how can I match the image?

[Peter K]

There was another 'tog in New York that took photographs of the achitectural details on skyscrapers--I can't remember his name but IIRC correctly he used a Sinar or Linhof with extra standards, tripods, and lots of bellows. Cool idea!

It was Reinhard Wolf in 1979. He used Apo-Ronar's mounted on a Sinar with two bellows.
http://www.reinhartwolf.de/gallery.htm

[ic-racer]

To just about match your diagonal angle of view, use a 3000mm lens. One of the forum members has a 5x7 with a 1016mm lens. The angle of view is greater than what you are after, but you may be able to find one similar.
http://users.snip.net/~joe/BigBertha/default.htm
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...d.php?p=311117

[bglick]

You did not state how much resolution you want to hold, or the budget you would be willing to spend.... these to variables dictate the possible solution.

Lowest cost solution - as Ken mentioned above, use a digital camera with an APS sized sensor and a longer lens, whatever you can afford. With the 1.6x crop factor, the length of the lenses are that much longer, stitch together a handful of images in PS CS3, quality would be tough to beat assuming you have good capture technique. shutter speeds will be as fast as can be expected.


Higher cost solution / better resolution / slower shutter speeds - use MF with a telescope that attaches to the camera body. Adapters are often made for Pentax 67 cameras as well as a few others....which I can't recall. Of course, you pay a small price with shutter speed, as the longer fl's are rather slow. Fast scopes are ultra expensive, slow scopes are more reasonably priced, such as a 6" f15, which is 2250mm fl. or an f12 at 1800mm fl. AT these fl's, you can stitch together several pieces of MF film, between 6 - 10 is my guess.... end quality will be better than LF quality due to the lower f stops that can be shot at, = less apt. diffraction. Not to mention, no camera lens is sharper than a telescope, specially at infinity.

[Michael Carter]

Well, I bought the Pentax 6x7 outfit with a 600mm f4 lens, a lens fo my 35mm Minolta - 500mm Rokkor RF mirror lens, teleconverters, and adapters to a Canon 5D digital cam.. NO telescope. Unless you want to count that 600 lens, it's as big as one.
Big prints here I come!

[Nathan Potter]

As timparkin points out the Nikon 1200 ED is a very good bet on 4X5. The low dispersion glass helps measurably with image contrast, But you must deal with the 36 inch bellows extension required. And you won't realize the resolving capability of that lens unless you completely eliminate differential vibration between the lens standard and the film standard. For that you'll need to employ the equivalent of an optical bench between front and rear standards.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Frank Petronio]

If you only have Kiev money, it ain't going to happen.

[g.lancia]

Get an APS-C digital camera.

[Paddy McKay]

While not an exact, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Tele-Xenars, in the 4x5 format. Schneider's longest tele is the 800mm Apo Tele-Xenar, with only a relatively normal bellows draw required.

Here's a link: http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/fo...tele_xenar.pdf