PDA

View Full Version : Wista 45VX/RF/SP bellows draw and idea



rdeloe
7-Jan-2019, 15:08
While I'm waiting for my Wista 45VX to slowly make its way to me through the postal system, I have a couple questions about bellows draw for people familiar with this camera.

I'd like to be able to use a 300mm lens on this camera, and possibly even longer. I understand that I will need an extension bed -- either the 460mm or 300mm, with the choice most likely depending on what I find first; these seem to be quite scarce. I also know that Wista made an extension bellows with 600mm of draw. However, I'd rather not have to get the Wista extension bellows because it's one more thing to carry.

So first question: assuming I'm using an extension bed, is there enough "stretch" in the normal bellows to allow me to get more than 300mm of draw (at the cost of limited or no movements)? If so, how much extra "stretch draw" would there be?

Second, has anyone had bellows made by one of the Hong Kong (or other) workshops out of synthetic material that (a) gives more than 300mm of draw, and (b) are thin enough that they allow the camera to be folded up normally? I've messaged one of the vendors on eBay who has a good reputation on the forum (ecbuyonline2008) to see if they think it's possible, but I would definitely prefer a second opinion, especially from someone who has actually done this already.

Rob de Loe
Guelph, ON Canada

Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2019, 15:32
No, you will also need a longer bellows, especially if you want to do movements!

JimL
7-Jan-2019, 16:03
A lightweight 300mm like the Nikkor M on a 50-60mm tophat extension board (going by memory here) will work fine with the normal bellows. The thinnest and best bellows I've seen are from Custom Bellows (http://www.custombellows.co.uk/) in the UK.

AJ Edmondson
7-Jan-2019, 16:57
My memory may be failing me here but I have used a 305mm G-Claron on my 45 SP (for sure) and it seems that I could focus the lens to about 15 feet. I didn't use it often but I did not use a "top-hat" board for certain and, while I haven't searched old posts on this forum, I distinctly remember answering this same question with specific distance measurements.

Joel

rdeloe
7-Jan-2019, 18:16
I'm trying to avoid the tophat extension board route (and also telephoto lenses). The camera does axis tilt and I'd like to be able to do that with longer lenses too. Thanks for the suggestion though.

It was too much to hope that I could eke out some extra stretch from the standard bellows! Oh well. I'll shoot the folks at Custom Bellows a note to see what they can come up with. If I have to get an extension bellows, it's probably going to be easier and cheaper to have one made. In all my searching I have only found one example that sold, and none for sale.

David Karp
8-Jan-2019, 21:38
Even if you have a longer bellows you will be limited by the mechanical limits of the camera's ability to extend. I don't think you will get what you want with just a longer bellows.

Bob Salomon
9-Jan-2019, 03:54
Even if you have a longer bellows you will be limited by the mechanical limits of the camera's ability to extend. I don't think you will get what you want with just a longer bellows.

That is why he mentioned the accessory extension bed for the Wista.

rdeloe
9-Jan-2019, 07:33
Next up I need to figure out if I can squeeze a modern longer bellows into the camera. The bellows manufacturer thinks it's possible because the materials he is using are thinner than the materials Wista originally used. That might allow for a slightly longer bellows to fit into the same volume of space occupied by the standard Wista bellows. I have to think this through some more because I could end up buying a longer bellows that doesn't allow the camera to close, and only gives me a little bit more extension.

The other option is I might just buy the longest non-telephoto lens I can use with the standard bellows and rails. I'm thinking of a G-Claron 270/9. With a flange focal length of 264mm on that lens I could focus down to 2.2m, which would be fine as I have other lenses if I need to have more magnification.

Bob Salomon
9-Jan-2019, 07:58
Next up I need to figure out if I can squeeze a modern longer bellows into the camera. The bellows manufacturer thinks it's possible because the materials he is using are thinner than the materials Wista originally used. That might allow for a slightly longer bellows to fit into the same volume of space occupied by the standard Wista bellows. I have to think this through some more because I could end up buying a longer bellows that doesn't allow the camera to close, and only gives me a little bit more extension.

The other option is I might just buy the longest non-telephoto lens I can use with the standard bellows and rails. I'm thinking of a G-Claron 270/9. With a flange focal length of 264mm on that lens I could focus down to 2.2m, which would be fine as I have other lenses if I need to have more magnification.

The camera comes with 12” of bellows and extension. A longer bellows will not help unless you get a longer bed.

David Karp
9-Jan-2019, 09:26
That is why he mentioned the accessory extension bed for the Wista.

Ah. Missed that. I went the other way. I use the top hat type boards, but I did catch that he did not want to do that.

David Karp
9-Jan-2019, 09:31
I should mention that with longer lenses I rarely use tilt, so the top hat board is not a problem for me. I guess it depends on what you photograph. I mostly photograph landscapes and use the longer lenses for things far away that I cannot walk to, etc., so I am not so concerned with tilt in those situations.

You can easily use a Nikkor 300M for subjects at infinity on the VX. Certainly, you are not going to be focusing on items close to the camera with that focal length.

rdeloe
9-Jan-2019, 13:00
The camera comes with 12” of bellows and extension. A longer bellows will not help unless you get a longer bed.

I realize that Bob... My plan for a longer bellows has always involved an extension board.

Bob Salomon
9-Jan-2019, 13:45
I realize that Bob... My plan for a longer bellows has always involved an extension board.

Extension bed, an extension board would be an extended lens board.

rdeloe
9-Jan-2019, 14:24
Extension bed, an extension board would be an extended lens board.

Oops, yes of course! That's what I getting for answering posts in between other things... I would prefer not use an extension board or tophat. I want to use an extension rail/bed/track so I can preserve axis tilt. Cheers, Rob

tweggers
9-Jan-2019, 21:03
Hello,
When I had my Wista SP I used a G-Claron F9 270mm and had no problem and then preformed great. I know it's not 300mm but close and I didn't need to make other changes.
BTW: I still have the lens and board.

tweggers
10-Jan-2019, 13:11
Hi Rob, Your email has been rejected for some reason?

rdeloe
12-Jan-2019, 11:48
To close the circle on this thread, I think my idea of a longer bellows made out of thinner material is a non-starter. (Bob's "No!" response to the original post seems to apply to both the ideas I outlined!) My 45VX came with a new synthetic bellows installed. It's a nice bellows and has the full draw needed to use the camera. However, it doesn't compress quite as much as the original (I presume) because the camera just barely closes. The tolerances are extremely tight. The replacement synthetic bellows needs to compress by about another 2 mm to make closing the camera easy.

So that means that for my "longer bellows in the same space" idea to work, the material would have to be incredibly thin. Maybe that's possible -- I don't know. But it clearly isn't possible using the material used to make the modern synthetic replacement bellows I have.

Thanks all for the ideas and suggestions.

Doremus Scudder
12-Jan-2019, 12:18
Before you go to a lot of trouble, why don't you just try an extended lensboard? I've been using one with a 300mm Nikkor M on my Wistas for years. Front tilt is tiny bit limited a bit by mechanical vignetting from the extension tube, but there's a lot of movement still usable. Making tilt (and swing) adjustments with the front is just like working with base tilts, but a bit more pronounced; i.e., not really a problem at all. Plus, you'll find you probably won't use movements as much with longer lenses anyway; it's just the nature of those kind of shots.

I guess I'm saying, "get over your addiction to axis tilts and get on with it. It's not so hard."

Best,

Doremus

rdeloe
12-Jan-2019, 17:14
It's not so much an addiction Doremus as trying to avoid compromising unless I have to. Is it safe to admit on the LFF that you also shoot digital? ;) In my digital personality, I've built an entire photographic workflow around tilt-shift on a tiny APS-C sensor https://www.robdeloephotography.com/Pages/Tiltshift-on-APSC). Talk about compromises! Not only is it not axis tilt -- it's just rear base tilts. You may be sure that I know all about base tilt...

My Wista 45VX was supposed to be my "Ahhh, not compromising" kit. But that's a fantasy. It's always about compromises. Especially with large format. What was I thinking? So yes, I shall get over it quickly!





Before you go to a lot of trouble, why don't you just try an extended lensboard? I've been using one with a 300mm Nikkor M on my Wistas for years. Front tilt is tiny bit limited a bit by mechanical vignetting from the extension tube, but there's a lot of movement still usable. Making tilt (and swing) adjustments with the front is just like working with base tilts, but a bit more pronounced; i.e., not really a problem at all. Plus, you'll find you probably won't use movements as much with longer lenses anyway; it's just the nature of those kind of shots.

I guess I'm saying, "get over your addiction to axis tilts and get on with it. It's not so hard."

Best,

Doremus

JimL
12-Jan-2019, 20:35
FYI, here is a picture showing a rather well used OEM Wista bellows on the left and a set from Custom Bellows on the right. The height from the table surface to the top rim of the front plate is 17mm on the OEM bellows, and 21mm on the CB bellows. The CB bellows easily compresses a few more mm, and I suspect that the Wista bellows would have sat a bit thicker when new. The Wista bellows have a papery feeling outer with a fabric lining, which the Custom Bellows are a synthetic outer, also with a fabric lining.
186355

Doremus Scudder
13-Jan-2019, 13:02
It's not so much an addiction Doremus as trying to avoid compromising unless I have to....

While base tilts are a bit more fiddly than axis tilts, there's really no compromise as far as the final image is concerned. Really, as far as placing the image plane goes, the only thing that matters is the spacial orientation of the planes of the film and front standard. How you arrive at that is immaterial. If you need to deal with base tilts in order to use a particular lens on your Wista without going to a lot of trouble and expense modifying the camera, I'd consider that a no-brainer...

FWIW, I think that base tilts can be inherently more accurate than axis (or even asymmetrical) tilts. With base tilts you can pick focus points very far apart, at opposites sides on the ground glass, thus giving you a better chance of precisely positioning the movement that with axis tilts, with which you need to, by definition, choose one focus point on the center axis. Not doing so ends up involving a process of reiteration to get both focus points in sharp focus, which makes it, in practice, just the same as using a base tilt. Asymmetrical tilts and swings are more accurate than axis tilts/swings for the same reason.

I use lightweight field cameras and have to deal with base tilts all the time; it's my trade-off (compromise, if you will) for minimizing weight. I find that, when I'm in practice, I can apply a movement using the base tilt just about as fast as I can with axis tilts. For me, adding weight and bulk to my kit would be an unacceptable compromise :)

And, please take my admonition in my previous post as intended; with a smile and a touch of sarcasm. Upon re-reading, I can see how it could come off as a bit harsh or dismissive; not my intention as all.

Best,

Doremus

Bob Salomon
13-Jan-2019, 15:14
While base tilts are a bit more fiddly than axis tilts, there's really no compromise as far as the final image is concerned. Really, as far as placing the image plane goes, the only thing that matters is the spacial orientation of the planes of the film and front standard. How you arrive at that is immaterial. If you need to deal with base tilts in order to use a particular lens on your Wista without going to a lot of trouble and expense modifying the camera, I'd consider that a no-brainer...

FWIW, I think that base tilts can be inherently more accurate than axis (or even asymmetrical) tilts. With base tilts you can pick focus points very far apart, at opposites sides on the ground glass, thus giving you a better chance of precisely positioning the movement that with axis tilts, with which you need to, by definition, choose one focus point on the center axis. Not doing so ends up involving a process of reiteration to get both focus points in sharp focus, which makes it, in practice, just the same as using a base tilt. Asymmetrical tilts and swings are more accurate than axis tilts/swings for the same reason.

I use lightweight field cameras and have to deal with base tilts all the time; it's my trade-off (compromise, if you will) for minimizing weight. I find that, when I'm in practice, I can apply a movement using the base tilt just about as fast as I can with axis tilts. For me, adding weight and bulk to my kit would be an unacceptable compromise :)

And, please take my admonition in my previous post as intended; with a smile and a touch of sarcasm. Upon re-reading, I can see how it could come off as a bit harsh or dismissive; not my intention as all.

Best,

Doremus

Base tilts also shits subject placement. That is why asymmetrical movements came about. Optical axis movements do not change subject position.

Once mastered all are fast and equally so.

rdeloe
14-Jan-2019, 08:39
Doremus, no offense taken! Every Internet forum has its own character. Most have a very poor character... LFF is a refreshing contrast. People are generally polite and direct, which is good.
Cheers, Rob



And, please take my admonition in my previous post as intended; with a smile and a touch of sarcasm. Upon re-reading, I can see how it could come off as a bit harsh or dismissive; not my intention as all.

Best,

Doremus

rdeloe
14-Jan-2019, 08:41
Thanks for the picture Jim. That's actually quite helpful to see. I don't know where the replacement bellows I received was made, but it looks similar to the one in your picture from Custom Bellows. I except the CB bellows is a tight fit in that space (like mine). I had to change out the light seal foam on my Wista, and I started with a 3mm thick closed cell foam. I have to pull that out and replace it with something on the order of 1.5mm or 2mm because I can't close the case anymore. The tolerances are very tight.



FYI, here is a picture showing a rather well used OEM Wista bellows on the left and a set from Custom Bellows on the right. The height from the table surface to the top rim of the front plate is 17mm on the OEM bellows, and 21mm on the CB bellows. The CB bellows easily compresses a few more mm, and I suspect that the Wista bellows would have sat a bit thicker when new. The Wista bellows have a papery feeling outer with a fabric lining, which the Custom Bellows are a synthetic outer, also with a fabric lining.
186355

JimL
14-Jan-2019, 15:43
I don't have any problem closing the camera - the front standard is definitely hitting the hard stops inside the body, as opposed to the bellows preventing it from going all the way back.

rdeloe
14-Jan-2019, 16:47
I need to talk to the seller. With the foam light seals removed, this is as far back as the bellows go... If those two parts of the rail are supposed to be flush, on my camera the rail part of the front standard is proud by about 1.5mm. Sigh. 186408

Daniel Casper Lohenstein
15-Jan-2019, 06:24
Good afternoon to everybody,

I wonder why we have to extend the bellows and the focusing rail when working with field cameras.

Bellows are sensible and expensive, a 600mm rail is bulky and fragile, too, especially in a backpack in the field.

Cameras like the Mamiya Press and the Horseman VH or the Ebony New Wide 45 camera showed a simple solution to the extension problem.

They added a little spacer box at the back of the camera, to do macros (Mamiya), to enlarge the image to 4x5 (Horseman), to allow focusing with longer lenses (Ebony).

All you need is an wooden / aluminium box that fits into the Graflock mount of the 4x5 back on the camera.

On the back of the box you need another Graflock back to mount the groundglass and the 4x5 film holder.

I think this could even improve the balance of the camera, given that your 300mm bellows with the 600mm lens in the front standard is fully extended.

If you connect the sides of the box with hinges, you can fold it flat for transport. Then you need a black cotton cloth of the inside of the extension box.

This solution will be camera-independent. It works with every international 4x5 back.

It's ideal to do macro photography, too.

You can add several smaller spacers to obtain a given length, according to your lenses.

Of course, shifting will be difficult (vignetting).

To avoid vignetting, you could mount an enlarged spacer box directly on the camera body and install the entire Wista back on this enlarged box.

Regards

Bob Salomon
15-Jan-2019, 06:31
Good afternoon to everybody,

I wonder why we have to extend the bellows and the focusing rail when working with field cameras.

Bellows are sensible and expensive, a 600mm rail is bulky and fragile, too, especially in a backback in the field.

Cameras like the Mamiya Press and the Horseman VH showed a simple solution to the extension problem.

They added a little spacer box at the back of the camera, to do macros (Mamiya) or enlarge the image to 4x5 (Horseman).

All you need is an wooden / aluminium box that fits into the Graflock mount of the 4x5 back on the camera.

On the back of the box you need another Graflock back to mount the groundglass and the 4x5 film holder.

I think this could even improve the balance of the camera, given that your 300mm bellows with the 600mm lens in the front standard is fully extended.

If you connect the sides of the box with hinges, you can fold it flat for transport. Then you need a black cotton cloth of the inside of the extension box.

This solution will be camera-independent. It works with every international 4x5 back.

It's ideal to do macro photography, too.

You can add several smaller spacers to obtain a given length, according to your lenses.

Regards

But it would severely limit back movements without vignetting!

Mark Crabtree
15-Jan-2019, 07:40
Base tilts also shits subject placement...

"Base tilts also shits subject placement."

Now I know why my pictures stink.

Mark

Daniel Casper Lohenstein
15-Jan-2019, 12:53
But it would severely limit back movements without vignetting!

Ja, natürlich!

But - do we need much back movements with long focal lenses?

Using a 600mm lens gives rather flat images of small details far away from the camera, with little enlargement in the dark room and long distance from the viewer to the print on the wall.

And we don't photograph large houses, buildings or objects with great distances in depth, from near to far, or huge dimensions that need movements.

Regards

Bob Salomon
15-Jan-2019, 13:06
Ja, natürlich!

But - do we need much back movements with long focal lenses?

Using a 600mm lens gives rather flat images of small details far away from the camera, with little enlargement in the dark room and long distance from the viewer to the print on the wall.

And we don't photograph large houses, buildings or objects with great distances in depth, from near to far, or huge dimensions that need movements.

Regards

Except you might want to reposition the subject using shifts. And with an extension bed and bellows places the front controls possibly beyond arms reach from under the dark cloth.

neil poulsen
15-Jan-2019, 21:43
I had a Wista SP. I thought that it would be nice to have a clamshell, in addition to my relatively light-weight rail camera.

Two Wista possibilities . . .

With Wista's removable bellows capability, they made a longer bellows, longer rail combination that could both be installed on their metal cameras. I bought a set on EBay and gave it a try. In my opinion it was too wobbly, so I returned it.

Another Wista option is an extension that fits onto the Wista lensboard. It includes an adjustable length tube with a fixture at the opposite end to receive a Technika lensboard and lens. This enables one to extend a 300mm lens out in front of the front standard. I tried this with a 355mm G-Claron, and I thought that the lens was too heavy for the camera with this device. However, it might work fine with one of the Copal 1 300mm lenses. (Nikon M, or a G-Claron?)

As a third non-Wista option, Rodenstock made a doubler that could be added to a 150mm lens to obtain a 300mm focal length. (One loses two stops of aperture using this doubler.) I bought one of these, but I've not yet had the occasion to use it. Depending on how often one needs to longer focal length, it may be an option. There's is some loss of resolution, as one might expect.

I used the Wista SP system a few times. But, I determined that I preferred my light-weight, rail 4x5. So, the Wista SP was sold.

Bob Salomon
16-Jan-2019, 01:45
I had a Wista SP. I thought that it would be nice to have a clamshell, in addition to my relatively light-weight rail camera.

Two Wista possibilities . . .

With Wista's removable bellows capability, they made a longer bellows, longer rail combination that could both be installed on their metal cameras. I bought a set on EBay and gave it a try. In my opinion it was too wobbly, so I returned it.

Another Wista option is an extension that fits onto the Wista lensboard. It includes an adjustable length tube with a fixture at the opposite end to receive a Technika lensboard and lens. This enables one to extend a 300mm lens out in front of the front standard. I tried this with a 355mm G-Claron, and I thought that the lens was too heavy for the camera with this device. However, it might work fine with one of the Copal 1 300mm lenses. (Nikon M, or a G-Claron?)

As a third non-Wista option, Rodenstock made a doubler that could be added to a 150mm lens to obtain a 300mm focal length. (One loses two stops of aperture using this doubler.) I bought one of these, but I've not yet had the occasion to use it. Depending on how often one needs to longer focal length, it may be an option. There's is some loss of resolution, as one might expect.

I usedd for their the Wista SP system a few times. But, I determined that I preferred my light-weight, rail 4x5. So, the Wista SP was sold.

No, Rodenstock did not make a doubler, I believe the Horseman did for their 150mm

Sal Santamaura
16-Jan-2019, 08:56
No, Rodenstock did not make a doubler, I believe the Horseman did for their 150mmThe Horseman 2X converter was marketed as compatible with any modern 150mm 5.6 plasmat. I used it with several lenses of that type. Its performance wasn't great with any of them. :)

neil poulsen
16-Jan-2019, 10:11
No, Rodenstock did not make a doubler, I believe the Horseman did for their 150mm

Bob, Thanks for the clarification.

tweggers
20-Jan-2019, 10:44
Yes, I agree with this. When I shot with my 270mm G/Claron on my SP I was at the end of the rail. The good thing it worked great!

Bob Salomon
20-Jan-2019, 13:06
The Horseman 2X converter was marketed as compatible with any modern 150mm 5.6 plasmat. I used it with several lenses of that type. Its performance wasn't great with any of them. :)

Most, it would not fit the 150 Apo Sironar/Apo Sironar S.

BTW, Horseman, for many years, was the Rodenstock distributor in Japan.

nicemate1
25-Jan-2019, 09:35
Hi everyone !

A little bit off topic but can someone tell me what is the minimum size Ground glass a Wista SP or VX can accept in it's graflok frame (length and width wise)?
Thanks,