Sinar Auto Shutter or Packard Shutter?

[Hugo_6476]

Ok, I have got a 2D Kodak as a "dedicated" portrait camera. I am going to use three lenses in barrel on it. I have lens No.1 with me now: a Dallmeyer 12" f3.5 Portrait lens with front diameter of 4" and back diameter of 3 1/2", 4 1/4 " in length and about 7-8 pounds in weight. The other two lenses on the way are 36cm and 42cm Heliars. I don't have their dimension yet. I will use these lenses in natural light.

A few days ago, I thought I would install a Packard shutter behind the front standard like Jim Galli did. I am still leaning toward that option. But I have read on this board that some users have good experience with Sinar auto shutter. I would like to have some advice from both sides, preferably with people who have used both shutters. I have a Deardorff with a dozen of Dagors and Artars in shutters for my landscape use. The shutter I am going to put on will be used for big and heavy barrel lenses only.

Thanks a lot.

[Jim Galli]

The Packard is the elegant solution given the other variables. But I'm jaded.

[Hugo_6476]

Jim,

I understand Packard comes in different sizes. What is your recommendation based on my lenses? #6, #8? Thanks.

[Jim Galli]

Hugo, The biggest one you can stuff into a 2D is 6 3/4" square. I know, doesn't look like it would fit, but you can stuff it in. That gives a 3 3/4" aperture which is just big enough for most anything that won't tip a 2D over frontwards.

[Dan Dozer]

Hugo - I have a 2D and was faced the same problem issue with a large sized Cooke lens. Turned out that in order to get a packard large enough for the size of the lens, the packard was much too large to fit inside behind the lens board. I had a large sized packard and ended up mounting it in front of the lens instead of behind the lens board. All that needed to be done was to cut a hole in a board (about 3/8" thick plywood same size as the packard) just slightly larger than the front rim of the lens, line the hole with felt to get a snug fit on the rim of the lens, mount the packard on the front of the board and you're all set.

Jim Galli - this may sound like a dumb question, but if you put a 6 3/4" packard (maximum size) behind the lens board, where do you drill the hole for the hose that connects to the shutter?

[Hugo_6476]

Dan,

I have three lenses now I want to use on the 2D, there may be more later on. Do I get a Packard for each lens? Their diameters may not the same. I wouldn't mind mount each lens on a 2D board.

[Dan Dozer]

Hugo - for my barrel lenses, I have different packard shutters for each lens. I have been thinking of a way to make a packard board for the largest lens and some sort of adaptor piece for the smaller lenses, but haven't had the time to do it yet. That way, I would only need one shutter for all for them.

One other thing to think about, if you try to do this with a very wide angle lens, since the packard is mounted on the surface of the board and sticks out in front of the len, you may have vignetting problems with anything in front of the packard (like a filter). Obviously, there is nothing to screw a filter onto so you have to hand hold the filter yourself. I experienced this problem with a wide angle dagor when I tried to hold a polarizing filter on the front of the shutter and got a little darkening in the corners.

[Hugo_6476]

Dan, Deardorff used to have a Packard shutter adapt board. I have seen a picture of it on this forum. It's about 1"-2" thick with the Packard shutter on the back and the front has a square open into which you can just put on your lensboard with your barrel lens. This way, all you need is to have each of your barrel lens screwed on its own lens board, just like the way we do lenses in shutters.

This 2D will be my portrait camera and I don't plan to use wide angel lens with it. The shortest lens will be 12".

[Scott Davis]

If you need to fit a shutter inside the camera that is the same size as the bellows or close to it, the way to mount it is with a mounting box- it serves as a spacer, so you can run the air hose through the side wall of the box, then angle it up to meet the exterior nipple.

BTW, the Packard shuter #s are more a type designation than a size designation. I forget which model is which, but they had #5, #6 and #8 models, which differed in that one of them was just the bulb operation with a top speed of about 1/15th of a second. Then there was another model which had an instant option actuated by inserting a pin through a hole in the shutter that would force the shutter to return closed faster, giving you a 1/30th option. Then there are models that have electronic flash sync. The Packard Shutter company is still in business and you can look up the various models on their website. The model numbers and designations there are relevant for current models. There may be older variations that use the same model numbers but differ in specifications.

[tor kviljo]

If you are working solely with B&W, you probably don't need the precision that the sinar-copal shutter gives you, with precisely timed speeds from 1/60 - 8 sek. Thus, if the "instant" 1/10 sec and the B/T of a packard-ideal suits you, then go for it as the least complex solution. However, if you intend to use the camera shooting chrome, the lack of presise timing will be a drawback as a LF exposure outdoor typically will bve in between the 1/10 "instant" and the 1 - 2 seconds you might get away with doing manual timing with the packard & blub. I used the sinar-copals for years, being very satisfied with them but using the mostly in the field for landscapes & with chromes, thus precise timing were important. Fitting a sinar-copal will make your camera a much more universal instrument when it comes to precise exposure outside the packard-range. However, the Sinar-Copal have a much smaller aperture than the bigger packard's so you might find that limiting. People (probably not having used the sinar-copal themselves...), talk about the heavy vibration of this shutter. This is in most parts wrong: the shutter is noisy - espesially during breakdown, but this heavy movements is after exposure is finished, and all movements within the shutter is about moving mass in a circular motion around the lens-opening, not camera-inducing movement due to moving mass in one direction. If you come across a sinar-copal with necessary cables & in nice working order + that it's big enough for your use, mount this one and have a much more universal camera. The sinar-copal shutter is made to be attached behind the front standard, fitting a 140mm slide lock recess, and having a 140mm recess on film-plane side. Cannibalizing an old sinar bellows rewards you with the attachment-frame enabeling you to convert the front bellows fitting of your camera to fit the sinar-copal. The fitting of the shutter to rear part of front standard is more of a handyman-job.

[Jim Galli]

I'm really enjoying the single shutter in camera for multiple lenses. I've got over a dozen portrait lenses ready for whatever whim surfaces already on 2D boards. 36cm Heliar early, 12 3/4" Cooke II, 15 1/2" Cooke VI, 13" Cooke III, 13" Pinkham Smith IV, 12" Velostigmat II, 12" Beach Multi-focal B, 12" Bausch Lomb Tessar 1C, 14 1/2" Verito, 11 1/2" Verito, 15" Bausch Lomb Petzval, 15" Bausch Lomb triplet, 3A Dallmeyer Petzval, #6 Voigtlander Euryscope IV, all just on a board with the common shutter inside. Then if I want sharp, I have 450mm Voigtlander APO Skopar, XV Cooke, 9 1/2" Series VII Protar, 8 1/4" Dagor all on boards and ready to rock. The Cooke fills in for longer than 450mm needs. Also I do use the shutters on the Cooke and the Protar instead of the Packard. Simply open up the Packard and the rear of the Cooke fits inside the open hole. It's quite the set-up and I've been burning quite a bit of film up with this camera. Since I'm a bit of a lens nut, the 2D becomes my test bed. Simply cobble a new-2-me lens to a 2D board and Voila.

The pneumatic entrance is very tight with a 6 3/4" shutter. I drilled at an angle and forced a piece of 1/4" copper tubing in the hole below the bottom lensboard brass rail. You have to chew up the brass there just a tad to make it fit.

If this sounds low tech to the point of being very backwards to some of you techie types, we can get together and compare negs. This old camera does an outstanding job for me.

[Hugo J. Zhang]

Jim, Can you send me some pictures of your set up? Thanks.

[Bob Fowler]

I posted this web page a couple of years ago. It describes how to make a box lensboard for your Packard shutter so you don't have to make permanent alterations to your camera. You can see it here:

http://mysite.verizon.net/fowler/photo/packard2.htm

[Hugo J. Zhang]

Thanks, Bob. That is a very beautiful box! Instead of the round hole to accept one lens, I will probably need a square hole to accept lens boards with lenses of different diameters. Very unfortunately I have no woodwork skills to build such box. I emailed your page to skgrimes and they replied that they could do the job for $750-$1000, of course not including the cost of the shutter. That is twice what I paid for my 2D and a tripod plus some film holders. And I have to ship my 2D all the way from California to them for the job. Of course, another suggestion from them is to make some adspting rings for my lenses to front mount the Parkard shutter into which a flange with thread will be added to accept these rings. Cost will be around $800-$1000.

Jim, please help me out. You are the one who got me into this at the first place--))).

[Dan Dozer]

Hugo - Where in California are you from? I'm in the Coachella Valley (Palm Springs/La Quinta). I 've been wanting to tackle this problem for some time for my 2D, and maybe this is an excuse to do it - maybe do it together. I have a wood shop (build a lot of my own things) and agree with you that $750 - $1000 is not anywhere worth it. It shouldn't take more that a few dollars worth of materials. Any thoughts/possiblities of making it here to the desert any time in the future? Let me know if you're interested.

[Hugo_6476]

Hi Dan! Paml Springs is only 2 hours away. I live in Walnut, about 25 miles east of downtown LA. I will drive up to you during one of these weekend. How about I bring a few cases of beer for the hot desert? I am waiting for for Heliar 36cm and 42cm. Jim Galli seems to get away without the shutter box and I really want to see how he did it.

[Bob Fowler]

$750 to a $1000?????

Hell, I make them for $150 to $250 (depoending on how they have to be set up) plus cost of shutter...

I posted the page to help the DIY'ers, but have since started custom making them. Let me know if you're interested.

[Dan Dozer]

Hi Bob,

Since Hugo and I live fairly close together, we're going to get together over the next few weeks to develop a Hybrid version of your "box design" that fits our 8 x 10 Kodak 2D's. Your info on your website has provided us with a lot of ideas and inspiration for our approach, that is to have a box with packard inside that also allows removable lens boards for different sized lenses. When we get something together, we'll send you some images - maybe our final design will give you some more ideas on your custom boxes.

Thanks again for putting all your ideas and images on your website.

[Hugo_6476]

Tor- What is the diameter of the hole on Sinar auto shutter? Is it going to take a lens with rear diameter of 3 1/2"? I read somewhere indicating that it has a hole of 85mm. Is that true? Thanks.

[Jim Galli]

Hugo, Sorry for the silence. My internet provider that I pay large sums of $$$ to has got me throttled to about 100 bytes a day it seems. I'll try to get pictures but it will be Monday at work before I can post them. Cheers. Jim

[Hugo_6476]

Thanks, Jim. I can wait till Monday. BTW, you mentioned you have a #7 shutter, I went to their website, they are listing #6 and #8, the latter one is of 7" square and 3 3/4" opening. If you had to squeeze in your 6 3/4" square into the front standard, I don't know how can I do a bigger size?

[Jim Galli]

Hugo, here's pix of the install. The black tape in the first photo holds the instantaneous pin from dis-lodging, and the black tape in the second photo keeps the screw heads from chafing against the inner bellows while folded. You may have to look for an older used 6 3/4 inch shutter. IIRC #5 did not have the button for instantaneous which is useful. #6 had both instant and timed. #8 had a double piston double hose affair where one piston was instant and the other piston was time. A lot of bother. Some of the #6 had built in flash sync switch. That's the cat's meow.

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/2DPackard_1.jpg

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/2DPackard_2.jpg

[Hugo J. Zhang]

Thank you very much, Jim!