24 inch lens on Chamonix 8x10

[rich caramadre]

Does anyone have experience using a 24 inch lens on a Chamonix 8x10? I have an Artar in a no.5 Ilex shutter. It weighs just over 3 pounds. I know the Chamonix has plenty of bellows to handle this focal length but I'm wandering what the stability would be like. Thanks for any input.

[Luis-F-S]

Since you already own the lens, why don't you try it and see if it works for you. My 24" and 30" Artars work just fine on my Deardorff V8. L

[rich caramadre]

Well, I don't own a Chamonix at the moment. But I'm thinking of getting one.

[Luis-F-S]

I would then contact the manufacturer and see what they say about that lens/shutter/weight combination. L

[Greg]

On my 8x10 Chamonix, I extend the back standard as far back as it will go. Front standard is mounted not on the foremost front female screw but on the second one from the front. This gives me approximately 27 1/2 inches of extension. Then an adapter is attached to the front of the front standard to accept a Sinar Copal shutter onto which a 600mm f/9 Apo Ronar is mounted. This effectively gives me an extra 3 inches of extension. On the front female screw I mount a modified Sinar Norma auxiliary standard to help support the lens. Camera is now very front heavy, its balance akin to "a pig on stilts", so I add on a Manfrotto clamp atop a monopod. Clamp is clamped onto the modified Sinar Norma auxiliary standard. Now the whole setup is quite stable. Front movements are possible but not at all very practical, so I use the movements on the rear standard exclusively. Before setting up this configuration, I view the scene with a Linhof finder. Moving anything except the rear standard can be done, but again is not very practical especially in the field. Use this same configuration with my 11x14 Chamonix but everything for some reason seems to be easier to set up. Shooting on a windy day... forget it. Tried this twice on windy days and got unacceptable movement in mye negatives. The image on the GG seemed to be steady enough between wind gusts, but was not so per the resulting negatives.So... using a 600mm lens on a 8x10 Chamonix? Yes it can be done, but is a pain to set up. But to me is well worth all the effort once I view my negatives on the light box. Having your lens mounted in an Ilex No 5 shutter just might make it a whole lot more practical and easier to set up. FYI: for me using a 600mm lens on my 8x10 is the the longest lens, for me, to practically use. Have used way longer lenses with my 8x10 Sinar Standard to shoot 8x10 Chromes, but the setups were just a pain in the a** to set up and do without the help of an assistant.

[Greg]

Addendum to my previous post... The last time that I used my 600mm f/9 Apo Ronar on an 8x10 camera was with my 8x10 Sinar Norma. Was way more stable than on the Chamonix, and was easy to use front standard movements.

[Roger Thoms]

Chamonix does make a lens support. I don’t have any first hand experience with it but it might be worth checking out if you are considering a Chamonix. Hopefully someone with first hand experience will way in.

http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/accessories/lenssupport

Roger

[neil poulsen]

A lot of this is personal preference; if possible, one should try it out themselves. Or if one must rely on someone else to experiment, ask them to provide a full description, whether there was vibration, did it seem too much for the camera, etc.

I had a Deardorff that was in very good condition, and I put a 24" lens on it. (A Fuji 600mm C.) The camera could handle the lens easily enough, and the bellows were long enough. But for my tastes, it was too prone to vibration. I ended up selling the camera.

I currently have an old-style Arca, metal rail 8x10 that weighs 13lbs. (About the same as a Deardorff.) It's quite solid, and it compacts easily into a backpack. It has interchangeable bellows, so it will accept bag bellows. I sold the Fuji lens and now have a 610mm Repro Claron that will work fine on this camera.

[Bernice Loui]

Been there done this, standard 8x10 Dorf can accommodate a 24" lens, problem is as a set up the overall stability is questionable. IMO, better to put the limit at 19", at 24" the camera and overall system is not that stable.... and the 8x10 Dorf is one of the much better and more stable wood field cameras.

IMO, if you're planning to use a 24" lens, get a GOOD 8x10 monorail for a host of very real reasons. You're not going to achieve both low weight-compact and good stability with long focal length lenses of 24" or more with a flimsy view camera.. which will result in struggles with vibration and image quality.


Bernice




I had a Deardorff that was in very good condition, and I put a 24" lens on it. (A Fuji 600mm C.) The camera could handle the lens easily enough, and the bellows were long enough. But for my tastes, it was too prone to vibration. I ended up selling the camera.

[tgtaylor]

I'll take issue with that. There is a salt print on my website entitled Golden Gate from Bluff Overlooking Marshall's Beach - San Francisco, 2014. that was taken with a 610mm apo nikkor mounted on an 810 Toyo MII field camera during a gale on a exposed bluff overlooking the Golden Gate with Fuji 8x10 Acros. After composing I held a big "golf" umbrella open in my left hand to protect the camera from the wind coming from the left and the shutter release and tripod with my right (I was afraid that a gust would come along and blow the camera down into the ocean below). I couldn't see the scene as I was concentrating on keeping the open umbrella close to the camera but away from the lens and tripped the shutter at seemingly the nadir of a gust. I only shot one negative as I wasn't confident about vibrations but was amazed that the negative and print showed not the slightest trace of camera vibrations. Tripod was a Gitzo G1348 with arca-swiss z1-sp ball head.

Thomas

[Vaughn]

I have used a 24" on my Zone VI 8x10 many times with no problems whatsoever. Fortunately the Chamonix, based on my experience with their 11x14, should be able to use the lens just as easy if not easier.

[Keith Pitman]

I have a Chamonix 8x10 and use the original Manfrotto version of this support for longer lenses:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Luland-Produced-Tripod-support-bar-large-frame-camera-support-bar-Stabilizer/183077731163?hash=item2aa0487b5b:g:qqAAAOSwrVdc~0tV

It installs quickly and is small enough and light enough to carry easily.

[Drew Wiley]

Less weight and leverage on the front standard would be preferable. That's why I use a Fuji 600C. Unfortunately, that's one of the lenses that have gotten quite expensive on the used market. I bought mine new when they were still reasonably priced. An Apo Nikkor 600 would do nicely; but you'd have to find and fit a big shutter for it. Artars in shutter would do, but be somewhat heavy. Depends on your application. A contact printer can get away with a lot more than a critical enlargement, where a tiny bit of shutter vibration can somewhat undermine even the best of optical designs.

[Len Middleton]

Another consideration is with regards to the weight and distance that weight is from the lens board.

I have a 325mm f4.5 and a 36cm f4.5 both in barrels that "automatically" provide some front tilt when mounted on my Deardorff V8, as a result of the axis tilt.

Have an "L" bracket I use to constrain the tilt to what I want, not what the lens "wants"... :cool:

Not certain the configuration of the Chamonix.

[davehyams]

Rich I’m in SLC and have a chamonix 8X10, and run lenses in that weight range without issues. Drop me a message if you want to drop by and check out the camera in person.