide Field Ektar. Very nice lens IMNSHO

[IanG]

90mm Angulons, as well as the other focal lengths, were originally sold as triple convertibles (!!), if that is really what you want to do. Which I would not.

Read page 8 and 9, here: http://cameraeccentric.com/html/info/schneider_3.html

That's the pre-WWII Angulon which has more coverage than the later post WWII Angulon, although both were at times described as convertible, If you look the early 90mm f6.8 Angulon covers half plate at f22 while the later version vignettes earlier only just covering 5x4. I've just acquired the cells of an earlier 90mm Angulon so it'll be interesting to see the difference.

Ian

[mdarnton]

Yes, but info I can find indicates that the formula is the same and that coverage is a mounting limitation by the metal work, so converting should work the same. But I cannot imagine anyone intentionally wanting an 185 mm lens working at f/14 when there are so many great small alternatives with speeds one can actually focus at! Also, it is usually not a good thing when a manufacturer of that era says a convertible lens is good for portraits--the optimistic way to say results aren't going to be very sharp. :-)

[esearing]

My question was more regarding a wide triple convertible like Cooke made for 8x10. I have 65, 90, 135, 150/265, 180/315, 210, 250 lenses but I usually only carry 3-4 of them at any one time. Looks like I may have to opt for a 70mm-80mm and not carry the 65 and 90. I seem to use the 65 and 135 the most of all my lenses. current projects are mostly rivers and waterfalls which call for wides most of the time.

Though that Schneider Angulon 90 6.8 sounds like it would be worth experimenting with: 90, 140 (rear only), 185 (front only) - but might be hard to focus with at 185 with 4x exposue factor.

[jnantz]

esearing
you might look into making yourself a casket set full of gclaron cells.
http://www.apug.org/forum/index.php?...-anyone.33629/
that way you might only have to bring 1 thing and it has everytihng you need
there have been threads here on this website about what cells you might need
and their configurations, i think some of them were kind of wide-angle-view

good luck !

[Dan Fromm]

Um, John, the shortest G-Claron is 150 mm. A single cell will be nearly twice as long. As for mixing and matching, well, the 150's cells fit a #0. 210 through 305 fit #1. 355 fits #3.

Ugly fantasy.

[IanG]

Schneider sold a sort of Casket set of Symmar cells in the late 1950's or very early 60's, it can't have sold well as you never come across thm now. I can't remember the exact details off the top of my head but have an advert for them in a BJP Almanac.

Ian