PDA

View Full Version : Toyo View D 45M Questions



Mike Fiction
4-Aug-2008, 11:08
I picked up a Toyo View D 45M the other day for pretty cheap and I have a couple of questions.

Does the normal modern Toyo bag bellows (or long bellows for that matter) fit this model?

The rear rise/fall is a little stiff, not too bad, but could be better - what's the best way to resolve this? Lube or grease? WD-40?

Is it easy to mount a Packard shutter on something like this to use brass lenses?
And how do they mount anyways? I've never seen one in person.

sorry for so many questions :)

Bob Salomon
4-Aug-2008, 11:53
Since you are in Columbus why not take it over to Jim at Midwest Camera and check it out? He must also have some Packard shutters laying around and some lensboards so you could mount them.

Wally
5-Aug-2008, 15:28
I picked up a Toyo View D 45M the other day for pretty cheap and I have a couple of questions.

Does the normal modern Toyo bag bellows (or long bellows for that matter) fit this model?

The rear rise/fall is a little stiff, not too bad, but could be better - what's the best way to resolve this? Lube or grease? WD-40?

Is it easy to mount a Packard shutter on something like this to use brass lenses?
And how do they mount anyways? I've never seen one in person.

sorry for so many questions :)

I've got a couple of these D45Ms and really like them. One thing to watch is if you try to use one of the later bag bellows, the plastic frame is wider than the older bag bellows' metal frame. It fits right, the ridges line up with the grooves in the standard, but the plastic's thickness makes it bump into the rear standard's area near the tilt indicator. No biggie - if you force it, the plastic deforms for a moment then gets past it and all's OK. But if you can find one of the older bag bellows, with the metal framework, you'll be happier.

WD-40 is not a lubricant, and shouldn't be used as one. It's a penetrant, just to be used to loosen slightly rusty bolts (WD stands for Water Displacement). I used a little grease on my rail focusing mechansims when they started binding up on my older D45M, and now it's a dream.

Buy a spare flat lensboard and hack the backside to hold the packard shutter, and drill a small hole to pass the hose through. Be sure to glom some 3M black masking tape around the hole. I use one for my 360mm Nikkor process lens, and it works very reliably.

Mike Fiction
6-Aug-2008, 06:06
Thanks for the replies - I'm gonna pick up some white lithium grease and some black liquid electrical tape (bellows pinholes) tonight and get to work on it. My initial test shot looks really good, so it'll definitely be nice using this once it's up to speed.

I'm still playing with the idea of a packard shutter - I'm going to mount the lens I have to test before I spend any $ on a shutter - I'm not sure but it may be a 12" petzval projection lens - I took it apart to clean the inside elements and it has 2 groups of 2 elements, the rear one airspaced - front not sure as the rim's bent so couldn't remove front element - it looked like what I expected to see from a petzval, though I'm certainly not an expert on lens design :)

It has no stops though, and not sure of the f/stop - if I recall correctly, there is a formula you can use to measure the rear element and use the focal length to get the f/stop? I'll have to search that one as I'm sure it's in the archives.

Bob Salomon
6-Aug-2008, 06:20
[QUOTE=

It has no stops though, and not sure of the f/stop - if I recall correctly, there is a formula you can use to measure the rear element and use the focal length to get the f/stop? I'll have to search that one as I'm sure it's in the archives.[/QUOTE]

The ratio of the maximum usable diameter and the focal length is the f stop.

Have you checked with Jim yet? He could have answered or solved your questions by now.

Mike Fiction
6-Aug-2008, 06:38
The ratio of the maximum usable diameter and the focal length is the f stop.

Have you checked with Jim yet? He could have answered or solved your questions by now.
I haven't had time yet - I work the hours they're open so I won't be able to stop by there for a couple of weeks.

Edit: Here's my initial test shot.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3102/2730142873_ba91eebba1_m.jpg (http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=2730142873&size=large)

aduncanson
6-Aug-2008, 08:32
The ratio of the maximum usable diameter and the focal length is the f stop.

It seems to me that that "maximum usable diameter" must be measured from an infinite distance (no easy task), since the front elements will magnify (or demagnify) the limiting diameter. Measuring the focal length is a bit subtle as well, as recently discussed in the lenses forum here:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=38475

What information you have on the design is consistent with a dialyte like a process lens, or some telephoto designs, or a double gauss wide angle among others. (Telephotos usually have front cells of much larger diameter than the rear cells.) I'm no expert, but your perfectly lovely first effort sure looks sharp overall compared to most images made with a wide open Petzval.

Mike Fiction
6-Aug-2008, 08:50
No, sorry I should have been clearer - that sample shot was not with my (possibly petzval) lens - that was a Rodenstock Sironar-N 210mm on the new Toyo, just to test the camera itself - I haven't had a chance to test the barrel lens yet, have to mount it on a board 1st.

Also found the aperture formula, really simple actually :: focal length divided by diameter = f/stop

I know it's a 12" focal length so all I have to is measure the rear diameter of the lens when I get home and I'll have the f/stop.

I'll take a photo of the barrel lens and post it tonight - if I recall correctly it's a B&L. I've had it for a couple years actually, picked up at an antique store for $15 - but focal length was to long to do anything useful on my Tachihara so I've never done anything with it.

Bob Salomon
6-Aug-2008, 09:55
"It seems to me that that "maximum usable diameter" must be measured from an infinite distance (no easy task), since the front elements will magnify (or demagnify) the limiting diameter. "

In practice it is a lot simpler. Just took a new 150mm Apo Sironar N. Opened the aperture and the press focus and measured the hole from the front. It measured 25.5mm in diameter. Divided that into the focal length (150mm) and got 5.88. Close enough to 5.6 to work for photographic purposes. Not accurate enough for scientific purposes but photography isn't an exact science. In fact, 150mm is not the actual focal length of the lens. Lenses are always the marked focal length. But 5.88 is close enough to determine a working aperture.

Mike Fiction
6-Aug-2008, 14:35
I was wrong, it's not a B&L, it's a Wollensak - the writing says:
SUNRAY
12" Focus
Wollensak-Rochester USA

any ideas?

Mike Fiction
7-Aug-2008, 04:13
I got the rise/fall cleaned and re-greased - fixed the couple of pinhole leaks and reconditioned the bellows.

Now the only thing left is to get a board to mount that barrel lens and test it, see if it's worth installing a packard.

aduncanson
7-Aug-2008, 07:17
"It seems to me that that "maximum usable diameter" must be measured from an infinite distance (no easy task), since the front elements will magnify (or demagnify) the limiting diameter. "

In practice it is a lot simpler. Just took a new 150mm Apo Sironar N. Opened the aperture and the press focus and measured the hole from the front. It measured 25.5mm in diameter. Divided that into the focal length (150mm) and got 5.88. Close enough to 5.6 to work for photographic purposes. Not accurate enough for scientific purposes but photography isn't an exact science. In fact, 150mm is not the actual focal length of the lens. Lenses are always the marked focal length. But 5.88 is close enough to determine a working aperture.

Bob,

I always appreciate your participation in this forum.

I agree that it is usually not difficult to make this measurement with sufficient accuracy for photographic purposes.

I thought that the distinctly unsymmetrical tessar design might induce more error than the Sironar that you measured. I grabbed a 127mm f/4.7 Ysarex and measured the clear aperture as 26mm from the front and 23mm from the rear; yielding f/4.9 & f/5.5 respectively. So even a tessar with its negative front cell allows for a useful measurement.

The clear aperture of a 360/5.5 Tele-Xenar on the other hand, measured 39mm from the front when I squinted through my bi-focals getting about as close as I could focus, yet it quickly expanded to fill the full inner diameter of the 67mm filter ring as I backed away. Measured from the rear, the clear aperture was only 29mm. It is the observation from the front and from some distance that yields the correct aperture.

Not knowing the design of the original poster's lens, I think that it was warranted that I caution him to try to estimate the clear aperture from some distance.

Mike Fiction
7-Aug-2008, 07:31
I measured from the front and got 39mm
The focal length is 12" so around 300 to 305mm
That get's me about an f/8 (actually more like f/7.7)

That's good enough for B&W work!

Mike Fiction
9-Aug-2008, 11:41
Ok - got the brass lens mounted and took a test shot of my wife - has plenty of movement on a 4x5 - and plenty of softness.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3136/2747348170_e64bf7cd3e_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikefiction/2747348170)

Available light from window - 3 sec. exposure - lens cap as shutter