No swing on the camera

[coops]

I have just aquired an old 8x10 view camera and there is no front or rear swing, which I am so used to using on my 4x5. I am having a hard time focusing without it, I guess I need to set up the camera at such an angle I don't need to use it? Any suggestions?

[IanG]

Do you mean front/rear tilt ? While my main 5x4 cameras have swing I very rarely ever need to use it.

If you need tilt it's possible to build a lens board that allows a small amount.

Ian

[coops]

The camera has clunky but effective front and rear tilt. It's the left to right swing it does not have. I was playing with it in the yard this morning and focusing on the fence but could not get all the fence in focus, which I think I could with rear swing. I know it's probably possible to do but I just cannot figure it out.

[Walter Calahan]

Sounds like you need a different camera with what you need for shooting.

[Heroique]

The camera has clunky but effective front and rear tilt.

Coops, not sure how big your 8x10 is, or how sturdy your tripod, but if you can rotate the entire camera body 90 degrees, this might convert your "clunky but effective" tilt into "clunky but effective" swing.

Occasionally, I'll do this w/ my Tachi 4x5, converting its front rise/fall into front shift. (This also converts my front swing into front axial tilt; and my back swing into back axial tilt, etc.)

[Glenn Thoreson]

In this case, you have to depend on depth of field to cover the small focus errors. The cure is to focus on the most important point, then stop down a lot. To get good depth of field with 8X10 requires a very small aperture. The folks of old produced beautiful photos with little or no movements.

[coops]

In this case, you have to depend on depth of field to cover the small focus errors. The cure is to focus on the most important point, then stop down a lot. To get good depth of field with 8X10 requires a very small aperture. The folks of old produced beautiful photos with little or no movements.

Thanks. The lens I have closes down to F90. Never used a lens that went beyond
64. I was amazed at how much I could see through the ground glass at F32. Looking forward to using it tomorrow. Cheers

[wfwhitaker]

I have just aquired an old 8x10 view camera and there is no front or rear swing, which I am so used to using on my 4x5.

If you're used to using 4x5 and are just now starting with 8x10, one of the first things you'll notice on the ground glass is that less is in focus than before. You don't provide a lot of specifics, so please excuse me if I make some assumptions. What lens are you using? For an 8x10 lens that is equivalent to what you've been using on 4x5, the focal length will double. That reduces your depth of field from the start. It will not be possible to get as much of the same scene in focus with the longer focal length lens as you can with 4x5. It's the nature of the beast. The ways to increase your depth of field are to stop down, move further from the subject, use a shorter focal length lens or redefine your idea of critical focus. Of course, movements help. But they are not a cure-all. Sometimes bigger is not always better. It really depends on how you see and how you shoot. Personally, I like the restricted depth of field and use it as a compositional element. But whatever your choices, you have to work within the constraints of your tools.

[coops]

What lens are you using?

The lens is Goerz Apochromatic Artar red dot 14in F9
Not sure how the 14in translates as far as focal length (90mm, 200mm etc) but I did notice playing with it that it seems to bring the subject closer than I am used to. It may not be suitable for landscape work, hard to say until I get it out in the open. My yard is small.

[wfwhitaker]

14 in = 356 mm. What lens were using for 4x5 that you're comparing to?

[coops]

I have a 90mm, 150mm and a 210mm.

[wfwhitaker]

A 14 inch lens on 8x10 will equate to a 178mm lens on 4x5 - so somewhere between your 150 and your 210. In any case, your 14 inch Artar is substantially longer than any of your 4x5 lenses. The depth of field will decrease accordingly. (There are several DOF calculators online you can explore. I'm not going to try the math - my brain has the day off.) And while DOF is dependent on a lot of variables (and some of them interpretive), the point is that all variables being equal, the longer focal length lens required for an 8x10 camera is going to have less depth of field. And that's especially true with the aperture wide open as it is when you're focusing - even at ƒ/9.

Your Artar is fine for landscape photography, although its coverage is limited for 8x10. You won't have a lot of movement available, especially at infinity focus. Stopping down might help. Not all lenses increase their coverage when they're stopped down. Others will know and will hopefully comment.

As I said at the beginning of my earlier post, I'm making some assumptions. I hope I'm not telling you stuff you already know. But it struck me as I re-read your initial post that my own experience of moving from 4x5 to 8x10 included some surprise at the narrower depth of field.

[lenser]

Coops, do you have shift on front and/or back?

If so, you can shift the back to which ever direction you need, then twist the tripod head to align the back to the plane of focus you need and then shift the lens the other way to include the rest of the scene. Obviously this depends on the coverage of the lens, but in optimal situations, you will have aligned the film plane and lens for your focus plane needs and supplemented with depth of field. It's the same as rise and fall except sideways.

Good luck.

Tim