2x3 monorails?

[dh003i]

Hi all,

A few days ago, thanks to the help of many forum members here including Frank Petronio (who was kind enough to show me the operation of his 8x10 LF camera), I bought a 4x5 LF Linhof.

The reasons I bought it are more creative control over dof, ability to use movements, and of course the enormous image quality.

I am also interested in an affordable 2x3 monorail, preferrably one cheaper than the 4x5 I bought (it was ~$545). The reason for this is I'd like to adapt it to my 4/3rds digitla Olympus E-3, and make various modifications to mount 35mm lenses on the front of it. Does anyone have any suggestions?

PS: I suppose I could get another lens-board for the 4x5 and modify it, but I don't think the bellows could get close enough to the DSLR sensor to produce anything beyond the super-macro world.

[David A. Goldfarb]

PS: I suppose I could get another lens-board for the 4x5 and modify it, but I don't think the bellows could get close enough to the DSLR sensor to produce anything beyond the super-macro world.

I think this is going to be the case with a 2x3" monorail as well. In fact, it would be the case if the manufacturer of your camera made a tilt/swing bellows, because the apparatus of any bellows just takes up too much space, and you've got the mirror box of the camera to contend with, so it will likely only focus to infinity with a view camera lens of about 90mm or longer.

Another approach would be to get a sliding back for your 4x5" camera with a mount for your DSLR. Such things are made by Fotodiox and various Chinese shops selling on eBay. Fotodiox makes lots of different camera mount adapters, so they may be able to make one with your Olympus mount, if you ask them. I think they only offer Nikon and Canon EF mounts as standard for the sliding back. Then you could compose on the groundglass, use movements, switch to the sliding back, refocus (but you won't have to change your other movements), shoot multi-shot images, and stitch them.

[dh003i]

Thank you very much for the helpful response. I'll contact them regarding possibly making a sliding back for Olympus.

I guess I may just also should consider trying to make something like the Lens Baby 3G.

The issue with any system that uses LF, for me, is that I'd like to use my 58/1.2 for this. So I guess I'll need to figure out a way to get lots of shift and tilt, but keep it very close to the camera body. I've done some experimenting (http://www.tabblo.com/studio/stories/view/1562741/) with movements (http://www.tabblo.com/studio/stories/view/1557660/) using my 58/1.2 and E-3 by hand...interesting results, but not too easy on the wrists, and a big PITA to get it right (lots of patience).

PS: The reason why I say I want to use my 35mm lenses is that even the brighest lenses for LF are relatively dim when projecting an image onto a digital sensor, especially a 4/3rds format sensor. For non-telephoto lenses, imho, anything under f4 isn't too bright on 4/3rds. Also, DOF is very narrow on 4/3rds at f1.2, but not so narrow at f4.5.

[Anupam]

The 4/3 system has a film to flange distance of about 38.8mm. So any of those lenses, to focus on infinity would have to be 38.8mm from the film plane. But even then they would not cover 2x3 film. If you are planning to mount your olympus DSLR on the 2x3 back, then I'm afraid you'd have no way to get infinity focus with those lenses. You could of course use barrel lenses or normal LF lenses with large flange distances to make images with the DLSR. Adapters can be made at home for very little cost.

[Frank Petronio]

Slow down, you're way way off.... You're only going to waste a lot of time and money going down this road and the results won't be any better than a Lensbaby or if you use a Leica 25/1.4 on your 4/3s Olympus. I don't know Olympus digital very well myself but there is a 50/2 Macro that would also give you short depth of field results.

Trying to use camera movements on a 4/3s sized sensor is a fool's errand. Even with the medium format sized sensors -- which are 8x-10x? larger -- you really have a hard time making the subtle movements you need without using a very expensive and precise GEARED camera like a Linhof 679. To do it with the fingernail-sized 4/3 chip is pointless.

[C. D. Keth]

Slow down, you're way way off.... You're only going to waste a lot of time and money going down this road and the results won't be any better than a Lensbaby or if you use a Leica 25/1.4 on your 4/3s Olympus. I don't know Olympus digital very well myself but there is a 50/2 Macro that would also give you short depth of field results.

Trying to use camera movements on a 4/3s sized sensor is a fool's errand. Even with the medium format sized sensors -- which are 8x-10x? larger -- you really have a hard time making the subtle movements you need without using a very expensive and precise GEARED camera like a Linhof 679. To do it with the fingernail-sized 4/3 chip is pointless.

There's also the part about lenses. Most anything made for a bellows camera will be quite disappointing as far as sharpness when you use it on a thumbnail-size sensor and enlarge it to such a degree. The lenses just aren't designed with that degree of enlargement in mind.

[Dan Fromm]

"I'd like to adapt it to my 4/3rds digitla Olympus E-3, and make various modifications to mount 35mm lenses on the front of it."

Um, er, ah, there's a large problem with this apparently sensible idea.

Lenses made for 35 mm still have flange-to-film distances on the order of 45 mm. You're proposing to do the equivalent of hanging the lens in front of a bellows. Macro only, shooting a distance is impossible.

If you must get a 2x3 monorail, a used Galvin, if you can find one, is probably the least expensive.

[Gordon Moat]

There is Hartblei, who make the Super Rotator lenses, which have tilt and shift built into the lens mount. I know those come in four different focal lengths, and if I recall correctly about f2.8 maximum aperture. They make these available in a few mounts, though not specifically 4/3rds. One approach might be to get a Nikon to 4/3rds adapter, and buy a Hartblei Super Rotator. I think that would be the best approach, unless someone makes a macro bellows that fits onto a 4/3rds camera. Perhaps that is another approach; getting a Nikon PB-4 Bellows, which has full movements, and adapting that to a 4/3rds camera.

The ground glass brightness can be helped in a few ways, though mostly it depends upon which lenses you are using on 4x5 (or 2x3). Generally the longer focal lengths tend to appear brighter on the ground glass, assuming maximum aperture is about the same. When you use wider lenses, you might want to look into getting a fresnel or screen brightener.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Stefan Lungu]

For your purpose I would suggest getting a T/S adapter for 645 lenses ( Mirex is making some nice ones ). Even so, you are in a clear disadvantage over full frame DSLR's since you can go oly down to about 70mm in 35mm equivalent with the widest linear lenses available for medium format. Trying to do something like this with a LF camera will go almost nowhere. It is nice to have all the movements in the world, but you will have problems with the fact that you only have long lenses - and they become very long on your 4/3 Oly. The only nice thing you can do is using the LF camera for stitching if you have back movements - that is like you go around with the sensor on the film plane and gather the information - no parallax, no problem. There will be a problem since your plane of focus is further than the ground glass, and focusing with the Oly might be hard - other than live view, but it could be done. Other than that, and this will only work for some applications, I would try to shoot LF on film and take the Oly for snapshots, family or when I'm on the run and would not have time for LF.
Regards, Stefan

[dh003i]

Thanks all for all the creative responses. I think I'll just stick to what I was a little opposed to at first, using a rubber plunger, with 4/3rds adapters on both ends, one to mount to camera, the other to mount lens to plunger, and maybe put a UV filter in or after the camera-mount to deter dust. That's cheap.

[Dan Fromm]

Same problem with that as with a bellows, if you use lenses made for 35 mm cameras. Won't focus to infinity.

[dh003i]

Same problem with that as with a bellows, if you use lenses made for 35 mm cameras. Won't focus to infinity.

But it would at least be good enough for portraits, right? My Minolta lenses barely, if not quite, focus at infinity with the regular adapters, and that's fine.

[Anupam]

I doubt lenses made for the Oly 4/3 system would focus at portrait distances with the plunger attached. The reason lenses made for Minolta do better is that their flange distance is about 43-44mm. So you have 44-39=about 5mm to play with to insert adapters etc in.

[Jeff Keller]

Olympus made a very nice 24mm shift lens (no tilt) for their OM SLRs which can be mounted on a four thirds camera fairly easily. It is fairly popular with Canon digital SLR users who want to stitch together multiple images to create a large super high resolution picture. It costs about $1000 if you can find one. I'm not aware of any shift lenses having a shorter focal length.

If you are wanting a limited DOF you are starting with the wrong camera. You should use the largest format film/sensor you are comfortable with. A 24mm f2 lens on an E-3 will behave just like a 48mm f2.8 on a 35mm film camera except for the exposure times. The small formats are great for giving an extended DOF not for achieving a narrow DOF.

If you are just wanting to add camera movements to an SLR, both Hama and Spiratone made tilt/shift bellows years ago. They can be bought used for a little less than $300 if you can find one. You will be very limited which lenses you can use them with. The minimum lens to focal plane distance is probably about 75mm. Also, very few 35mm SLR lenses have an image circle large enough to handle any shift or tilt when focused at infinity.

As others have said if you put a sliding adapter on the back of a view camera you could stitch multiple images together if your subject doesn't move while you are taking the multiple images. It will take a lot of 12mm x 18mm images to create a 4"x5" composite.

The easiest and probably least expensive way to have view camera movements is to buy a used 4x5 camera and use film.

Jeff Keller
(I have an E-3, the OM shift lenses, and the tilt/shift bellows - they are very different from a LF camera)

[dh003i]

I doubt lenses made for the Oly 4/3 system would focus at portrait distances with the plunger attached. The reason lenses made for Minolta do better is that their flange distance is about 43-44mm. So you have 44-39=about 5mm to play with to insert adapters etc in.

Yes, I'm not planning on putting any Oly 4/3rds lenses on a plunger. Besides the flange, they all have an image circle designed for 4/3rds, so not as much room to move.

[John O'Connell]

Ditto to what Jeff said. Lenses for the 24x36 format will focus to portrait distance with very little extension, just a few millimeters for a 50, and a few more for a 90 or a 105.

There are some high-quality 35mm short mount lenses that will focus to infinity and portrait distances on a bellows rig, but they're quite expensive used these days. Most old Leitz telephotos, however, have removable lens heads for use on the visoflex, and the heads by themselves can be cheap.

If I was dead-set on doing this with a 4/3 camera, I'd look for a tilt/shift bellows, a 65, 90, or 135 Leica lens head , and the necessary heap of lens adapters to make such a setup work. You're talking a bunch of money though.