PDA

View Full Version : Accommodating short lenses on view cameras.



rdenney
13-May-2009, 23:52
I have spent considerable time in the archives, and in general searches of the Internet, trying to determine what seems to me a most critical piece of information: How short a lens can one put on a give camera? The information is out there in bits and pieces, but without sufficient detail to be authoritative.

If I missed it, I would welcome someone telling me where to look.

But in case I haven't where this has been done before, then I'll start.

Cambo SC and Calumet 45: Will focus a 65mm Super Angulon if both standards are on one side of the tripod mount, and if bag bellows and a recessed lens board are used. The bag bellows OR the recessed lens board are required for a 90mm Super Angulon. In addition to everything needed for the 65, the camera will focus a 47mm Super Angulon only if the rear standard is reversed, which requires the back to be vertically oriented (else the U-frame blocks the film-holder opening).

Sinar F F+ F1 and F2: Will focus a 47mm Super Angulon using a flat lens board and bag bellows (Wide Angle Bellows 1 works). Both standards must be on the same side of the tripod mount. Care is required to make sure the bellows are not folded up between the standards, or they will lean out at the top when trying to squeeze those folds. The Wide Angle Bellows 2 may make that a bit easier. For the 47, a recessed lens board avoids having to move the standards to one side of the tripod mount, and avoids the problem of having to fiddle with the bellows. The 65mm Super Angulon on a flat board focuses on a Sinar F using the bag bellows with no issue and with the standards in the usual position.

I would have included a 58mm SA in my analysis, except that I don't own one. And, with some cameras, a 75 might be good to test as well.

It's rather amazing how much I had to search to determine that the Sinar F would do what I wanted. And even then, everyone said it would focus the 47 just fine except for one fellow, who said it wouldn't even focus the 65. That guy must have had the standard bellows, and the first guys just forgot to mention that you have to reconfigure the camera to use the 47. Since I would like to use it for roll film, these lenses are not really all that short. It's also rather amazing at how little the camera manufacturers say about it, except in secondary measures such as minimum bellows draw.

If folks just added a paragraph or two to describe their view cameras (only common brands will have much efficacy for future searchers, it seems to me), this thread could perhaps help folks like me out in the future.

Oh, and see my wanted-to-buy post for a Sinar recessed board that hasn't already been drilled too large for a #00 shutter.

Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney

Bob Salomon
14-May-2009, 00:38
A Linhof Master Technika 2000 and 3000 will easily accommodate a 35mm focal length lens. The Linhof TechniKardan can use a 35mm lens. The Linhof Master Technika can use a 35mm focal length len.

gevalia
14-May-2009, 04:40
This topic is a fantastic idea. I would suggest that it be an article on the main page.

Darryl Baird
14-May-2009, 06:14
I think this begs the question of how many of us use roll film backs on our 4x5 cameras (and which camera). I do and I found similar issues of which lenses worked with standard versus bag bellows. In my case, the Wista technical camera was the camera in question, and the answer was a dedicated wide-angle rig made by Wista. Capable of shooting at least 65mm (shortest I own).

I also have a Cambo SF 2x3 camera with bag bellows and haven't tried to accommodate the wide angles, although It should easily with a bag bellows. I can try it and report back. FWIW, I think a 2x3 camera really shines in this application.

rdenney
14-May-2009, 10:07
A Linhof Master Technika 2000 and 3000 will easily accommodate a 35mm focal length lens. The Linhof TechniKardan can use a 35mm lens. The Linhof Master Technika can use a 35mm focal length len.

Bob, what bellows are required? At what focal length is a bag bellows required?

Rick "for whom Linhof stuff was still out of reach in terms of price" Denney

Per Madsen
14-May-2009, 11:39
On the Toyo 45AII I have the following recommendations based on my experience:

1" recessed board:
65 mm with movements.

1/2" recessed board:
80 mm with movements.

flat board:
90 mm with small movements, but full movements on a 90 mm on a 1/2" recessed board.

The Toyo 45AII has a fixed bellows and a bag bellows is not possible.

The shortest possible lens with no movements is probably a 47 mm (bassed on the measurement of a fully compressed belows).

Joshua Dunn
14-May-2009, 11:56
I have both the Schneider 38mm and 47mm Super Angulon XLs that I use on my Sinar F2. I use recessed lens boards and a bag bellows for both lenses to allow for movements. But I did mount the 47mm Super Angulon XL once on my Zone VI. I could focus on close subjects but the angle of coverage is so wide you could see the front of the cameras focusing bed.

Bob Salomon
14-May-2009, 12:03
Bob, what bellows are required? At what focal length is a bag bellows required?

Rick "for whom Linhof stuff was still out of reach in terms of price" Denney

Rick,

There is no interchangeable bellows on a Technika. Those cameras handle the lenses with the fixed bellows. On the Master Technika 2000 and 3000 models a 35mm focal length lens is mounted into the 001015 "Comfort" recessed board with a 12mm recess.

With the TechniKardan you can focus a 35mm lens at infinity with the standard bellows but will not have any movements with lenses on the wide end. If you use the bag bellows for 90mm and shorter lenses you would get whatever movemnts the lenses provide. On the TK 45 a 35mm lens is mounted on a 001035 board with a 21mm recess.

Lynn Jones
14-May-2009, 12:08
I hate bag bellows, they often sag and vignette the image.

I hate almost as much, recessed lens boards, there don't seem to be any flex tip cable releases anymore.

What I did while at the original Calumet (1965/66) was to invent a new view camera which we called the CC402 Wide Field camera. It would take lenses as short as 47mm on a flat board at infinity and a lens easily up to 180mm. However, late in the life of Calumet they put a stiff bellows on that camera and it wasn't worth a flip after that. If you can find an old grey camera with the double folded soft grey bellows you really have something. I'm on my third one, it was so popular, 2 of them were stolen over the years!

Lynn

Bob Salomon
14-May-2009, 12:41
I hate bag bellows, they often sag and vignette the image.

I hate almost as much, recessed lens boards, there don't seem to be any flex tip cable releases anymore.

Lynn

Lynn,

Not all bag bellows sag. Many, like Linhof's, have a metal wire in them so that they hold their shape. And Gepe makes a very popular Wide Angle Cable Release Extension as well as "L" and "U" shaped cable release adapters. And the latest 001015 Linhof "Comfort" recessed board is actually easier to use then a flat board as all of the controls for the lens and the aperture scale are on the flat part of the board so there is no reaching into a recess to operate or read the shutter controls.

mandoman7
14-May-2009, 16:20
Once you get really set up for very wides, you'll likely find your taste running to longer views. Its a murphy's law thing.

rdenney
14-May-2009, 16:24
What I did while at the original Calumet (1965/66) was to invent a new view camera which we called the CC402 Wide Field camera. It would take lenses as short as 47mm on a flat board at infinity and a lens easily up to 180mm. However, late in the life of Calumet they put a stiff bellows on that camera and it wasn't worth a flip after that. If you can find an old grey camera with the double folded soft grey bellows you really have something. I'm on my third one, it was so popular, 2 of them were stolen over the years!

When I lived in Austin, a close buddy had a CC-402. At that time, I was using a CC-400. Given his preference for longer lenses, we really should have traded, but I couldn't afford good wide-angle optics in those days anyway.

That camera had a pleated bellows but with flat sections in the pleats to allow them to wrinkle usefully to allow shifts when compressed. It also appeared that the front main standard was reversed so that the u-frames for the standards were mirrored. This allowed the standards to get closer. I was able to make that modification on my 400, as I recall. (That camera is still with me in a box somewhere basically inaccessible). I never realized the 402 could take a 47 or I might have hit my friend over the head and stolen it from him, heh, heh. He eventually gave it away, but not to me. I do recall that he used a 75mm f/8 Fujinon on that camera successfully--the widest lens either of us owned at the time.

I don't mind the bag bellows, and the Sinar bag is easier to live with than the Cambo/Calumet bag. But the Cambo bag will accommodate a longer lens. The main weakness of the Cambo design for really short lenses is that the standards are offset in the U-frames and rotate about their centers. The base-tilt Sinar can more easily put the tilt mechanics out of the way.

Rick "who'll write a summary article if enough information comes in" Denney

rdenney
14-May-2009, 16:27
Once you get really set up for very wides, you'll likely find your taste running to longer views. Its a murphy's law thing.

Heh, heh.

Considering the lenses I have for other formats, I have no evidence to contradict you. But there are fewer mechanical limitations to going long--one just needs a long enough rail and bellows. And for the Sinar F, that's easy--just keep stacking them on until it focuses.

Rick "who actually wouldn't mind something in the 240 range" Denney

Brian Wallen
15-May-2009, 00:57
Minimum extension for focusing short focus lenses is a primary spec to be concerned with; standards movements based on bellows compression is another concern, particularly when using 4x5 cameras with rollfilm backs. While movement isn't really an issue using a 55mm lens on a 4x5 frame since the lens will barely cover that format, movements with that lens on a 6x7 or 6x9 frame are possible.

Here are some additions:

Super Graphic. Will focus an 80mm Wide Field Ektar, just barely. Fixed bellows, no OEM recessed lensboards and custom lens boards are difficult to make.
More => http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/BN_Photo/LFN/CamProf_SuperGraphic.htm

Crown Graphic. Articulated focusing rack mounted both in the case and on the bed allows focusing of short lenses on flat boards. I have an older 58mm Grandagon that works nicely with 6x? rollholders on a 4x5 Crown.

Graphic View. 90mm lenses can be focused at infinity on flat boards; a recessed board allows closer focusing and will focus a 80mm Wide Field Ektar at infinity. Stiff bellows allow only modest movements with lenses this short. The 4 inch boards are large enough to allow deeper custom recessed boards with enough surround room to allow tedious operation of #00 shutters like those used for 58mm Grandagons and 65mm f/8 Super Angulons.

Wista Technicals. Will focus 65mm lenses on flat boards with modest front standards movements. Ingeneous recessed lensboard framework allows easy access to shutter controls and shortens minimum extension by 40mm. Requires a wide angle bellows, but that allows ample movements for short lenses. Easily focuses my 55mm Grandagon and would likely focus 45-47mm lenses. Sliding auxillary back for rollholders and GG focusing adds only about 7mm of extension. These Wista configurations are the slickest I've seen for mounting short focus lenses on 4 x 5 technicals.
More => http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/BN_Photo/LFN/CamProf_WistaVX.htm

Horseman Technicals. Both 4x5 (HD, HF, and FA) and 6x9 (VH, VH-R and ER-1) have the same focusing rack and front standard that limit rack focusing to 65mm with the standard focusing frame and slide-in film holders or holders attached with Graflok bars. No bag bellows is available. Small lensboard virtually excludes recessed board designs. 6x9 mount Rotary Backs with swappable GG and filmgate add 25mm of extension, limiting the 6x9 cameras to ~100mm lenses. The 4x5 mount Rotary Backs add 45mm of extension.
More => http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/BN_Photo/LFN/CamProf_Horseman_Intro.htm

Gowland/Calumet Pocketview. With the standard bellows this will only focus a 90mm, due to bellows compression. This version included a Cambo rotating back which accepts a Cambo bag bellows and with a custom adapting frame for the front standard will focus a 65mm with movements. Current 4x5 Gowlands can accept a bag bellows, but I don't know the limitations.

Arne Croell
15-May-2009, 07:25
Good idea to start a repository for these values. One should keep in mind that the focal length is only a rough indication of flange-focal distance (FFD). The FFD can be different for different lenses with the same focal length.

Gary Beasley
15-May-2009, 14:24
The Anba Ikeda 4x5 I had would handle a 65mm in a recessed lens board with both standards moved to the front of the track.
My Ebony 4x5 will handle the same lens but you have to tilt both uprights to the front and swivel the standards parallel to make it work. It's a pain but it worked.

rdenney
18-May-2009, 08:34
Good idea to start a repository for these values. One should keep in mind that the focal length is only a rough indication of flange-focal distance (FFD). The FFD can be different for different lenses with the same focal length.

Yes, that's why I mentioned specific lenses. There really aren't so many lenses to consider.

But I have found that the minimum bellows extension spec from the camera makers is often not realistic, and usually doesn't come with qualifications. For example, the Sinar spec for the standard bellows is so tight that the standards will bow out on the lighter F camera. I have two sets of "standard" bellows for the Sinar, and they are both somewhat different, one being older and stiffer than the other.

And Sinar recommends their Wide Angle Bellows 2 for lenses 65mm and shorter, but I only assume that makes it easier to keep the folds out from between the standards. Again, though, the specs need more description--one buying a second bag bellows (which never seem to come up used) based on that spec might have spent their money needlessly--my F will operate the 65 using the Wide Angle Bellows 1 without issue, and without any limitation on movements.

Rick "appreciative for all the responses" Denney

rdenney
4-Jun-2009, 09:47
From another thread, posting here to keep it all in one place:


...I finally got a Nikkor 65mm for my Horseman LX from a very nice member here.

Got the bag bellows at the same time, but now I find that even with the standards flipped and the base blocks touching each other, it just refuses to focus past a certain point.

So, a Horseman LX requires a recessed board for 65 and shorter because of mechanical interference between the standards.

Rick "adding to the repository" Denney

Brian Wallen
4-Jun-2009, 23:48
Another addition:

I recently bought an older 47mm f /8 Super Angulon. While I am futzing around trying to make a recessed lensboard for my Horseman VH, I tried mounting the lens on a Graphic 23. Because of the Graphic's articulated focusing rack, this combination works very well mounted on a standard flat board. I think if I removed the wire frame finder on the front standard, I could even manage a bit of rise.

For working out of my car, I may just leave the lens set up like this as my SW 6x9, since the Graphic is tiny and light.

Jim Michael
5-Jun-2009, 04:39
Horseman 450 and Fuji 65mm 5.6 will focus at infinity with no recessed lensboard required.

Emmanuel BIGLER
5-Jun-2009, 10:56
As far as Arca Swiss is concerned :
- the F-line field and misura (110->141) cameras can focus a 24 mm lens with a recessed lens panel and the ultra-short (110->142) bellows listed for 24 to 55 mm
- the same F-line field can focus down to the 35 mm with the universal leather bellows (300 mm of max extension). My experience with this configuration is that the 55 apo grandgon works fine with some usable movements on the universal leather bellows with a flat panel ; the 45 needs a recessed lens board and for both lenses the ultra-short bellows is probably more comfortable.

I do not have handy the specifications for other A/S configurations, namely the current (141-141) and the discontonued (110->171) and (171->171) but for the 171 frames the info can be retrieved from the well-known A/S catalogue downloadable in pdf.

In 6x9 (110-110) the universal leather bellows allows to use the 55, there is a shorter leather bellows for the 35-55 range and a flat bag belows for those using the uttra-short "digital" lenses e.g. 23 and 24mm.
In this case users of M-line cameras can focus the 24mm on a flat lens panel since in fact both format frames can touch each other : could not be shorter.

Ernest Purdum
5-Jun-2009, 14:15
For Lynn Jones:

My thanks for your design. I bought a CC-402 soon after they came out and am still impressed with what a remarkable variation on the CC-400 basis they were and still are.Together with my CC-401, I had a great choice of lenses. I still have them both. My physical limitations now allow very little large format work but I still appreciate your work and am happy to recommend the CC-402 to anyone who wants wide angle capability and has budget limitations.

Clive Gray
6-Jun-2009, 04:36
And Sinar recommends their Wide Angle Bellows 2 for lenses 65mm and shorter, but I only assume that makes it easier to keep the folds out from between the standards. Again, though, the specs need more description--one buying a second bag bellows (which never seem to come up used) based on that spec might have spent their money needlessly--my F will operate the 65 using the Wide Angle Bellows 1 without issue, and without any limitation on movements.

Rick "appreciative for all the responses" Denney


The wide angle bellows 2 apparently have thinner frames to take up less space between the standards also its a bit hidden away but they are required with the Sinar db mounted 65mm because with that you also have the Sinar shutter between the standards.

I happily use the Nikon 65mm F4 on the F and P with just the standard wide angled bellows but don't ave any sorter focal lengths.

Lee Christopher
6-Jun-2009, 09:41
From another thread, posting here to keep it all in one place:



So, a Horseman LX requires a recessed board for 65 and shorter because of mechanical interference between the standards.

Rick "adding to the repository" Denney

Rick,

Great of you to start this thread.

I had the biggest nightmare searching, and even experienced lf-ers I asked could not tell me specifically what I would need.

I would just add, I was told that on the Horseman LE, flipping the standards would get you infinity focus with a 65mm - just.

On my LX, it won't. Also, while some may get away with squashing the standard bellows, a bag bellows would be to me, standard to lenses 65mm and shorter. It's like the difference between taking out boiling alphabet pasta with a pair of chopsticks and a straining scoop. Both gets the job done, but one almost feels like torture and the other, sheer bliss.

rdenney
6-Jun-2009, 19:28
The wide angle bellows 2 apparently have thinner frames to take up less space between the standards also its a bit hidden away but they are required with the Sinar db mounted 65mm because with that you also have the Sinar shutter between the standards.

Ah, that explains it. I figured it was just that the shape of the WA Bellows 2 would keep the folds from jamming up between the standards. I couldn't square that with the recommendation to use it for 65--my 65 clearly has plenty of room with the standard bag bellows. But I never considered that they were accommodating the DB system and shutter--all that is a bit beyond my needs.

But it emphasizes the importance of collecting this information--even when the manufacturers make a clear statement they don't often tell the whole story.

Rick "keep those cards and letters coming" Denney

rdenney
26-Apr-2010, 07:47
Someone posted a link to an ebay store by "apogeebee", where he has listed (and still has) the Sinar Wide Angle Bellows II.

Sinar describes the WA Bellows II as being suited for lenses of 65mm and shorter, in comparison to the regular WA Bellows. Both are bag bellows, but the II model has a double-pleat instead of the single fold of the conventional bag bellows.

As reported in the opening post of this thread, I am -just- able to focus a 47mm Super Angulon at infinity, with no tilts or swings at all, using the regular bag bellows (Wide Angle Bellows I) and a flat lensboard. In that post, I present several limitations, resulting in the practical need for a recessed lens board and its accompanying fiddliness especially with the Compur 00.

So, I went ahead and bought the extra-wide bellows, just for use with that lens. But I was amazed to discover that the double-fold bellows actually accommodate longer lenses than do the standard bag bellows.

The mounting frames for this model are thinner, and the double fold prevents the material from getting trapped between the standards. I can focus a 47 on a flat lens board routinely at infinity, with no fiddling required. And there is even room for about 6 degrees of tilt or swing. The WA Bellows II will also allow shifting with ease even when the bellows are tight together. The Sinar F2 will happily focus this lens with the standards on opposite sides of the tripod mount as long as the standards are raised so that the vertical struts clear the tripod mount. My particular combination of an F rear standard and an F2 front standard works well--the F's vertical struts are shorter. With an F or F1 that use a lens standard without geared focus, the standards will need to be on the same side of the tripod mount.

But the surprise was that I could focus my 12" Ilex-Caltar to a 1:4 close-up without stretching the bellows tight, though movements will be limited. I have a set of standard bellows for when I need more, but the conventional bag bellows were not sufficient even for my 240mm lens, let alone the 12". The Wide-Angle Bellows II will accommodate most uses of lenses that will work on the 12" rail plus a single 6" extension.

For those wanting to use ultra-short lenses on an Sinar, the Wide-Angle Bellows II comes highly recommended.

Rick "who'll leave the standard bag bellows at home" Denney