PDA

View Full Version : Alternative Center Filters for Rodenstock 75/4.5 Grandagon N?



acapela
18-Jul-2018, 13:53
I came into a used Rodenstock 75/4.5 Grandagon N recently, but am without a "dedicated" center filter.

I can watch eBay for the original Rodenstock center filter (a 1.5-stop/3x in a 67-86mm size). But in the meantime (none appear to be listed at the moment), what might those with actual user experience recommend as a substitute?

I have Schneider 3b center filters already, for my 47/5.6 Super Angulon XL and 80/5.6 Super Symmar XL lenses. The 3b is a 1.5-stop/3x 67-86mm filter, so would be mechanically compatible and hopefully at least somewhat optically compatible as well.

I also have a source for new/old stock for Schneider "plain 3" (i.e. "III") filters, originally for use with the 65/5.6 and 75/5.6 Super Angulon, though I would have to buy one even just to test with it. Finally, I also see a Schneider "IIIa" filter for auction currently on eBay. I can't find any documentation on a 3a anywhere, but photos in the listing clearly show "IIIa" on the filter mount. I am assuming this actually a "plain 3/III", bearing a relatively recent cosmetic change in designation when additional variants of 67-86mm center filter ("IIIb/c/etc", for other Schneider lenses) reached the market.

Any actual user testimonials/advice would be welcome. In the meantime, my simplest option is to start with the 3b filter I actually have in hand and see if that is "good enough", even illumination, free of banding, etc.

Thanks.

Oren Grad
18-Jul-2018, 14:05
I would try the IIIb that you already have. In my occasional experience of center-filter-shopping, Rodenstock center filters have been much harder to find than Schneiders.

See also this thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?25956-Schneider-Center-Filter-IIIa-amp-IIIb-difference

Bob Salomon
18-Jul-2018, 14:14
The Heliopan is virtually identical to the Rodenstock.

acapela
18-Jul-2018, 14:28
See also this thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?25956-Schneider-Center-Filter-IIIa-amp-IIIb-difference

Aha, confirmation of the existence of the "IIIa", interesting. Sounds as if the IIIa is for "older" lenses, rather than the more recent XL/wide-field lenses.

Thanks!

Steve Goldstein
18-Jul-2018, 14:43
I have copies of Schneider's 1977 and 1984 center filter brochures, both of which contain the III and IIIa. The III is listed for the f/5.6 65mm and 75mm Super Angulons, as acapela has stated, while the IIIa is for the 90mm f/8 SA. They are mechanically the same (67mm male, 86mm female) and both are stated as 3x. I assume there's a difference in the filter pattern between the two, but the documents don't give any clues aside from the different stock numbers.

The IIIa doesn't appear in the 2007 specs. The IIIb is added, with applications for the 58mm SAXL, 80mm and 110mm SSXL, in addition to the 90mm f/8 SA. There's also a IIIc for the 47mm SAXL, though a footnote says the IIIb is also usable with that lens. Again, Schneider provides no information as to any differences between the III/IIIa/IIIb/IIIc.

Here's a link to some info on Rodenstock's filters: http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/accessories_en.html#filters
Unlike Schneider, they don't provide part numbers so it's impossible to know if the various 67/86 3x filters are specific to individual focal lengths or if they're "one size fits all". Bob may know as he was the Rodenstock rep for many years.

I agree with Oren - give your IIIb a go. Remember that the lens should be closed down at least two stops from wide open per Schneider's instructions.

If you drop me a PM or email with your email address I'll be happy to send you all five Schneider PDFs I've acquired over the years.

Bob Salomon
18-Jul-2018, 14:48
I have copies of Schneider's 1977 and 1984 center filter brochures, both of which contain the III and IIIa. The III is listed for the f/5.6 65mm and 75mm Super Angulons, as acapela has stated, while the IIIa is for the 90mm f/8 SA. They are mechanically the same (67mm male, 86mm female) and both are stated as 3x. I assume there's a difference in the filter pattern between the two, but the documents don't give any clues.

The IIIa doesn't appear in the 2007 specs. The IIIb is added, with applications for the 58mm SAXL, 80SSXL, and 110SSXL in addition to the 90mm f/8 SA. There's also a IIIc for the 47mm SAXL, though a footnote says the IIIb is also usable with that lens. Again, Schneider provides no information as to any differences between the IIIa/IIIb/IIIc.

Here's a link to some info on Rodenstock's filters; http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/accessories_en.html#filters
Unlike Schneider, they don't provide part numbers so it's impossible to know if the various 67/86 3x filters are specific to individual focal lengths or if they're "one size fits all".

I agree with Oren - give your IIIb a try. Remember that the lens should be closed down at least two stops from wide open per Schneider's orders.

If you drop me a PM or email with your email address I'll be happy to send you all five Schneider PDFs I've acquired over the years.

Of course the Rodenstock 3x center filter is correct for that lens. The Apo Grandagon series required a different center filter.
Rodenstock listed the part numbers in their price list and we listed the catalog numbers in our literature and press releases. Don’t know what the Russian distributor did. Don’t even know if they used Rodenstock numbers or their own.
Also note that Rodenstock offered two different 67mm center filter for their analog lenses, not one as per the site you suggested. Also, this statement in their center filter description is completely wrong!

“....Rodenstock center filters are neutral gray concentric graduated filters whose density decreases from the center up to the translucent rim.”

They do not have a translucent rim, the filter goes from maximum density in the center to transparent at the edge. The rim is metal and translucent is not transparent!

Oren Grad
18-Jul-2018, 15:02
The IIIa doesn't appear in the 2007 specs. The IIIb is added, with applications for the 58mm SAXL, 80mm and 110mm SSXL, in addition to the 90mm f/8 SA. There's also a IIIc for the 47mm SAXL, though a footnote says the IIIb is also usable with that lens. Again, Schneider provides no information as to any differences between the III/IIIa/IIIb/IIIc.

FWIW, in my later documentation, the IIIb is specified as 3x and the IIIc as 4x. The latter is preferred if full correction is required for the 47 XL, but of course not every application requires that.

Steve Goldstein
18-Jul-2018, 15:28
Right you are, Oren, I missed that in the 2007 document. The IIIc is given as 4x.

Dan Fromm
18-Jul-2018, 15:36
Folks, this site has resources. This one http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?138978-Where-to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses has a link to a list of links that includes one to an article on center filters that lays out equivalences.

Oren Grad
18-Jul-2018, 15:50
I plead guilty to not remembering everything that's in Dan's very extensive, extraordinarily useful list. Here is a direct link to his center-filter article...

http://www.galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html

...but I encourage anyone who hasn't seen Dan's resource to follow his link to the sticky thread at the top of this (Lenses) subforum and check it out.

Drew Wiley
18-Jul-2018, 17:16
I was told Rodenstock never made their own center filters, and that they are (or were) private-labeled Schneider. That would certainly explain their relatively high mark-up pricing. Some of these lenses were very similarly designed. For example, the same CF I once use for a Schneider 120 SA also works perfectly (fit as well as falloff correction) for my Nikon 90/4.5. But I don't have any experience with the newer Heliopan CF's.

Bob Salomon
18-Jul-2018, 17:53
I was told Rodenstock never made their own center filters, and that they are (or were) private-labeled Schneider. That would certainly explain their relatively high mark-up pricing. Some of these lenses were very similarly designed. For example, the same CF I once use for a Schneider 120 SA also works perfectly (fit as well as falloff correction) for my Nikon 90/4.5. But I don't have any experience with the newer Heliopan CF's.
You were told wrong. Rodenstock does make their own center filters so stop spreading false information.

Here is the latest information on Rodenstock’s current technology for making center filters that work by absorption rather then reflection thus eliminating strange color cast effects fro other types with shiny buildings in the sun. They have been making these for 3 or 4 years.

Drew Wiley
19-Jul-2018, 10:38
I didn't say "does" Bob. I said "did" and made it perfectly clear this was something I was told with reference to a particular era. And by informing me that a new method has been in use only a few years, you yourself are implying it highly likely that most of the Rodenstock center filters already out there are something else other than the latest and greatest. Subcontracting specific products to competitive manufacturers who can do a particular task better is rather common among German manufacturers in particular, though certainly not limited to them. And other than the brand label on the rim or box, would it even be possible to distinguish between a past Schneider and Rodenstock center filter engineered for an equivalent specification? Even Fuji and Nikon didn't make their own center filters, though there is obviously vast lens and filter manufacturing capacity in Japan. You tell me, Bob. I've been in retail stores with huge large format and filter inventories during the heyday of such gear, and why would I spend a couple hundreds dollars more for a filter under one brand name that looked identical in every respect to another? I'm not saying that's the case now.

Bob Salomon
19-Jul-2018, 10:50
I didn't say "does" Bob. I said "did" and made it perfectly clear this was something I was told with reference to a particular era. And by informing me that a new method has been in use only a few years, you yourself are implying it highly likely that most of the Rodenstock center filters already out there are something else other than the latest and greatest. Subcontracting specific products to competitive manufacturers who can do a particular task better is rather common among German manufacturers in particular, though certainly not limited to them. And other than the brand label on the rim or box, would it even be possible to distinguish between a past Schneider and Rodenstock center filter engineered for an equivalent specification? Even Fuji and Nikon didn't make their own center filters, though there is obviously vast lens and filter manufacturing capacity in Japan. You tell me, Bob. I've been in retail stores with huge large format and filter inventories during the heyday of such gear, and why would I spend a couple hundreds dollars more for a filter under one brand name that looked identical in every respect to another? I'm not saying that's the case now.

Drew, Rodenstock has been making their center filters for decades. Even during the period of time in the 80s when Schneider went into bankruptcy and the successor company, under Mandermann, liquidated whole divisions of the company. You were told incorrectly!

Dan Fromm
19-Jul-2018, 11:40
Longer than that, Bob. Rodenstock made their first center filter before WW I.

Bob Salomon
19-Jul-2018, 11:57
Longer than that, Bob. Rodenstock made their first center filter before WW I.

I believe that that one used a similar technology to their latest ones, a sandwich of a concave and convex glasses. Except that one was colored on one glass and the current ones are grey on one glass.

Drew Wiley
19-Jul-2018, 12:17
I'll take your word for it, Bob. I was merely implying that for a given generation, there might not be a helluva lot of difference between brands. Nobody would ever know that I use an 82mm Schneider CF on a Nikon, for instance. It works perfectly. Color neutrality, complete transparency, resistance to flare, and proper correction of falloff are what count. Any improvement beyond, like the one you cite relative to specular highlights, would indeed be a newer innovation. But I have no functional interest in primitive versions, though this might be interesting from a historical perspective. In fact, I rarely shoot true wide angle lenses at all any more. They were nice for architectural interiors. But that kind of work is now mostly being done digitally. Everyone wants their pictures delivered yesterday - perhaps the only redeeming quality of digital except a tad more portability.

Bob Salomon
19-Jul-2018, 13:37
I'll take your word for it, Bob. I was merely implying that for a given generation, there might not be a helluva lot of difference between brands. Nobody would ever know that I use an 82mm Schneider CF on a Nikon, for instance. It works perfectly. Color neutrality, complete transparency, resistance to flare, and proper correction of falloff are what count. Any improvement beyond, like the one you cite relative to specular highlights, would indeed be a newer innovation. But I have no functional interest in primitive versions, though this might be interesting from a historical perspective. In fact, I rarely shoot true wide angle lenses at all any more. They were nice for architectural interiors. But that kind of work is now mostly being done digitally. Everyone wants their pictures delivered yesterday - perhaps the only redeeming quality of digital except a tad more portability.

Shoot a sky scraper with aluminum cladding with a wide angle with your center filter on a sunny day and don’t be surprised if you don’t get a magenta shift towards the top of the building. The Rodenstock center filters don’t do that.

Drew Wiley
19-Jul-2018, 17:09
I'm out shooting tall things quite a bit, Bob; but granite spires and redwood trees aren't made with aluminum yet. I have nothing against urban photography,
but don't gravitate toward getting my gear trampled or going nuts trying to find parking spaces. My occasional shots of downtown SF are usually done with
a very long telephoto from clear across the water. I just got back from the Oakland Airport, and while stuck in traffic up on the fwy interchange was trying
to spot exactly where the new foot trail on the Bay Bridge originates. It goes from the Eastshore State Park clear to Treasure Island, and opens up some very
interesting new opportunities to photograph both SF and the Port of Oakland. But I'll wait until late fall when the air is clear, and maybe try then.

acapela
21-Jul-2018, 09:54
Thanks to those who provided RELEVANT, USEFUL information in response to my query.

At this point, this thread appears to have been hijacked and has become yet another vacuous flame war (a tradition on the part of one particular poster to this thread that goes back 20+ years, to the Usenet era). I have unsubscribed to all my threads, and am leaving these forums, hopefully never to return. Blech.

rdenney
21-Jul-2018, 11:19
On the contrary, the information provided was relevant to your question, but in a general sense. Your question was also answered, or at least parts of it were, but maybe nobody has used the exact combination you were curious about.

For example, you learned that the letters after III mean more than cosmetic changes, as you had assumed. You also learned that lenses of similar design have similar falloff, and are likely to be served well enough by any filter intended for that design that mechanically fits, even from a different maker.

The thread is still working on the issue of cross-brand compatibility, which is precisely what you asked about.

A lot is us here (and not just here) are old and curmudgeonly. Several of our chief curmudgeons have participated in this thread. Sometimes we ask them to reel it in. But I for one don’t see the problem in this thread—the topic may be broader than you supposed and other readers may have need for the more general discussion even if you don’t. I would commend to you continued participation, though perhaps with a bit thicker skin and less baggage from what are apparently past encounters. There is much to be learned from our old curmudgeons, even if the meat is sometimes a bit salty.

Rick “with all due respect: OPs do not own threads” Denney

brucetaylor
21-Jul-2018, 21:48
Acapela, if you’re still here, there is a great feature under “settings,” called “edit ignore list.”
You can specify the annoying curmudgeons that irritate you and never be bothered with their long winded argumentative replies again!

Drew Wiley
22-Jul-2018, 19:55
Well, maybe some of us curmudgeons do spend too much time comparing our old war wounds. But there's nothing quite like learning from the School of Hard Knocks; so one can either spend a lot of money on an expensive filter and possibly end up disappointed, or perhaps learn something useful from old war stories. Not every answer would be honest if it was cut and dried. There are an awful lot of "it depends" in relation to large format lens usage. For one thing, center filters are optimized for a specific limited f-stop range, which might or might not match your personally preferred depth of field usage. Certain CF's of the correct thread and even specific for a particular lens require an intermediate spacer ring not supplied with the filter itself or the bulge in the front lens element will actually rub the back of the filter - a potential disaster! The 120 SA was one of these. You sometimes need to read the fine print.

Bernice Loui
28-Jul-2018, 10:15
Rodenstock E67 center filter (67mm) for 75mm f4.5 Grandagon, 35mm, 45mm, 55mm f4.5 Grandagon. Noted filter factor is 0.45.
180969

Rodenstock E67 on 75mm f4.5 Grandagon.
180970


Rodenstock E67 on 55mm f4.5 Grandagon.
180971


The Rodenstock E67 might work on the Schneider 110mm f5.6 SSXL, have this lens not tried this due to the front element of the 110mm SSXL being SO close to the front lens barrel. If there is not sufficient clearance between filter and front element, bad stuff will happen.


Bernice

Bob Salomon
28-Jul-2018, 10:30
Rodenstock E67 center filter (67mm) for 75mm f4.5 Grandagon, 35mm, 45mm, 55mm f4.5 Grandagon. Noted filter factor is 0.45.
180969

Rodenstock E67 on 75mm f4.5 Grandagon.
180970


Rodenstock E67 on 55mm f4.5 Grandagon.
180971


The Rodenstock E67 might work on the Schneider 110mm f5.6 SSXL, have this lens not tried this due to the front element of the 110mm SSXL being SO close to the front lens barrel. If there is not sufficient clearance between filter and front element, bad stuff will happen.


Bernice
While all of these lenses are 67mm the Apo series used a different center filter then the 75mm or the 90mm f8.

Dan Fromm
28-Jul-2018, 12:02
While all of these lenses are 67mm the Apo series used a different center filter then the 75mm or the 90mm f8.

Yes. The center filters R'stock recommends for Apo Grandagons have greater density at the center than the ones recommended for Grandagons and Grandagon-Ns. 2 stops vs. 1.5. I've never found a CF recommendation for the old 58/5.6 Grandagon; I b'lieve it wants a 67 mm filter with 1.5 stop central density.

r.e.
15-Aug-2021, 03:30
The Heliopan is virtually identical to the Rodenstock.

Thanks for this information. I'm looking to purchase a centre filter for this lens. It's helpful to learn that the Heliopan 67/86 and the Rodenstock 67/86 are interchangeable.

Re Schneider, David A. Goldfarb says this in another thread (boldface added):


"I've compared the III to the IIIb and the difference is 1/4 stop. I use the III on my 90/8 Super-Angulon, 75/4.5 Grandagon-N and 55/4.5 Apo-Grandagon.* There are times when I'd like a stronger center filter, but it's something of a subjective thing, since even the dedicated filters don't correct 100% for falloff. If they did, they would have to be darker than most people would tolerate."

That makes it sound like both Schneider centre filters will work, but that Goldfarb may prefer the "look" of the III, which he says also has slightly less of an exposure penalty. Re his last two sentences, Schneider does say in its literature that vignetting is not fully compensated, "to avoid too long exposure times and with consideration of the exposure latitude of the film emulsions".

Link to David Goldfarb's post: https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?25956-Schneider-Center-Filter-IIIa-amp-IIIb-difference&p=244210&viewfull=1#post244210

More generally... My impression, after reading a good number of threads on the subject of centre filters, is that the main reservation is their cost. As I understand it, I'll have to stop down this lens to at least f/9 for a centre filter to work mechanically/optically. Sounds OK to me. After that, the exposure compensation appears to be about 1 1/2 stops (Bob Salomon suggests in another thread that it may be 1 1/3 stops). Maybe it's because I shoot video, where neutral density filters are a fact of life, but I'm not terribly fussed about the penalty.

If I want to add further filtration, it appears to be a matter of experimenting with Lee100 square filters (100mmx100mm), which I have, and screw-in filters that are 86mm or, with an 86mm-95mm step-up ring, 95mm in diameter. The latter interests me as an option because I have a Nikkor-W f/6.5 360mm lens that takes 95mm filters.

The trick is finding a centre filter that's in good condition optically and that I can afford :)

If anybody has suggestions or views that differ from what's in this post, I'd love to read them.

* Dan Fromm's Schneider table in the following article would also appear to suggest the III: Center Filters for Large Format (https://galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html)

Dan Fromm
15-Aug-2021, 06:33
r.e., some time ago I published the defiinitive, until someone writes a better one, article on center filters. See http://www.galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html

r.e.
15-Aug-2021, 06:35
r.e., some time ago I published the defiinitive, until someone writes a better one, article on center filters. See http://www.galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html

I was adding a reference to your article while you were posting :) See my post just above yours, in particular the asterisk that I've added to the quote from David Goldfarb and the comment at the end of the post.

Dan Fromm
15-Aug-2021, 07:16
r.e.,

Don't pussyfoot around. I didn't suggest, I stated firmly.

About buying centerfilters. I now have four, the most expensive cost $225 delivered. One is a Schneider CF III.

I was patient, kept on looking and looked everywhere plausible. Google searches found a few. Some dealers still have websites and don't list their inventories on venues like eBay.

For example, Google just found this Schneider III https://fotohandeldelfshaven.nl/product/schneider-kreuznach-center-filter-iii-multicoating-67mm-screw-in-boxed/

r.e.
15-Aug-2021, 07:58
r.e.,

Don't pussyfoot around. I didn't suggest, I stated firmly.

Pussyfooting around?

I'm interested in what David Goldfarb has to say because he's used both the Schneider III and IIIb with this specific lens. I appreciate the fact that you put together a table containing Schneider information for its own lenses. As far as I can see, that's all it is. When it comes to suggestions (your problem with the word suggestion is frankly your problem), your article is about choosing centre filters for Nikon and Fuji lenses. Apart from Rodenstock's own centre filter, there is in fact no recommendation in your article about the lens that is the subject of this thread and that interests me. You also provide no basis whatever for your claim that Schneider and Rodenstock, when they say that certain centre filters go with certain lenses, are engaging in "propaganda".

I don't know why, but every time the subject of centre filters comes up, you seem to find it necessary to post about your "definitive" article. You've done it twice now in this thread alone. Maybe you figured that I was too stupid to read the thread, or maybe it's yet another opportunity to tell everyone about your "definitive" piece.

Thanks, but I'll evaluate material as I see fit. I think that your article contains useful manufacturers' data. Apart from the Schneider table, I do not find it helpful on choosing a centre filter for the lens that I just purchased. I do find David Goldfarb's post helpful. I am also considering some of the things that Bob Salomon has said about centre filters over time, which also make no appearance in your "definitive" article.

Dan Fromm
15-Aug-2021, 09:05
Oh, boy.

Bob S. has a strong R'stock bias and doesn't seem to believe that center filters from different manufacturers with the same threading and maximum density are functionally equivalent. He'll never recommend R'stock gear that's not fit for purpose but won't recommend competitors' equipment.

Bob Salomon
15-Aug-2021, 09:20
Oh, boy.

Bob S. has a strong R'stock bias and doesn't seem to believe that center filters from different manufacturers with the same threading and maximum density are functionally equivalent. He'll never recommend R'stock gear that's not fit for purpose but won't recommend competitors' equipment.

Dan,

I’ve also sold a ton of Schneider large format lenses and was involved with Nikon when their lenses were first introduced as I sold Sinar then.
I recommend what the factory recommended for both Schneider and Rodenstock.

r.e.
15-Aug-2021, 09:22
Oh, boy.

Bob S. has a strong R'stock bias and doesn't seem to believe that center filters from different manufacturers with the same threading and maximum density are functionally equivalent. He'll never recommend R'stock gear that's not fit for purpose but won't recommend competitors' equipment.

Apparently you were so obsessed about the initial failure of my first post (#27) to cite your "definitive" article, the post went in one ear and out the other without registering in your brain. The quote at the very beginning of the post from Bob Salomon, which is from post #3 in this very thread, says:


"The Heliopan [center filter] is virtually identical to the Rodenstock."

How many people are you planning to insult in this thread? So far, you're good for two in two successive posts.

Dugan
15-Aug-2021, 10:11
218649

r.e.
16-Aug-2021, 07:22
My impression, after reading a good number of threads on the subject of centre filters, is that the main reservation is their cost. As I understand it, I'll have to stop down this lens to at least f/9 for a centre filter to work mechanically/optically. Sounds OK to me. After that, the exposure compensation appears to be about 1 1/2 stops (Bob Salomon suggests in another thread that it may be 1 1/3 stops). Maybe it's because I shoot video, where neutral density filters are a fact of life, but I'm not terribly fussed about the penalty.

If I want to add further filtration, it appears to be a matter of experimenting with Lee100 square filters (100mmx100mm), which I have, and screw-in filters that are 86mm or, with an 86mm-95mm step-up ring, 95mm in diameter. The latter interests me as an option because I have a Nikkor-W f/6.5 360mm lens that takes 95mm filters.

I'm going to have a hands-on opportunity to assess whether a centre filter will be useful having regard to how I plan to use the lens. I expect to receive the Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm later this week, and a participant in the forum has very kindly offered to lend me a Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter for a few days.

I plan to try out the lens, without and with the centre filter, with Ilford FP4+ 125, Kodak Portra 160 and Kodak Ektar 100. The characteristics of the two colour films are sufficiently different that I think that it's worth testing with both.

I don't have 86mm screw-in filters or a Lee100 86mm adapter. To see what happens when I add an additional filter, l'll set up a shot where I can handhold a Lee square linear polariser (https://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera/polariser) (to cut glare/reflections), or a Lee ProGlass IRND 2-stop neutral density filter (https://www.leefilters.com/index.php/camera/proglass-nd).

As part of this, it would be useful to try some camera movement. I'll be using an Arca-Swiss F-line camera with a 300mm rail, 171mm standards and a recessed lens board. See the photo below. I'll be using a shorter bellows than the one in the photo, but I don't have a proper bag bellows. Don't know how much rise I'll be able to coax from the bellows with a 75mm lens, but I'll give it a go.

I may write a follow-up post about my conclusions.

Many thanks to the forum member who has offered to lend me the Rodenstock centre filter.

218701

Bob Salomon
16-Aug-2021, 08:34
When using a polarizer on wide angle lenses outdoors it is important to remember that areas of the sky are naturally polarized and other areas are not. Using a polarizer while including both types of areas will result in banding in the sky.
Best is just test with the center filter and forget the polarizer. Just remember that for the center filter to be effective you must stop down at least 2 stops from wide open and add 1 ⅓ for the factor.

r.e.
16-Aug-2021, 08:46
When using a polarizer on wide angle lenses outdoors it is important to remember that areas of the sky are naturally polarized and other areas are not. Using a polarizer while including both types of areas will result in banding in the sky.
Best is just test with the center filter and forget the polarizer. Just remember that for the center filter to be effective you must stop down at least 2 stops from wide open and add 1 ⅓ for the factor.

Hi Bob, that's why I said that I'll use the polariser "to cut glare/reflections". I'm thinking shiny surfaces and shop windows. The last time that I used a polariser on the sky was with a 35mm camera and 24mm lens years ago in Wadi Rum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_Rum) in Jordan. Would have been great desert photographs were it not for the polariser. I hated the effect, and haven't repeated the mistake since :)

Anyway, this is just to test stacking, having regard to what I have in the Lee line.

Yes, my understanding is that I have to stop down this lens to at least f/9 for mechanical/optical reasons, plus add filter factor. I've seen suggestions that this lens is best at f/16 and f/22. Is that your view?

Bob Salomon
16-Aug-2021, 08:52
Hi Bob, that's why I said that I'll use the polariser "to cut glare/reflections". I'm thinking shiny surfaces and shop windows. The last time that I used a polariser on the sky was with a 35mm camera and 24mm lens years ago in Wadi Rum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_Rum) in Jordan. I hated the effect, and haven't done it since :)

Yes, my understanding is that I have to stop down this lens to at least f/9 for mechanical/optical reasons, plus add filter factor. I've seen suggestions that this lens is best at f/16 and f/22. Is that your view?

It is diffraction limited at f22.

r.e.
16-Aug-2021, 09:03
It is diffraction limited at f22.

Thank-you.


For those who are interested, Rodenstock has a link to its archived catalogue for analogue lenses and centre filters here: https://www.rodenstock-photo.com/service

Oren Grad
16-Aug-2021, 09:04
Yes, my understanding is that I have to stop down this lens to at least f/9 for mechanical/optical reasons, plus add filter factor. I've seen suggestions that this lens is best at f/16 and f/22. Is that your view?

FWIW, Rodenstock's literature recommends f/16 as the optimal aperture for the 75/4.5 Grandagon-N unshifted, and f/22 if shifts are used, based on the criterion "highest sharpness is achieved over the whole format with the depth of field being neglected".

r.e.
16-Aug-2021, 09:43
FWIW, Rodenstock's literature recommends f/16 as the optimal aperture for the 75/4.5 Grandagon-N unshifted, and f/22 if shifts are used, based on the criterion "highest sharpness is achieved over the whole format with the depth of field being neglected".

Thanks Oren.

If that statement is from a longer text that's useful, do you have a link at hand for it? It doesn't appear to be in the catalogue .pdf that I linked in post #40.

Only if handy.

Oren Grad
16-Aug-2021, 09:58
If that statement is from a longer text that's useful, do you have a link at hand for it? It doesn't appear be in the catalogue .pdf that I linked in post #40.

Yes, you have to go to older catalogs to get the full wording. But I'm afraid there's nothing that provides any more insight. Here's the entire paragraph:
___________

Notes on the Recommended Working Aperture

In the table, the range given for the recommended working aperture is that in which the highest sharpness is achieved over the whole format with the depth of field being neglected.

The larger aperture applies to unmoved lenses, i.e. when the "format range" is used. The smaller aperture is recommended for shifted and/or tilted lens, i.e for the "movement range".

Depending on the reproduction ratio and the depth of the motif, the required depth of field may make further stopping down necessary. In such cases, the sharpness may be reduced due to diffraction - particularly in the center of the image circle.
___________

The Rodenstock catalogs show MTF at two apertures. As I'm sure you've already noticed, if you compare them you can see the tradeoff of center vs peripheral MTF as you stop down. But of course that's only two stops and only at a particular magnification. I know you know this, but for the benefit of anyone who's less experienced and might be reading this: for really critical applications there's no alternative to running one's own tests to find the optimum for one's subject matter, enlargement habits and photographic purposes.

r.e.
16-Aug-2021, 12:54
Thanks very much Oren. I think that the additional text is helpful.

r.e.
18-Aug-2021, 05:41
This is a follow-up to Bob Salomon's post #37 and my reply in post #38. Bob made the good point that a polariser on a lens this wide can be problematic. In my response, I said that I was interested in using one to control glare/reflections, not on the sky. That said, I think that the problem that Bob raises is potentially also an issue when a polariser is used as I proposed.

However, yesterday I saw a video that was quite encouraging. In it, UK landscape photographer Tom Heaton uses a Lee round polariser (mine is a 100mm square linear polariser) on a Canon full frame and Canon 16-35mm at 16mm. The subject is wet rocks in water on a beach on the UK coast. See the 8:34 mark, where he shows the effect without and with the polariser. The finished photograph is at 11:10. I should probably note that Heaton also used a Lee graduated neutral density filter and focus stacking (three shots) for this photograph.

All that aside, my main purpose in using a Lee polariser and/or Lee IRND filter is to see how the Grandagon 75mm plus centre filter reacts to filter stacking in terms of vignetting. At that, I'm just making do and will handhold the filter because I don't have a Lee 86mm adapter ring.

Without the centre filter, the Grandagon has a 67mm thread. Being standardised at 82mm for screw-in filters, without the centre filter I would just use my 67mm to 82mm step-up ring and screw-in filters. The problem of vignetting wouldn't arise with one filter, and probably not with two.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un_LjLBB9M4

r.e.
19-Aug-2021, 08:03
I expect to receive the Grandagon 75mm lens this afternoon and the Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter tomorrow, in time for the weekend.

One reason that I've purchased this lens is that it will make it easier to make photographs in an historic and highly diverse New York neighbourhood. Some of these photographs will show a shop front with the shop owner in front of his/her establishment. Basically, environmental portraits. The practical problem is making these photographs without setting up a tripod on the street and playing chicken with the traffic. Not to mention that shooting from the street means waiting for the parking space in front of the shop to be vacant. In New York, this could be an eternity. As a practical matter, shop owner subject + traffic + parked cars = no photograph.

Some quick snaps with my iPhone and an app called Artist's Viewfinder (https://www.artistsviewfinder.com) demonstrated that a 75mm lens would solve the problem. The two snaps below were taken using the app and 75mm frame lines. They show that with a 75mm lens I can make the photographs from the sidewalks, which are about 5m (16') wide. I think that I can avoid distorting the human subjects by keeping the camera horizontal (that is, not tilted up or down) and keeping the subjects away from the sides and corners of the frame. I also concluded that the Grandagon will be generally useful for making urban photographs, not just in these circumstances. There's discussion about Artist's Viewfinder in this thread, What Scouting/Planning Apps Are You Using in 2021? (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164815-What-Scouting-Planning-Apps-Are-You-Using-in-2021)

Judging from the first photo, I'm also going to need a broom :)

iPhone 11, Artist's Viewfinder, 75mm frame, black and white:

218820

iPhone 11, Artist's Viewfinder, 75mm frame, colour:

218824

The above photos should explain why I expressed interest in earlier posts (see the post just above this one) in using a polariser. One will be useful in dealing with reflections from shop front windows.

The other issue is camera height. In some cases, I'll need to get my camera either back further or fairly high off the ground to frame the shop front properly. I'll be able to determine this weekend whether the available rise on the Grandagon solves the problem. In any event, I plan to use a Miller CX6 fluid head, which is fairly tall to begin with, and if needed I can use a 150mm (6") riser. The first photo below shows my Arca-Swiss on the Miller. The second, albeit with a Blackmagic cinema camera on a ground tripod, shows the Miller head mounted on a 150mm riser.

Arca-Swiss 4x5 on a Miller CX6 Fluid Head:

218818

Miller CX6 + 150mm (6") Riser:

218832


Post continued below...

r.e.
19-Aug-2021, 15:07
Continued from post #46 above...

The rig in the photo below, with its small footprint, may also come in useful. It consists of a robust Gitzo Series 3 monopod and the RRS ground tripod shown in the last photo in the post just above. In that photo the legs are fully extended, whereas here they're at their shortest. I could use this rig without a tripod head (levelling a ground tripod is trivial), with a levelling base or with a conventional head.

Gitzo Series 3 Monopod + RRS Ground Tripod:

218823

r.e.
20-Aug-2021, 06:41
I've now received both the Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm lens and the Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter that a forum member has kindly leant me.

A comment about the lens...

I purchased it from forum participant @corallus. The condition of the barrel and glass is every bit as good as he described in his "for sale" post at Rodenstock Grandagon-N 75mm f/4.5 (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164774-Rodenstock-Grandagon-N-75mm-f-4-5-Lens&highlight=75mm)

Judging from the serial number, the lens was made in 1993. Rodenstock added a green stripe to many of its lenses, including this one, shortly after, in time for Photokina. I've noticed that lenses with a green stripe are often described as the "new version". Subject to any comments that Bob Salomon may have, my internet research suggests that the addition of a green stripe on the 75mm was cosmetic. It looks smart visually, and helps brand the lens lineup, but doesn't reflect a change to the mechanics or optics of this particular lens.

I'll post some photos of my Arca-Swiss 4x5 with the lens and the centre filter over the weekend. The plan is to test field of view, available lens movement (especially rise) and the centre filter's effect on images.

Bob Salomon
20-Aug-2021, 06:55
I've now received both the Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm lens and the Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter that a forum member has kindly leant me.

A comment about the lens...

I purchased it from forum participant @corallus. The condition of the barrel and glass is every bit as good as he described in his "for sale" post at Rodenstock Grandagon-N 75mm f/4.5 (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164774-Rodenstock-Grandagon-N-75mm-f-4-5-Lens&highlight=75mm)

Judging from the serial number, the lens was made in 1993. Rodenstock added a green stripe to many of its lenses, including this one, shortly after, in time for Photokina. I've noticed that lenses with a green stripe are often described as the "new version". Subject to any comments that Bob Salomon may have, my internet research suggests that the addition of a green stripe on the 75mm was cosmetic. It looks smart visually, and helps brand the lens lineup, but doesn't reflect a change to the mechanics or optics of this particular lens.

I'll post some photos of my Arca-Swiss 4x5 with the lens and the centre filter over the weekend. The plan is to test field of view, available lens movement (especially rise) and the centre filter's effect on images.

There is no difference, save the stripe, between those lenses and the Grandagon-N MC that preceded it.

r.e.
20-Aug-2021, 09:50
Earlier today, I came across the discussion in this 2016 thread about wide angle lenses, centre filters and fall-off. Well worth reading, I think. See Bob Salomon's post #13 and following: Help! Schneider XL Input (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?133334-Help!-Schneider-XL-input)

r.e.
21-Aug-2021, 18:34
I was planning to make some photographs with the 75mm Grandagon and centre filter tomorrow, but apparently Hurricane Henri has other ideas.

Tonight's internationally televised Central Park concert featuring big name artists was brought to an early and abrupt end by lightning, the rain's coming down pretty good in my part of the city, and Henri is supposed to make landfall on Long Island tomorrow as a Category 1 hurricane. For those who aren't familiar with New York City geography, Long Island is where Brooklyn and Queens are, and also where I live.

Doesn't sound like large format picture taking weather :)

On the upside, we're assured that we're in for some wet weather and a bit of wind, not Hurricane Sandy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy) Mark II.

Edit: The forecast for this has escalated quite a lot in the last few hours, from relatively minor tropical storm to category 1 hurricane. We weren't supposed to get any rain until tomorrow. The NY Times online says that NOAA has confirmed that the lightning that ended the Central Park concert, and the rain and thunder that we're getting, mean that Henri's outer bands are now here. Flights from LaGuardia and JFK, Long Island Railroad trains and the NYC-Boston Amtrak train are being cancelled. Fire Island is being evacuated. Bill de Blasio, the NY mayor, has ordered restaurants to close outdoor terraces and is calling for everyone to stay home tomorrow. Not looking forward to taking the dogs for their morning walk :)

r.e.
22-Aug-2021, 03:17
As the map shows, the National Hurricane Center's 5:00 a.m. track has the centre of Henri passing just off Long Island's Montauk Point, with tropical storm conditions in New York City. The current hurricane warning starts about 30km (20mi) up Long Island from where I am, and we're supposed to start getting tropical storm weather this morning. The local forecast is for 75mm - 150mm (3" - 6") of rain, with wind gusts to 70kmph (45mph). If 150mm/6" actually happens, it will probably test the post-Sandy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy) work that was done to protect NY Subway System tunnels from flooding.

The second photo shows Henri on radar as of 7:00 a.m. I've outlined NY City in red.

A fellow I know in Queens is streaming the view from his apartment. The third photo is a 7:25 a.m. screen capture from his feed. So far, lots of grey, no wind and light rain.

On the current forecast, the Grandagon will be staying indoors until Tuesday :)


218869

218871

218872

Bob Salomon
22-Aug-2021, 05:22
As the map shows, the National Hurricane Center's 5:00 a.m. track has the centre of Henri passing just off Long Island's Montauk Point, with tropical storm conditions in New York City. The current hurricane warning starts about 30km (20mi) up Long Island from where I am, and we're supposed to start getting tropical storm weather around 8:00 a.m. The local forecast is for 75mm - 150mm (3" - 6") of rain, with wind gusts to 70kmph (45mph). If 150mm/6" actually happens, it will probably test the post-Sandy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy) work that was done to protect NY Subway System tunnels from flooding.

The second photo shows Henri on radar as of 7:00 a.m. I've outlined NY City in red.

A fellow I know in Queens is streaming the view from his apartment. The third photo is a 7:25 a.m. screen capture from his feed.

On the current forecast, the Grandagon will be staying indoors until Tuesday :)


218869

218871

218872

Good luck!!!

r.e.
22-Aug-2021, 07:17
Good luck!!!

I'm on high ground and seeing steady, but not heavy, rain so far. Apparently there was plenty last night. According to the AccuWeather screen capture below, Brooklyn got over 150mm/6". People are uploading flood footage from parts of NY City and just across the river in New Jersey. This brief clip was shot in Brooklyn (Williamsburg neighbourhood) last night.

Henri has been downgraded to a Tropical Storm, but it's still out to sea southeast of Montauk and hasn't really hit this area yet. Hopefully it will mostly give us a pass and weaken as it heads for Connecticut.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW2NoDL8MqA

218884

r.e.
22-Aug-2021, 08:42
Getting back to the Grandagon...

I've misplaced the Rodenstock/Linos lens wrench that I've had forever. Having read nothing but superlatives about the S.K. Grimes wrench, I decided to spring for one, flat head version. Great service from Grimes, which got the wrench to me over night. Photos of both below.

The Grimes wrench is very nicely made. However, it has to be used with care. Initially, I wasn't focused enough and it slipped. It was a "slow down" moment. If the Grimes wrench slips, I think that it could do serious damage to a lens, diaphragm blades in particular. It's probably a good idea to hold it as shown in the S.K. Grimes photo below. The Rodenstock/Linos style of lens wrench isn't adjustable, but it has the advantages of not requiring any setup and being pretty much accident proof.

I hope to get to the Grandagon and centre filter tests on Tuesday.


218888


218889


218890

Bob Salomon
22-Aug-2021, 09:37
Getting back to the Grandagon...

I've misplaced the Rodenstock/Linos lens wrench that I've had forever. Having read nothing but superlatives about the S.K. Grimes wrench, I decided to spring for one, flat head version. Great service from Grimes, which got the wrench to me over night. Photos of both below.

The Grimes wrench is very nicely made. However, it has to be used with care. Initially, I wasn't focused enough and it slipped. It was a "slow down" moment. If the Grimes wrench slips, I think that it could do serious damage to a lens, diaphragm blades in particular. It's probably a good idea to hold it as shown in the S.K. Grimes photo below. The Rodenstock/Linos style of lens wrench isn't adjustable, but it has the advantages of not requiring any setup and being pretty much accident proof.

I hope to get to the Grandagon and centre filter tests on Tuesday.


218888


218889


218890

Interesting story about the Rodenstock wrench.
At Photokina one year Rodenstock brought several of their technicians to the show to do free minor CLA on customers lenses at the show.
At each station the tech had this flat factory made lens wrench. One of our larger dealers came to me and said that he would buy lots of them if the factory would market them. Then he said the same about the microfiber cloths the techs used to clean the lenses after they worked on them.
At our meeting with the export manager and the Product Manager I told them that we wanted to order the cloths and the wrench.
Thus the Rodenstock Lens Wrench and the Rodenstock MicroFiber cloth were born as retail Rodenstock products!

Bernice Loui
22-Aug-2021, 11:07
Got one of these Rodenstock lens spanner wrenched many, many years ago. They work GOOD.

Bernice

r.e.
27-Aug-2021, 14:38
I've now received both the Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm lens and the Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter that a forum member has kindly leant me.



Having done some tests, I decided to purchase a Rodenstock 67/86 0.45ND centre filter for the lens.

I want to be able to use a Lee100 filter holder and Lee square 100mm x 100mm filters with the centre filter, so I've ordered an 86mm adapter ring.

I may also want to use screw-in filters, on which I'm standardised at 82mm. My preferred option would be 95mm filters via an 86mm to 95mm step-up ring, but I don't know whether a step-up ring plus 95mm filter would cause vignetting. Anyone have a view on this?

I'll post some photos of my Arca-Swiss 4x5 with the lens and centre filter when the Lee adapter arrives, maybe sooner if it looks like delivery of the adapter will take several days.

Bob Salomon
27-Aug-2021, 14:44
Having done some tests, I decided to purchase a Rodenstock 67/86 0.45ND centre filter for the lens.

I want to be able to use a Lee100 filter holder and Lee square 100mm x 100mm filters with the centre filter, so I've ordered an 86mm adapter ring.

I may also want to use screw-in filters, on which I'm standardised at 82mm. My preferred option would be 95mm filters via an 82mm to 95mm step-up ring, but I don't know whether a step-up ring plus 95mm filter would cause vignetting. Anyone have a view on this?

I'll post some photos of my Arca-Swiss 4x5 with the lens and centre filter when the Lee adapter arrives, maybe sooner if it looks like receipt of the adapter will take several days.

If you get the Heliopan slim brass rings and their slim filters you should be OK.
If you get most other rings and fatter filters you may have problems.

r.e.
27-Aug-2021, 15:25
If you get the Heliopan slim brass rings and their slim filters you should be OK.
If you get most other rings and fatter filters you may have problems.

Thank-you Bob.

Mark Darragh
27-Aug-2021, 15:52
Having done some tests, I decided to purchase a Rodenstock 67/86 0.45ND centre filter for the lens.

I want to be able to use a Lee100 filter holder and Lee square 100mm x 100mm filters with the centre filter, so I've ordered an 86mm adapter ring.



You might want to consider a Lee slip-on filter holder which would fit over the centre filter rather than into the front thread, much less risk of vignetting.

r.e.
27-Aug-2021, 16:12
You might want to consider a Lee slip-on filter holder which would fit over the centre filter rather than into the front thread, much less risk of vignetting.

Thanks. If you're talking about the Lee Push-On holder, my understanding is that Lee no longer makes it. I'd be delighted to learn otherwise, but in any event second-hand is an option.

My preference is to use the Lee100 holder, and I'll find out when the adapter ring arrives whether there is, or isn't, a vignetting issue. Unfortunately, neither Lee nor Filter Dude (https://www.thefilterdude.com) make an 86mm wide angle adapter ring, only a standard ring.

Mark Darragh
27-Aug-2021, 16:20
I'm not sure about availability in the US but they appear to be available in the UK. I have occasionally seen them at a fraction of the new cost second-hand.

https://www.linhofstudio.com/products/Lee-100mm-series-Filters-Holder-Adapter/Lee%20Filters_Push_on_Holder

r.e.
27-Aug-2021, 16:32
I'm not sure about availability in the US but they appear to be available in the UK. I have occasionally seen them at a fraction of the new cost second-hand.

https://www.linhofstudio.com/products/Lee-100mm-series-Filters-Holder-Adapter/Lee%20Filters_Push_on_Holder

Thanks. In the U.S., that's shown as "Discontinued". However, I just found it on the Lee Filters site, not under "Holders" but under "Accessories". If I wanted one, it would be easy enough to order it from Linhof Studio or Robert White (https://www.robertwhite.co.uk).

I'll see how it goes with the Lee100 holder. The push-on isn't cheap, and affixing it to this lens is an issue in itself, no doubt also requiring an adapter of some kind. The Lee100 holder, which I already have, is a simpler and less costly solution. If it vignettes, the best solution may be the screw-in filter option that I talked about in post #58.

This screen shot is from Robert White:

219075

r.e.
28-Aug-2021, 04:15
Further to Mark Darragh's posts above about Lee's Push-On Holder, I've now measured the outside diameter of Rodenstock's 67/86 centre filter. It's 90mm. This means that the Push-On holder could be used if one adds Lee's 100mm to 90mm donut adapter. Here are ex-VAT prices from Robert White (see the screen capture in the previous post):

Lee 100mm Push-On Filter Holder: £92.91
Lee 100mm-90mm Donut Adapter: £32.00
Total: £124.91 ex-VAT

That is currently about US$172.00, plus shipping. As Mark says, one might be able to purchase these components for quite a bit less second-hand.

I'll also be considering screw-in filters (see post #58) if my Lee100 Holder with 86mm adapter ring causes vignetting. Lee and third party vendor Filter Dude, which appears to be located in Pennsylvania, make adapters for wide angle lenses specifically to address this kind of problem, but not in 86mm. I've ordered my adapter from Filter Dude because B&H is out of stock on Lee's 86mm adapter. Filter Dude's adapter is also quite a bit less expensive, and its adapters are said to be well-made.

Anyway, when I get the adapter ring I'll write a post on whether using the Lee100 Holder results in vignetting.

A couple of general comments on Robert White and Lee Filters... Robert White's pricing on Lee Filters products is very competitive, better than U.S. prices and other U.K. prices that I've seen. Located in Poole about 50mi/80km from Lee Filters, it can probably get any components that aren't in stock fairly quickly. I think that Lee itself has very good customer service. On a few occasions, I've e-mailed questions to Lee from the U.S. and received fairly fast responses during U.S. business hours. Lee is owned by Panavision, and my impression is that questions from the U.S. and Canada are being answered from Panavision's office in Burbank.

r.e.
28-Aug-2021, 10:44
These two photos show how the Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter was packaged as I received it.

The plastic box in the first photo is a bit over 170mm (6.7") square. The centre filter can be nestled in the brown Rodenstock lens cap for greater protection.

The pamphlet in the second photo fits in the box. It is undated, but it refers to the 1994 Photokina so was published sometime after. Running five pages in English, it says that this "new" version of the filter was introduced at the 1994 event. The pamphlet compares the performance of the "new" filter to the "old" one, and to two centre filters made by other, unnamed manufacturers. It's a marketing document, but it contains useful technical information.


219104


219105

r.e.
28-Aug-2021, 15:42
First photo shows the lens by itself, second with the centre filter. Camera is an Arca-Swiss F-Line, 171mm standards.

I'm looking for a more flexible bellows. The recessed lens board helps, but I feel like I'm fighting the bellows on lens movement. Custom Bellows (http://www.custombellows.co.uk) in the U.K. can make one, but I'd have to find, and send them, a bellows frame, which they don't sell. Another member of the forum is also looking for an Arca-Swiss 171mm bag bellows. Now that France's August holidays are ending, he plans to speak with Arca-Swiss about availability in 171mm. There's a Hong Kong maker of 171mm bag bellows on eBay. The quality may well be good, but I haven't come across any comments on those bellows.

As noted above, I'll post about how well a Lee100 Holder works with this setup when I receive an 86mm adapter ring this coming week.

Rodenstock Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm

219118

With Rodenstock 67/86 0.45 ND Centre Filter

219119

r.e.
29-Aug-2021, 05:49
As an aside, I've become a fan of the red-fringed dark cloth in the photos just above. It's made by Paramo Clothing in the U.K. to a design by Joe Cornish (http://www.joecornishgallery.co.uk). It would also work with a 6x9 camera. I've yet to see a perfect solution for liquid crystal displays, but I've used this dark cloth successfully with the Blackmagic camera display and external 5" monitor/recorder shown in the photo below.

In July, I wrote a post about this dark cloth, and included a link to Joe Cornish's video showing how it works: Paramo/Joe Cornish Dark Cloth (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164624-Paramo-Joe-Cornish-Dark-Cloth). Online, it's sold by Paramo (https://www.paramo-clothing.com/en-gb/) and by Linhof Studio (https://www.linhofstudio.com).


219154

r.e.
30-Aug-2021, 10:24
I now expect to have an Arca-Swiss 20cm leather bag bellows in addition to a Lee100 86mm adapter ring by about the end of the week. More photos to come.

In case anyone is wondering why I'm documenting this, it's because I would have found some of this information, and photos, useful when I started going down this route a couple of weeks ago. Maybe the next person will too.

r.e.
2-Sep-2021, 07:42
I received an Arca-Swiss F-Line 20cm bag bellows yesterday. Having tried the standard 38cm accordion bellows with a recessed lens board (post #67), I think that the bag bellows is an essential accessory for this lens if one wants to use lens movements. The bag bellows significantly expands the range of movement and makes adjustments easier. There isn't a chance that I'd get the amount of rise in the photos below out of the accordion bellows, and I wasn't even pushing rise to its limit.

Reading forum posts on this bag bellows, it looks like it can be used with lenses up to 210mm without movements and about 180mm with. In my case, this means that I can use this bellows with the Rodenstock Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm, a Rodenstock APO Sironar-N f/5.6 150mm and, without movements, maybe a Docter Optic f/4.5 210mm. If I didn't need more than about 0.66% magnification, the bellows would also work with my Nikkor AM ED f/5.6 120mm macro lens. My shortest Arca-Swiss rail is the 30cmm rail in the photos below. If I was planning to shoot only with this bellows and the 75mm and/or 150mm, Arca-Swiss's 15cm (6") rail would make the rig a bit more compact.

I also read a few of the many threads on the forum about conditioners for leather bellows. The bellows are in excellent shape and I'll be sparing in use of a conditioner. I already use Vanson Leathers (https://vansonleathers.com) conditioner on a Vanson motorbike jacket and trousers, which should work fine. However, I also ordered something called Apple Brand Leather Cleaner and Conditioner (https://www.amazon.com/Apple-brand-Leather-Cleaner-Conditioner/dp/B002626OLY/ref=sr_1_7?dchild=1&keywords=apple+leather+cleaner+and+conditioner&qid=1630588787&sr=8-7). This stuff is popular with owners of high end leather products, and is apparently recommended by retailers of Louis Vuitton leather goods. I got a kick out of a YouTube video by a guy who uses saddle soap to clean Louis Vuitton leather because he lives in Montana and his family has horses, followed by this Apple conditioner. I'll have a look at what's in the Apple bottles when they arrive later today.

When I receive Filter Dude's 86mm adapter ring for my Lee100 Holder, I'll test the Lee/centre filter combination for vignetting and post a photo or two. Not impressed with Filter Dude, to which I paid extra for USPS Priority Post, only to have Filter Dude sit on the order that I made last Friday until Wednesday afternoon, and ignore an e-mail that I sent enquiring about my order's status. USPS says that the adapter will arrive in New York from Pennsylvania on Saturday.

Hard on the heels of Hurricane Henri (posts #51-54), the remnants of Hurricane Ida visited NY last night. The National Weather Service Flash Flood Warning went off on my phone three times. On the way out to our co-op's courtyard this morning to take these photos, I discovered the super and porters dealing with a good bit of water in the building's basement.


Arca-Swiss Bag Bellows, Rise, Rodenstock Grandagon-N f/4.5 75mm:

219278


With the Rodenstock 67/86 0.45 ND Centre Filter:

219277

Bernice Loui
2-Sep-2021, 10:47
Looks great!

Bag bellows are a mostly must to get the most out of a wide angle lens on a view camera. What is often not appreciated, a good bag bellows will work good with a normal focal length lens and can go some ways to reduce internal light reflections inside the bellows due to a larger image circle as the bellows tends to expand outward allowing the lens image circle to be captured by the extended bellows area.


Bernice

Drew Wiley
2-Sep-2021, 13:59
On my Ebony 4X5 I have one of those bellow which is typically pleat-tapered part of the length, and partially bag too. It works well all the way from 90 to 360 mm lenses. My Sinar monorails have all kinds of bellows options of course; but I normally just stick with the Norma-style 4X5 tapered bellows, which is superb all the way from 90 clear out to 450. Their later box bellows would be nowhere as versatile. They made two styles of bag bellows, one more extreme than the other. You know all this of course, Bernice, probably better than me; but I'm just putting it out there in terms of general information. CF's I've commented on before, and have never even used anything as short as a 75, so will keep my mouth shut about that.

r.e.
2-Sep-2021, 17:03
Looks great!

Bag bellows are a mostly must to get the most out of a wide angle lens on a view camera. What is often not appreciated, a good bag bellows will work good with a normal focal length lens and can go some ways to reduce internal light reflections inside the bellows due to a larger image circle as the bellows tends to expand outward allowing the lens image circle to be captured by the extended bellows area.

Compared to the accordion bellows, it's night and day, especially since I know, as discussed earlier in this thread, that I need rise for how I'm going to use the lens.

r.e.
2-Sep-2021, 17:21
This post is for anyone in the future who wants to get an Arca-Swiss 20cm leather bag bellows for 171 cameras.

Before I came across one second-hand a few days ago, I looked at alternatives.

Another forum member has confirmed with Arca-Swiss that it will make this bellows to order. It isn't cheap, but the price is in line with what this bellows cost before Arca-Swiss moved to 141 lens boards. He has ordered one, with 4-5 weeks delivery. If you are told by an Arca-Swiss national rep, as I was, that the bellows is simply unavailable, I would suggest that you phone Arca-Swiss directly in Besançon, France. Had I not fortuitously come across one second-hand earlier this week, this is the route that I would have gone.

There is a Hong Kong company, operating under two eBay accounts, that makes and sells bag bellows including one that it says will fit an Arca-Swiss 171 camera. There is a three page thread about this company. My posts about my exchange with this company start from the following link to post #104. Read to post #111: Bellows from ecbuyonline2008??? (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?70338-Bellows-from-ecbuyonline2008&p=1612602&viewfull=1#post1612602) The bottom line is that the frames shown in their photos will not fit Arca-Swiss 171 standards, and they have not responded to my question about this.

Custom Bellows in the U.K. appears to be well-regarded, but it is only an option if you already have 171 bellows frames. They don't make the frames and you have to supply them. They quoted me £98 ex-VAT, but that doesn't include shipping, including shipping them frames.

r.e.
3-Sep-2021, 20:02
When I receive Filter Dude's 86mm adapter ring for my Lee100 Holder, I'll test the Lee/centre filter combination for vignetting and post a photo or two.

The adapter ring arrived this afternoon so I'll be able to check for vignetting, and post photos, on the weekend.

Wanting to make sure I have the process down right, I did a search and found several threads on the subject. This thread, started by forum founder QT Luong 21 years ago, was brief and to the point: Checking for vignetting. Aperture? (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?2166-Checking-for-vignetting-Aperture)

Bernice Loui
4-Sep-2021, 10:40
Suggestion, Rodenstock has a recommended rise-fall, shift of 25mm/29mm for the 75mm f4.5 Grandagon on 4x5. Mark with tape or similar easy to remove, non damaging indicator on the camera's front & rear standards to aid in limiting exceeding image circle issues on the film image. One thing to check lens aperture at GG cut corners, secondary check is a good thing as assurance.


Bernice

r.e.
4-Sep-2021, 14:36
Suggestion, Rodenstock has a recommended rise-fall, shift of 25mm/29mm for the 75mm f4.5 Grandagon on 4x5. Mark with tape or similar easy to remove, non damaging indicator on the camera's front & rear standards to aid in limiting exceeding image circle issues on the film image. One thing to check lens aperture at GG cut corners, secondary check is a good thing as assurance.

Thanks Bernice, that's a very good idea.