Difference Between Sinar F1, F2 - Finally found a definitive answer - FYI

[Frank Petronio]

If you didn't mind the bulk or silliness, a Norma front with a P2 rear and a F-P era back would be the best shooter in terms of strength and features.

[Jerry Flynn]

The difference between the f and f+ was that the origial f had a "low profile" rail clamp that had a lever that locked the rail. The f+ had, instead, the same rail clamp as the p.

The f and f+ had separate plastic knobs for the rise/fall and focus. The F1 and F2 have concentric knobs for focus and rise/fall with rubber grips.

The f and f+ used a pointer on the left side of the rear standard for the swing/tilt calculator. This did not work so well when using the fine focus on the rear since the pointer would stray off the "zero" mark as you focused. The f1 and f2 (and a1 for that matter) used a rotating drum on the left side of the rear focus block that you can zero after making the fine focus adjustments.

Lastly, the difference between f1 and f2 was the front standard. The f1 had a knob with rubber grip for rise/fall, no fine focus and latched onto the rail like any multipurpose standard. It did not have the separate lock for swing/shift that the back had.

I have used the 8X10 configuration of the f2 in both ways mentioned - with the proper beefed-up front standard as well as with a regular f2 standard. My experience was that the rise on the regular 4X5 f2 standard was insufficent to bring the lens up to a point where it cenered on the 8X10 format. You have to use the offset method to get any rise - the rear standard has minimal fall (5mm or so to my recollection which is not much on 8X10). The f1 standard might have a small fraction more rise because it does not have the same wraparound design as the f2, but I might question the stability of something like a 360mm Symmar S such as I had on that front.

[Leigh]

I was told the 8x10 had a beefier front standard too, but I can't find anything about it in the Sinar literature.

That's correct. I believe I mentioned it in a previous post, but I don't know in which thread of several on the subject.

The diameter of the support rods on my real 8x10 F2 is 15mm, as compared with 10mm on the 4x5 F2.

- Leigh

[Leigh]

My experience was that the rise on the regular 4X5 f2 standard was insufficent to bring the lens up to a point where it cenered on the 8X10 format.

I've encountered the same thing.

Somebody tried to sell me a supposed 8x10 F2 a couple of years ago, but it was
obviously put together using a 4x5 front standard and could not center the lens.

- Leigh

[Cletus]

Leigh -

Yes, I cited your comments about this in my original post. The problem I have is, the F2 8x10 I have came from an original owner, who bought the camera directly from Sinar so I must assume it has the correct front end. I know people can say whatever they want, but I spent some time with this guy and I know he's not telling me fish stories.

I've taken a good, close look at the parts on both cameras and compared the 8x10 to the F1 4x5 I bought from Adorama. There is almost no difference between the rear std on the F1 (4x5) and the front on the F2 (8x10), which is confusing. The front on the 8x10 does have plenty of rise (enough to go way above center and exhaust my lens coverages) but the rails are the same length and dia as the F2 4x5 rear. I'll have to measure and see if they're 10 or 15mm.

Okay that's all probably just confusing everything. Suffice to say the front on my 8x10 should be correct for the camera and is almost identical to the 4x5 rear standard, save the seperate shift lever, which the 8x10 front has and 4x5 rear does not. I'm sure there's something here I'm just not seeing. In the end, my Sinar kit appears to me to be capable and complete.

I thought I was doing some good by posting the info I got from the Sinar book, but evidently this subject just isn't that simple! I wish all these things just had the Sinar p/ns on them! Would save me a lot of confusion anyway.

[rdenney]

Leigh -

Yes, I cited your comments about this in my original post. The problem I have is, the F2 8x10 I have came from an original owner, who bought the camera directly from Sinar so I must assume it has the correct front end. I know people can say whatever they want, but I spent some time with this guy and I know he's not telling me fish stories.

I've taken a good, close look at the parts on both cameras and compared the 8x10 to the F1 4x5 I bought from Adorama. There is almost no difference between the rear std on the F1 (4x5) and the front on the F2 (8x10), which is confusing. The front on the 8x10 does have plenty of rise (enough to go way above center and exhaust my lens coverages) but the rails are the same length and dia as the F2 4x5 rear. I'll have to measure and see if they're 10 or 15mm.

Okay that's all probably just confusing everything. Suffice to say the front on my 8x10 should be correct for the camera and is almost identical to the 4x5 rear standard, save the seperate shift lever, which the 8x10 front has and 4x5 rear does not. I'm sure there's something here I'm just not seeing. In the end, my Sinar kit appears to me to be capable and complete.

I thought I was doing some good by posting the info I got from the Sinar book, but evidently this subject just isn't that simple! I wish all these things just had the Sinar p/ns on them! Would save me a lot of confusion anyway.

Leigh is correct on this.

In the Sinar Code document I referenced earlier (which you can download from Mike Butkus's site--follow the link), the Special Front Standard (431.62) for use with 8x10 F and C cameras clearly shows both thicker and longer rise/fall columns than the F2 front standard (431.61) or the multipurpose standard (437.61, used on the F1 and prior F).

Remember that these are system cameras. Yes, there are defined kits, and the 8x10 F2 standard kit (491.96) includes the Special Front Standard (431.62). The standard and expert kit components are also listed in the Sinar Code. But it's also quite possible for someone to buy a 4x5 F2 kit and an 8x10 format changing kit (or just the F2 8x10 rear standard and the 8x10 bellows) and mix and match the components. Your friend is either fibbing or remembering incorrectly, or he special-ordered the kit as you see it.

I totally agree with you that it would have been good for Sinar to have put the part numbers on the parts, and a production date code. Often, they changed a part as a matter of a production change, which is noted in the service manuals but nowhere else, without changing the part number. And sometimes they changed the part number without making really obvious changes to the part. It is indeed confusing. That, and the tendency for the parts to be mixed and matched into complete cameras (a byproduct of the excellent Sinar design), is why there's such a lore about what's what with Sinar componentry.

Rick "trust, but verify" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

Adorama often gets it wrong and sells beat up stuff so be cautious buying used from them. Remember NYC has the rental studios and yahoos who beat the crap out of their gear and many cameras are assembled from odd parts.

[rdenney]

Adorama often gets it wrong and sells beat up stuff so be cautious buying used from them. Remember NYC has the rental studios and yahoos who beat the crap out of their gear and many cameras are assembled from odd parts.

I had similar issues with Samy's in Los Angeles. Not everyone has tried to figure out all the nuances of the parts to the depth some of us have, and often they just don't put it together to see if it actually works. I got an F rear standard from Samy's that had been billed as an F2 front standard, but it was obviously an F-era piece (chrome, bakelite knobs, etc.)--quite aside from the fact that the controls were on the wrong side--and it was missing the plastic follower on the rail clamp and would have distorted the rail if really tightened. Samy's paid shipping both ways and refunded my money, so I don't really have a complaint about their integrity, but their Sinar lore could stand some improvement if they are going to sell parts and ad-hoc constructions.

My own camera is an assemblage of parts. It has an early F2 rear standard (without separate shift lock) with an F-era back, a late F2 front standard (with separate shift lock), and F-plus-era chrome rails and tripod clamp. I spent some considerable effort making adjustments to the factory shims to get the standards to align with very tight tolerances--they were certainly not that way when I first put them together--but who knows what fiddling they'd endured already.

Rick "one piece at a time..." Denney

[Cletus]

Frank - yes, I completely understand about the Adorama camera. I got a really good price on it and so, had little expectation of perfection, or even consistency. I had to go by a few decent photos as well as I could to make my buying decision. Turns out to be a decent 4x5 kit, but there is definitely some question in my mind about original parts!

It was a nice deal though - Adorama threw in a brand new (OEM) set of standard bellows AND brand new bag bellows (and extra 12" rail and caps and even a new case) for less than many were charging for old studio beater Fs on the 'Bay. I was (and am) pretty pleased with it, but there is still some questions about the 'originality' of the standards.

I rather regret making this original post now - I thought I had some pretty good information when I wrote it and had finally "verified" much of the different information I've gathered about the Sinar System over the last several weeks.

Turns out it wasn't nearly that simple! I appreciate the link to the "Sinar Codes" though (thanks Rick) and will be carefully reading through for a while now.

[rdenney]

I thought I had some pretty good information when I wrote it and had finally "verified" much of the different information I've gathered about the Sinar System over the last several weeks.

Don't worry about it--all of us who own Sinar cameras have been through it. I haven't even gone into the weird descriptions in a late-70's Wall Street Photo catalog about the Sinar F+ stuff. Seems like every time one of these threads comes up, some new tidbit comes to light.

And even the Sinar Code is only a snapshot and definitive for one period. Sinar may have said something that sounded quite different a decade or two earlier when the guys at Wall Street were assembling their catalog.

Rick "who once bought a 'Norma front standard' only to discover it was a Norma multipurpose standard--not at all the same thing--and another time bought an F2 4x5 back only to discover it was a (more desirable to me anyway) Norma back" Denney