PDA

View Full Version : Roll Film with a LF camera (4x5? 2x3?)



tendim
11-Nov-2010, 21:13
Good day to you all!

Some kind folks at photo.net pointed me in the direction of this forum, which I didn't know existed! It's nice to see so many people still interested in traditional sheet film shooting.

That said, I'm a little embarrassed at my request.. I've been a shooter of pretty much every format, but settled on medium format a long time ago. I love the 6x6 and 6x7 formats, and prefer to shoot them for personal work (of course, pulling out my 35mm's when required as well, depending on the task at hand!). I've recently started shooting landscapes (leaning towards the industrial side) and have realized the limits to my medium format gear (either a Bronica SQ for 6x6 or a Mamiya RB for 6x7): that being that, without movements, I will always be a victim to "toppling buildings". Thus, my current quest.

I've been considering a field camera for doing industrial landscapes, but limiting myself to roll film so that I can continue to use my beloved 6x7 formats. Switching to full 4x5 really isn't practical for me:


I've tried sheet film before, and personally don't like it.
My darkroom is setup for 6x7; moving to 4x5 just isn't possible given the size of the enlargers, etc.
My film to digital workflow is currently optimized for 6x6 and 6x7, so I'd rather stick with "what I know"


That said, after doing some research, the Toyo Field 45AX seems to fit within my budget. But I'm not sure if it can do what I require. Ideally, I'd like:


To be able to use my Mamiya RB backs to shoot 6x7; I believe the 45AX can be adapted to use Graflok backs, which should allow me to leverage my RB backs.
To use a lens equivalent to 24mm or 28mm in 35mm format, so a 50mm or 60mm lens on the Toyo
Retain full movements (since I am considering this camera for movements, there isn't much point if I can't use them due to the lens!!)


Is this at all practical with a 45AX? What about the other Toyo View field cameras? What if I branched out of the Toyo line to something else? Ideally I'd like to keep costs (including a "nice" wide angle lens, and whatever adapters needed for my roll film backs, to sub $1,500 CAD) within budget. What about non-field cameras? Looking at the KEH catalogue there is a Cambo 2x3 camera. I've stayed away from monorails because I would like to take this out in the field -- but given the size of a 2x3 maybe I don't have to limit myself?

Thanks for any comments you all can provide! I'm kind of at a loss as to where to find some concrete information as using roll film on a LF camera is definitely "do-able" but there aren't many reports as to what functionality is lost!

Cheers!

Jack Dahlgren
11-Nov-2010, 21:40
Good day to you all!

Some kind folks at photo.net pointed me in the direction of this forum, which I didn't know existed! It's nice to see so many people still interested in traditional sheet film shooting.

That said, I'm a little embarrassed at my request.. I've been a shooter of pretty much every format, but settled on medium format a long time ago. I love the 6x6 and 6x7 formats, and prefer to shoot them for personal work (of course, pulling out my 35mm's when required as well, depending on the task at hand!). I've recently started shooting landscapes (leaning towards the industrial side) and have realized the limits to my medium format gear (either a Bronica SQ for 6x6 or a Mamiya RB for 6x7): that being that, without movements, I will always be a victim to "toppling buildings". Thus, my current quest.

I've been considering a field camera for doing industrial landscapes, but limiting myself to roll film so that I can continue to use my beloved 6x7 formats. Switching to full 4x5 really isn't practical for me:


I've tried sheet film before, and personally don't like it.
My darkroom is setup for 6x7; moving to 4x5 just isn't possible given the size of the enlargers, etc.
My film to digital workflow is currently optimized for 6x6 and 6x7, so I'd rather stick with "what I know"


That said, after doing some research, the Toyo Field 45AX seems to fit within my budget. But I'm not sure if it can do what I require. Ideally, I'd like:


To be able to use my Mamiya RB backs to shoot 6x7; I believe the 45AX can be adapted to use Graflok backs, which should allow me to leverage my RB backs.
To use a lens equivalent to 24mm or 28mm in 35mm format, so a 50mm or 60mm lens on the Toyo
Retain full movements (since I am considering this camera for movements, there isn't much point if I can't use them due to the lens!!)


Is this at all practical with a 45AX? What about the other Toyo View field cameras? What if I branched out of the Toyo line to something else? Ideally I'd like to keep costs (including a "nice" wide angle lens, and whatever adapters needed for my roll film backs, to sub $1,500 CAD) within budget. What about non-field cameras? Looking at the KEH catalogue there is a Cambo 2x3 camera. I've stayed away from monorails because I would like to take this out in the field -- but given the size of a 2x3 maybe I don't have to limit myself?

Thanks for any comments you all can provide! I'm kind of at a loss as to where to find some concrete information as using roll film on a LF camera is definitely "do-able" but there aren't many reports as to what functionality is lost!

Cheers!

Roll-film on a sheet film camera is not a problem, except that you are carrying a big box instead of a smaller one. If you are just interested in a few simple movements, there are some tilt-shift lenses out there that you might try instead.

You can get a roll-flim back for a 4x5 for about 100 which is probably cheaper than finding a way to adapt your existing backs to the camera.

Probably the best way if you are going to stick with 120 film is to look at the baby linhofs and the like. They are 120 size so you don't have such a heavy box and tripod and have smaller bellows which means they can use the shorter lenses that are typical for medium format.

I have a baby speed graphic with a 6x9 rollfilm back that works pretty well. If you are using roll film it is good to have a camera with a range finder and viewfinder so that you don't have to use the ground glass all the time. Taking the rollfilm holder off, looking at the gg, then putting it back on then taking the shot is a pain.

These smaller cameras can probably handle short lenses better, except that the lensboard size might limit what lenses are possible. In large format, wide lenses often have big rear elements. My 90mm lens is easily 3 times the size of my 300mm lens.

Not only that, but it is probably not going to be easy to use a 50 or 65mm lens on one of those press cameras with a focal plane shutter.

Oren Grad
11-Nov-2010, 21:41
Welcome!

IMO a Toyo 45AX is not going to be ideal for 6x7. The camera is designed for convenient use with focal lengths that are moderately wide to moderately long on 4x5. With focal lengths short of normal (~90mm) for 6x7, on the 45AX you'll likely run into restricted movements, the hassles of a recessed lensboard, or both. Also, the 45AX back is designed to directly accept rollholders with a 4x5 Graflok plate, not "baby" Graflok rollholders such as those for the RB67. Adapters do exist, though.

There are some 4x5 cameras optimized for wide-angle use (for example, compact monorails with bag bellows, some Ebony SW models) which can serve well for 6x7, but you should also look at 2x3 monorails, field and technical cameras - there are plenty of different models to choose from. Another option is architectural cameras like the Cambo Wide, Silvestri and Corfield, though those require lenses in helicoid mount and are often quite pricey.

If you can tell us what focal length(s) you'd like to use, it will help narrow the field and better focus discussions of the pros and cons of different models.

Frank Bunnik
11-Nov-2010, 22:06
Ffordes (www.ffordes.co.uk) is a reliable company that has an Ebony SW23 for sale used. It is not cheap though. They also have a used Toyo 23G. A lot cheaper but not a field camera so maybe a bit more cumbersome in the field and providing much more movement than you probably need.

Personally I find the 6x9 ground glass of these kind of cameras to small to see the effects of shifts as good as on a 4x5 ground glass.

Good luck with your decision, Frank

gary mulder
12-Nov-2010, 01:02
For about 5 - 6 years I used a technikakardan 23. It is a nice camera which can handle lenses from 38mm to ± 240mm. A bitt above your budget If you do not have luck. You can even buy a adapter for your Mamiya backs. Although I think it is more cost effective to buy a second hand linhof roll film back.
But eventually I began to hate the small ground glass. Even when you fit same kind off "super" screen like a maxwell ore bosscreen which I did. So for about 3 years I use a 4x5.

Sascha Welter
12-Nov-2010, 04:35
Hey, there are some 6x9cm large format cameras. There is an article on the largeformatphotography.info static page: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup2x3.html

Myself I'm using an Arca-Swiss 6x9. Works fine for me and being able to use 120 film makes life a lot easier.

Emmanuel BIGLER
12-Nov-2010, 04:41
Hello from France and welcome to the 2x3" - 6x9 cm sub-group of this forum.

I've stayed away from monorails because I would like to take this out in the field -- but given the size of a 2x3 maybe I don't have to limit myself?

I have followed this route to a medium format view camera with all movements, 10 years ago, and I do not regret it even if I occasionnaly shoot some 4x5" cut film (and 9x12 cm as well) and also 6x12cm panoramic shots on 120 rolls, with the 4x5" accessory bellows & back on the same camera.

I have an Arca Swiss 6x9 monorail camera and I use it only in the field (http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4063/5077909184_7cde2991c9_b.jpg) ;)
The only strong limitation is that you HAVE to use a tripod.

The lenses & focal lengths your are mentioning ....
To use a lens equivalent to 24mm or 28mm in 35mm format, so a 50mm or 60mm lens on ... .. any camera fitted with a 6x7, 6x8 or 6x9 rollfim back.
Those lenses exist for the 6x9 format from various manufacturers, and deliver outstanding image quality. I have the 45 & 55 Rodenstock apo grandagon lenses plus the Grandagon-N 65mm and 75mm. Competing products exist from Schnedier and in 75mm and above, the Gang of Four : Fuji, Nikon, Schneider and Rodenstock, plus some outsiders, will supply many lenses designed for the 4x5" format (100-105mm view camera lenses are usually designed for the 6X9 format, though).
The 75 in 6x7-6x9 is the equivalent of the 35 mm in "small format photography" except that with a view camera lens you have a huge margin for titlting and shifting as you like it.
The amount of tilt required for a classical lanscape image with the forreground perfectly sharp is only a few degrees of angle. So do not forget that in order to get a really sharp image using a Scheimpflug tilt in the 6x7 format, with focal lengths shorter than 90mm, you need very smooth and very precise tilt controls.

Even if you do not use tilts, the use of shifts is extremely simple and allows you to get perfect images that correspond to the old standards of perspective projection for architecure shots, as obeyed by all painters since the Renaissance times ;)
If, agreed, the use of tilts and Scheimpflug settings is a bit difficult to check on a small ground glass, shifts on the contrary are not at all difficult to apply; even more: it so easy to properly frame with shifts, that you'll soon ask yourself how you could live for so long without access to shifts in your medium format photography !!
Of course you can ignore those old rules and let tour verticals converge, it is up to you (this is another story (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43175600@N00/4594852634/sizes/l/)) :D

Well, not kidding, I'll be happy to share my experience as an amateur with a 120-size rollfilm camera featuring all tilts & shifts !

Additional remark : the Arca Swiss 6x9 camera as well as many other view cameras take the 3x4" Polaroid-compatible film 10-packs, to date sold only by Fuji since Polaroid discontinued them. So if you want to take some instant shots, with the polaroid back you can actually use the full sensitive area, not like in the 6x6 or 6x7 camera where a lot of precious 3x4" instant film surface is lost.

ki6mf
12-Nov-2010, 04:51
Welcome. The issue I had when getting a roll film adapter, mine is 6X9 i just like bigger negatives, was the adapter for my cameras. My Cambo needs an adapter and my Shen Hao allows for the ground glass to be removed and the adapter inserted. I assume you have checked out if you can couple the roll film holder to the camera. A good site to check for roll film cameras is www.keh.com I believe they recently had a Cambo 23 for US $450 recently.

Dan Fromm
12-Nov-2010, 05:11
tendim, I went to 2x3 (US-speak for 6x9) from 35 mm, started with a 2x3 Speed Graphic, later added a Century Graphic (plastic-bodied 2x3 Crown Graphic) to be able to use lenses shorter than would focus to infinity on the 2x3 Speed. Minimum flange-to-film distances for the two are 61.9 mm (2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic) and 34.9 mm (Century/2x3 Crown).

Last year I was given a 2x3 Cambo SC, find that I use the Graphics much more. Smaller, lighter, easier to transport and the SC is hostile to lenses shorter than 90 mm.

The shortest lens that will cover 2x3 is the 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon. I have one, use it on my Century. Completely impossible on the 2x3 Cambo.

I appreciate that you want to use y'r RB backs. They'll work on 2x3 Graphics that have Graflok backs, possibly with interlock problems. Not, as you've already been told, on a 4x5 camera without an adapter.

The unmentioned problem with 2x3 view cameras is cost. The only relatively inexpensive one is the 2x3 Galvin. Without really good luck searching, you'll pay more for a decent used 2x3 than for a decent 4x5.

Look here http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup2x3.html for a list of 2x3 view cameras.

Emmanuel is right, if you want movements there's no substitute for a proper view camera. Graphics offer a little front rise, no front fall.

darr
12-Nov-2010, 06:29
tendim,

Welcome to the forum!
I have shot a lot of 120 film via Arca Swiss 6x9 cameras. I currently have an older Arca 6x9 Field Compact that I do not use since I made the switch to the M line 2 and also have a newer Arca 4x5" in my equipment closet. The Arca Swiss 6x9 FC will take your RB67 film backs via the adapter plate I have. If you are interested in this type of camera, PM me for photos and price.

Good luck!
Darr

Tom Monego
12-Nov-2010, 06:44
You can also check out a Horseman 2x3 field camera, a direct imitator of a Linhof, well made. But the standard lenses are only so-so, they have a Super line of lenses that is quite good though. The 65mm is especially nice. Had the camera for 3 or 4 years, my only nit-pick with it was the film holders didn't seem to hold the film really flat. I sold it for a 4x5 Linhof IV, a camera with some quirks but very nice overall. The Linhof film holders are fantastic, no question of film flatness.
But for a portable camera with movements the Horseman with the right lenses is a good choice.

Tom

Oren Grad
12-Nov-2010, 08:00
To use a lens equivalent to 24mm or 28mm in 35mm format, so a 50mm or 60mm lens on the Toyo


If you can tell us what focal length(s) you'd like to use...

That's what happens when I post late at night... :o

Here is an example of a 6x9 field camera that is compact, lightweight and inexpensive new:

https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=3164

I have a Horseman VH and VH-R. They're fine cameras, but can't accept lenses as short as 50-60mm without heroic measures.

rdenney
12-Nov-2010, 09:12
There are many options presented here. But having gone through this myself, I thought I would add a few points.

One is that 2x3 view cameras (either field or monorail) tend to be expensive. The Shen-Hao linked above is about as cheap as it gets (except for vintage press cameras such as the Century or 2x3 Speed Graphic). If you have one, 6x9 is as big as you can go, even if you later get the urge to try something new.

The 6x9 monorail cameras were built to provide high precision for professional use. Great if you can afford it, but not everyone has the scratch for a Linhof or an Arca-Swiss, wonderful though they are.

But 4x5 cameras are cheap on the ground, so I thought I would outline the issues with them.

The first big issue has been commented before: 4x5 cameras are often limited in how short the lenses can be for practical use in the field. Field cameras, in particularly, are subject to this limitation, and even the Shen-Hao 6x9 field camera will have difficulty with short lenses. But there are monorail cameras that can accommodate short lenses, and are readily available for cheap. The one I selected was a Sinar F. These regularly sell in the $300 range. They all have a 4x5 Graflok back, so they can take all holders designed for 4x5 cameras. And with the Wide Angle Bellows 2 (the double-pleated version that comes up on the used market occasionally for $200 or less), you can easily uses lenses down to 45 or 47mm on a flat lens board. With a recessed board (a little cumbersome, to be sure, but usable), you can use lenses down to 35mm. The camera will allow a useful range of lens movements with a 47mm lens, when using those bellows. The Wide Angle Bellows 1, which is the typical bag bellows, will also work down to 47, but it will limit movements and it may not accommodate an F2 with a metering back (which you don't need anyway).

The F does not have geared movements, so you have to have a little dexterity for very fine tilt and swing settings, but it can be done (I've done it).

You have also heard that it is cheaper to buy a roll-film holder than to try to accommodate your Mamiya backs on a 4x5 camera. This is correct. Wista and Horseman 6x9 holders are configured similarly to the Linhof Rollex, and they work well and are quite inexpensive on the used market. Graflex holders work, but the last one I bought (for 6x7) was a mix of parts that did not match properly. Another alternative is a Shen-Hao 6x12 holder which can be masked down to any format for use with 120 film. It uses a red-window advance so it is mechanically simple and fairly cheap even new. And it opens the door to 6x12 using roll film.

The slide-in roll film holders, such as those with the Calumet label, get mixed reviews for film flatness, but those who like them get good results. They are a bit fiddly, but they have the advantage of fitting under a bail back. Sinar makes a better one of this type, but even used these are not as cheap as the options above.

Instant film holders for Fuji peel-apart instant films are available for 4x5 cameras, too. They come in both the 3x4 and the 4x5 sizes, for pack films.

I still frequently use 6x7 and own a Pentax 6x7 kit. I even have the 75mm shift lens. But I find that tilting the lens is even more useful than shifting it, though with the short lenses it doesn't take much lens tilt to achieve a substantial tilting of the focus plane. The 45mm lens for the Pentax is excellent, but the early 70's 47/5.6 Super Angulon that I use for roll films is even better, and it allows as much movement as my camera can muster with 6x7 and 6x9. It even (barely) covers 6x12, where it is wiiiiiide.

As to portability, a 4x5 view camera intended for field use is no less portable than a 6x9 monorail for studio use. My Sinar F is not heavier than many field cameras, and it's pretty compact for a monorail camera. The flexibility of that system is unmatched, too, with mountains of goodies available on eBay at all times.

Arca-Swiss and Linhof also make fine view cameras that can accommodate very short lenses, but they are much more expensive. Sinar was no cheapie, but so many professionals used them that they are plentiful enough to keep prices very low.

Rick "thinking this application needs system interchangeability and flexibility more than most" Denney

tendim
12-Nov-2010, 14:10
Wow! I didn't expect so many replies in such a short time period - this definitely is an active forum. First and foremost, thank you everyone for the kind welcomes and comments on my original questions.

I've taken a look at some of the cameras suggested, and have some more questions..


The Arca Swiss 6x9 FC looks like a beautiful machine, but seems very expensive! Money aside, how much does the unit weigh? I currently use a Feisol carbon fibre tripod for my 35mm and Bronica work (but not the Mamiya); would this be sufficient?
Poking around, I've found a "LINHOF BABY Technika 6x9" camera which is definitely in my price range.. I'm a little confused on the Linhof cameras. Are these all folders/range finders? And I've seen various references to different generations (I, II, III) and lines "Technika" among others). What should I be looking for at these? Can a Linhof perform the shifts and swings I would require? What about wide lenses?
What about the Toyo 23G? The body alone is definitely in my budget, provided I can mount my RB backs on it, I would only need a lens. I rather like the quality of my Toyo 45M, although it weights too much for me to take backpacking with its all metal construction. I'm wondering how good this is in the field? There is a review on this site (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/cameras/toyo/toyo-galvin-2x3.html) comparing it to the "Galvin 2x3". However the author does make reference to its increased weight and not using it for "extended walks". How realistic is this?
Finally, I've also found a Bush Pressman 6x9, but haven't found much else on this unit either. Is it possible to mount conventional 6x7 backs on this unit? Or change the lenses given I had a spare lens board?


At first glance the Arca Swiss looks like the dream machine; not a folder, but given its minute size with the collapsible column, it would take up minimal space in whatever bag I had. However, the 23G is well within my budget and would allow me to spend the rest of my money on lenses.

Thanks again for any input.

engl
12-Nov-2010, 16:16
I do not own any such cameras, but this site does have a roundup of 2x3 cameras.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup2x3.html

The Toyo 23G you mention is included, all 4kg of it :)

You can read more about Linhof Technika/Super-Technika here, look for the reply by Jean-Louis Llech at the bottom:
http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00FbMR
If you want movements with wide lenses, a Technika might not be the best choice. There is a review of the IV version here on the site:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/linhof/technika-23.html
It mentions lenses wider than 95mm having movements restricted by the box. The Master Technika 4x5 was given better movements with wide lenses, but I have no idea if a Master version was made for 2x3 format. (Baby Linhof is not a real name, it is a nickname for Linhof Technika/Super Technika 2x3).

Did you take a look at the Shen Hao that Oren Grad linked?

Sharkonwheels
12-Nov-2010, 22:20
The Horseman VH-R was mentioned, and just to show a pointer, during my many eBay scouring marathon session, I ran across a couple of VERY complete packages.

I hope ebay links are OK? These aren't my items, nor do I know the sellers, nor do I endorse them - just showing there are some REALLY good deals going on right now...

This guy, for example:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Horseman-VHR-Expedition-Kit-w-3-lenses-2-film-backs-/290499173836?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item43a3199dcc

is selling a VERY complete bundle for $750 starting. 3 lenses, 2 original Horseman backs, film holders.

If I wasn't moving up to 4x5, I'd seriously consider that. The Horseman 2x3 backs alone run anywhere from $100-150/ea!

Another is at $450 first bid, but has a reserve:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Horseman-VH-R-6x9-cm-Camera-Excellent-Condition-/260690625886?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item3cb25f455e

again, camera, 3 lenses with cams, rollfilm back, sheetfilm holders, even a 4x5 back with 4x5 holders.

I don't know what your budget is, but there are options.

Those aren't mine, I don't know those folks, just showing that there ARE some decent deals out there.

I personally can't vouch for Horseman, but from what I've read, I personally wouldn't think twice.

If you want to shoot rollfilm, make ABSOLUTELY SURE that the camera you get has a graflok ("international") back for rollholders, or you will be asking for nothing but misery.

You mentioned a Busch Pressman, and unless it's been modified, I don't THINK they ever came with graflok back, and neither did Meridians.

Linhof made (makes?) 2x3 cameras, and they are available online all the time - I think KEH showed one under "in-transit" a few days ago. You

I personally have a '51 Graflex Pacemaker Speed Graphic 23 with Graflok back
<HornToot>
(listed in the For Sale Section)
</HornToot>

That I am selling, simply to be able to afford a 4x5 Wista 45D I just purchased from another forum member here.

In general, decent enough cameras, and if you don't need the rear focal plane shutter, you can go with a Century Graphic, as well. However, as these are press cameras, they have limited movements available to the front, and I think none on the rear.

You can always, as you mention, get a 4x5 and use rollholders for 120 film 6x6/6x7/6x9, but that'd be akin to using a cannon to fire shotgun shells - a whole lot of added size and weight, for not much benefit. I want to be able to shoot 4x5, but still have the ability to shoot on 120 film, so the Wista 4x5 for me is fine.

B.S.Kumar
12-Nov-2010, 23:23
While the Horseman VH series are pretty good cameras, they aren't much different from the Wisa 45 series in size and weight. The Wista 45D measures 8"x7"x4" and weighs 2.5 kg. The Horseman VH-R 1 measures 7.5"x6"x4", and weighs 2kg. The Horseman board measures 80mm overall, while the Wista board has an opening of 80mm, allowing much larger lenses to be used. The Horseman has no interchangeable bellows. The Wista WA bellows are pretty nifty.

And finally, you don't need a Graflok back to use roll film. Wista, Toyo, Sinar and Linhof all make excellent slide in type backs, and Calumet backs are fairly easy to find.

Kumar

Ivan J. Eberle
12-Nov-2010, 23:57
I too think a working rangefinder is also a huge plus with using roll film holders on a press-type field camera. I have a Super Graphic that I bought for such use. The main issue is that most will not work with very short lenses-- at least not what's short relative to 6x7 (from 37mm to 65mm). The beds are going to be in the way, you'll need to drop them, and then you'll want need some way to accurately focus the inner rail. So the SG is not so good for short lenses (sub 90mm). My Meridian 45B is good with it's inner focusing rail and drop bed but doesn't have a Graflok back (though some have been adapted to Graflok backs). Newer Linhof Master Technikas (2000, 3000) work like this too.

Monorails with bag bellows are a joy to use with short lenses. A Sinar 4x5 can be bought for a song these days (relatively speaking), and most all will take bag bellows and focus with short short lenses on non-recessed boards. Maybe physically bigger than you want to carry, though.

That said, the Galvin 2x3 is a non-bag bellows camera with a cool bail back that allows using standard Mamiya RB 67 type backs-- without removing the ground glass. But it's a bit tight with a 47mm, and the moves are a bit crude.

Oren Grad
12-Nov-2010, 23:58
While the Horseman VH series are pretty good cameras, they aren't much different from the Wisa 45 series in size and weight. The Wista 45D measures 8"x7"x4" and weighs 2.5 kg. The Horseman VH-R 1 measures 7.5"x6"x4", and weighs 2kg.

The VH is considerably smaller and lighter. I just measured mine at roughly 6"x6"x3.75", and it weighs about 1.7kg. There's no point lugging a rangefinder if you're not going to use it.

In any case, it's moot. The OP wants to use a lens in the 50-60mm range. Much as I like the VH / VH-R, it's not well suited to that.

B.S.Kumar
13-Nov-2010, 00:03
I got my information on the Horseman VH-R 1 here: http://martyfoto.host.sk/horseman/horsemanVHR1.html Only the Wista 45RF has a rangefinder, not the other models. And for wides of around 50-60mm, the Horseman would be pretty difficult to use.

For wides, as Rick and Ivan say, a monorail with a short rail and WA bellows is the best.
Kumar

Oren Grad
13-Nov-2010, 00:41
I got my information on the Horseman VH-R 1 here: http://martyfoto.host.sk/horseman/horsemanVHR1.html

I have both a VH and a VH-R (there's no "VH-R1" model - the "1" in that URL just refers to the first page of the sequence on that website reproducing the content of the VH-R instruction manual). Just to be clear for those who aren't familiar with these cameras, the VH-R has a viewfinder and rangefinder, the VH doesn't. The VF/RF housing adds a big chunk on top of the camera body. As a result, the VH is smaller and lighter than the VH-R, and much smaller and lighter than any of the Wista metal non-RF 45's (e.g., D, VX, SP), let alone the 45RF.


The Arca Swiss 6x9 FC looks like a beautiful machine, but seems very expensive! Money aside, how much does the unit weigh?

It's specified as 2.2 kg. I'm not sure whether that weight includes the required rollholder adapter frame.

Re another inexpensive camera that might get mentioned: I have a short-rail, bag bellows baby Gowland sitting in the closet. As monorails go it's a tiny little thing, and on paper it sounds ideal for this intended use, but I'm afraid I can't recommend it. The design doesn't allow enough precision in movements or in front/rear standard alignment to do justice to a 55 on 6x7.

B.S.Kumar
13-Nov-2010, 01:10
Thank you for the clarification, Oren.

Kumar

Sharkonwheels
13-Nov-2010, 01:50
The VH is considerably smaller and lighter. I just measured mine at roughly 6"x6"x3.75", and it weighs about 1.7kg. There's no point lugging a rangefinder if you're not going to use it.

In any case, it's moot. The OP wants to use a lens in the 50-60mm range. Much as I like the VH / VH-R, it's not well suited to that.

FWIW, the second camera I linked to above, has a 65mm f/7 lens included, from the description.

GPS
13-Nov-2010, 02:41
...
It's specified as 2.2 kg. I'm not sure whether that weight includes the required rollholder adapter frame.
...

The adapter frame for AS camera weighs 134g. The adapter frame together with the Horseman 6x9 roll film holder is at 552g (with no film inside and one empty film spool in).

The main OP's problem is the price limitation he puts on himself. Any view camera able to handle the short focal length lenses he wishes to use must be of a decent mechanical construction due to the precision movements requirements. A simple wooden spooky will not do.

Dan Fromm
13-Nov-2010, 07:09
George, my simple little wooden spooky works just fine with a 35/4.5 Apo-Grandagon. No movements but a little front rise, though.

My spiffier heavier 2x3 Cambo SC that looks much more precise can't focus the 35 Apo Grandy to infinity. That lens can indeed be used on a 6x9 proper view camera, but not on an inexpensive one. Modern ones made for digital backs, yes, but they're pretty dear. For inexpensive, its a simple little wooden spooky or nothing.

GPS
13-Nov-2010, 08:00
Peter, one can always argue that a simple hole in soil makes a good toilet too. And giving to the OP as an example a camera that has no movements when what he wants is just movements is not of big help either. There is a good reason why the digital backs cameras, made for short lenses, have greater mechanical precision than wooden spooky monkeys.

Dan Fromm
13-Nov-2010, 08:35
George, you must be thinking of my brother. I'm Daniel.

The OP seems to want more than he can pay for. Short lenses and movements. He has to give up something or raise more money.

With respect to simple holes in the ground, they serve.

GPS
13-Nov-2010, 09:00
Martin, you must be thinking of your uncle. I'm GPS. And sure I agree that the OP limits himself to an awkward combination than doesn't make sense in one way or the other. The holes serve sometimes, a well known fact...;-)

Oren Grad
13-Nov-2010, 10:37
Thank you for the clarification, Oren.

Sorry to have sounded so cranky about it... :o

GPS
13-Nov-2010, 11:01
...


It's specified as 2.2 kg. I'm not sure whether that weight includes the required rollholder adapter frame.

...

Not that I would like to be authoritative on this point but a quick search (Badger, LF Boutique) shows 2.4 kg for the AS 6x9 camera. I confess being too lazy to go and put my AS on the scale now- only because I would need to change to the conventional bellows on it...:(

Oren Grad
13-Nov-2010, 12:01
Not that I would like to be authoritative on this point but a quick search (Badger, LF Boutique) shows 2.4 kg for the AS 6x9 camera. I confess being too lazy to go and put my AS on the scale now- only because I would need to change to the conventional bellows on it...:(

2.4 for the fixed-rail version...

https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=1381

...2.2 for the collapsing-rail "compact" version ("6x9FC") that the OP was asking about:

https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=7

...camera-trivia-R-us ;)

GPS
13-Nov-2010, 12:17
Thanks for the nuance...;-)

tendim
13-Nov-2010, 17:13
Hello again everyone.

As before, thanks for all of the very useful comments so far. I believe GPS hit it on the head:


The main OP's problem is the price limitation he puts on himself. Any view camera able to handle the short focal length lenses he wishes to use must be of a decent mechanical construction due to the precision movements requirements. A simple wooden spooky will not do.

Given what I wanted to accomplish, with what little funds I have, well, let's just say that I'll wake up from that pipe dream for now. In the meantime, I've pulled an old Toyo 45M out of its case that has been hiding away in a corner for the past 10 years. Unfortunately I don't have a lens for it anymore, but that's a moot point as I don't plan on using it for studio work this time around.

The camera is still pretty solid with a light-leak-proof bellows, but for what I plan on doing, I don't think the current bellows will work for me. I've done some poking around and found a thread from this forum from 2008 (here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=39110)), but nothing since then. So, I've got some questions, again. :D


Bag bellows! If I want to go wide on a 6x7 or 6x9 I'm assuming this is what I'll need. My current accordion bellows looks like it will kill me if I try to do any movements at minimum extension. Any suggestions on where to get one? What about modern Toyo bellows? The thread I referenced above speaks of modern ones on a 45M, but has anything changed?
I am at a complete and utter loss with regards to LF lenses. To recap: I'm interested in shooting 6x7 (possibly 6x9), so I'm looking for a lens in the 65mm range. But, what am I looking for? Is there an FAQ that outlines the different lens types? I see names like "Symmar," "Sironar" and the like. Even on KEH there is a wide selection of "Sironar", "Nikkor", "Caltar" and "Grandagon". The Nikkor is pretty self explanatory, but what about the rest? Are these manufacturers or designs? Is there any design or manufacturer I should stay away from?
Lens mounts.. From memory most shutters are a "Copal" with a different number, representing the opening required in the lensboard, no? My lensboard has an approximately 40mm opening which is a Copal-1; any ideas if this will be a problem? Or is it "luck of the draw" if I find the lens I want, with a Copal-1 shutter?
Back to the roll-film question. What is a good way to use roll-film on this camera? It has one of the spring loaded backs currently where I would slide my 4x5 film holder in front of the ground glass currently.


Once again, thanks for all of the help so far!

Cheers.

Jack Dahlgren
13-Nov-2010, 17:40
Hello again everyone.

As before, thanks for all of the very useful comments so far. I believe GPS hit it on the head:



Given what I wanted to accomplish, with what little funds I have, well, let's just say that I'll wake up from that pipe dream for now. In the meantime, I've pulled an old Toyo 45M out of its case that has been hiding away in a corner for the past 10 years. Unfortunately I don't have a lens for it anymore, but that's a moot point as I don't plan on using it for studio work this time around.

The camera is still pretty solid with a light-leak-proof bellows, but for what I plan on doing, I don't think the current bellows will work for me. I've done some poking around and found a thread from this forum from 2008 (here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=39110)), but nothing since then. So, I've got some questions, again. :D


Bag bellows! If I want to go wide on a 6x7 or 6x9 I'm assuming this is what I'll need. My current accordion bellows looks like it will kill me if I try to do any movements at minimum extension. Any suggestions on where to get one? What about modern Toyo bellows? The thread I referenced above speaks of modern ones on a 45M, but has anything changed?
I am at a complete and utter loss with regards to LF lenses. To recap: I'm interested in shooting 6x7 (possibly 6x9), so I'm looking for a lens in the 65mm range. But, what am I looking for? Is there an FAQ that outlines the different lens types? I see names like "Symmar," "Sironar" and the like. Even on KEH there is a wide selection of "Sironar", "Nikkor", "Caltar" and "Grandagon". The Nikkor is pretty self explanatory, but what about the rest? Are these manufacturers or designs? Is there any design or manufacturer I should stay away from?
Lens mounts.. From memory most shutters are a "Copal" with a different number, representing the opening required in the lensboard, no? My lensboard has an approximately 40mm opening which is a Copal-1; any ideas if this will be a problem? Or is it "luck of the draw" if I find the lens I want, with a Copal-1 shutter?
Back to the roll-film question. What is a good way to use roll-film on this camera? It has one of the spring loaded backs currently where I would slide my 4x5 film holder in front of the ground glass currently.


Once again, thanks for all of the help so far!

Cheers.

The big 4 lens manufacturers (modern) are Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon and Fuji. The first two of those label their different lens designs with names (symmar, angulon, grandagon, sironar ...) Sometimes the design changes but the name stays the same. They also produce lenses for third parties like Linhof and Calumet. If the lens is for calumet, then they are usually cheaper than the brand names.

There is too much to explain about which lens is good and bad, but search the forum for the focal lengths you want and you will find many opinions.

Lenses mostly come already fitted with a shutter and you should probably only consider those that do at least until you have more experience. The lens design and focal length will determine what shutter it is in. Then you just need to find a lens board that is pre-drilled to that size, or that can be drilled to that size. It is not difficult.

There are a few threads active right now on roll-film holders. I suggest you read them.

Policar
13-Nov-2010, 18:19
If this goes wide enough bellows-wise and doesn't increase too high in price it looks awesome. Not sure about lensboard availability, though:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Horseman-VH-R-range-finder-camera-/140475382192?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item20b4fc39b0#ht_1293wt_702

I think certain versions of the Fuji 680 have tilt/shift, too. Sometimes I wish I could ditch my 6x7 and 4x5 and just get that Fuji. Looks so cool. But sometimes I want a Canon 5DII, also.

I'm relatively new to 4x5, but from what I can tell the "on" suffix generally correlates with wide lenses (biogon, angulon, distagon, grandagon) with large amounts of coverage. I believe the super angulon and grandagon are modified biogon designs? Not sure. The symmar and sironar are plasmats with less coverage and longer focal lengths. The additional letters and stuff correlate with how old the lens design is, although I don't think these designs have changed much in recent years. Apparently, any modern lens from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, or Rodenstock is about equally as good with coverage and speed being the real differentiators. But I have no idea, as I haven't compared directly. There are lots of rebranded lenses, too, and then some other manufacturers I'm not very familiar with. Other lenses are process lenses mounted in shutters (ronar, claron, etc.). I only have Rodenstock lenses with colored rings around them since I am a sucker for marketing tactics. The 65mm grandagon looks nice to me because it's fast (f4.5) but probably also expensive. I have a 90mm f6.8 grandagon and it is so dark in the ground glass I kind of dislike using it.

al olson
14-Nov-2010, 15:04
. . .

Poking around, I've found a "LINHOF BABY Technika 6x9" camera which is definitely in my price range.. I'm a little confused on the Linhof cameras. Are these all folders/range finders? And I've seen various references to different generations (I, II, III) and lines "Technika" among others). What should I be looking for at these? Can a Linhof perform the shifts and swings I would require? What about wide lenses?
. . .

The baby Technikas aka as Super Technikas come in several versions. The IIIs (pre 1956) and IVs (produced from 1956 to 1964) have integrated viewfinders/rangefinders. The Vs have an integrated rangefinder and detachable viewfinder. Unlike the 4x5 cameras, I do not believe that this camera has ever been produced in a I or II version.

These cameras are folders, like the baby Speeds, and were designed to be used as press cameras and other uses by architects, doctors, and engineers. These cameras were frequently sold with three lens kits and a rangefinder cam that has been machined to the focus characteristics of the lens fitted to the camera (the cam has three cammed prongs with the serial number of the lens on each prong and the serial number of the body on the opposite).

I have a Super Technika III with 65mm, 105mm, and 180mm lenses. I also have a Linhof Rollex roll film holder that can be placed on the back. [Not for sale] The book, The Linhof Camera Story, states that lenses from 47mm to 360mm are available for these cameras. It further states for the IV that the bed drops 15 degrees, the lens board tilts 15 degrees, and it has 50mm front rise. Missing are swing and shift (although swing can be accomplished by rotating the camera and using tilt and likewise rise would be used to accomplish shift). The rear standard rotates and is adjustable similarly to the 4x5 Technikas for minor tilt and swing.

Good luck on your search.

GPS
14-Nov-2010, 15:19
Hello again everyone.

...

Bag bellows! If I want to go wide on a 6x7 or 6x9 I'm assuming this is what I'll need. My current accordion bellows looks like it will kill me if I try to do any movements at minimum extension. Any suggestions on where to get one? What about modern Toyo bellows? The thread I referenced above speaks of modern ones on a 45M, but has anything changed?

...
Back to the roll-film question. What is a good way to use roll-film on this camera? It has one of the spring loaded backs currently where I would slide my 4x5 film holder in front of the ground glass currently.


Once again, thanks for all of the help so far!

Cheers.

Depending on your manual appetite - bag bellows is the easiest to make by yourself. Fine leather sold to make clothes from is a wonderful material for it. You can make bag bellows better than the original ones just for you special needs. If you cannot find spare frames for the bellows, in the worst case you cut the bellows you have...:(

Roll-film holder you could use is a Calumet 6x7 slide in type.
You see - you already have your camera, the dream is still alive...:)

rdenney
16-Nov-2010, 08:31
I am at a complete and utter loss with regards to LF lenses. To recap: I'm interested in shooting 6x7 (possibly 6x9), so I'm looking for a lens in the 65mm range. But, what am I looking for? Is there an FAQ that outlines the different lens types? I see names like "Symmar," "Sironar" and the like. Even on KEH there is a wide selection of "Sironar", "Nikkor", "Caltar" and "Grandagon". The Nikkor is pretty self explanatory, but what about the rest? Are these manufacturers or designs? Is there any design or manufacturer I should stay away from?

Here's a quick summary of lenses new enough to be currently useful but old enough to be affordable. I've included the model names and their design heritage.

Manufacturer: Schneider Kreuznach
Models: Super Angulon (wide coverage double-biogon design), Symmar (plasmat).
Vintage models: Angulon (dagor design--not as wide or sharp as SA), Xenar (tessar).

Manufacturer: Rodenstock
Models: Grandagon (wide coverage double-biogon design), Sironar (plasmat)
Vintage model: Ysar, Ysarex (tessar)

Manufacturer: Nikon
Models: Nikkor-SW (wide coverage double-biogon design), Nikkor-W (plasmat)

I'm unfamiliar with the Fuji models but they fit in the same categories and are just as good as the above.

There are some additional models that still float around, including a Rodenstock triplet (the budget-minded by excellent Geronar--excellent when stopped down, that is), and several models that are process-lens designs that work for regular photography when stopped down. There are also some telephoto designs that have much less coverage but that require less bellows draw--these are not really important when considering smaller formats than 4x5, and they start at 270mm and go up from there.

The Zeiss Biogon was a revolutionary wide-coverage design. Schneider took the design of half a biogon, and doubled it, with the second grouping opposing the first. This corrected for geometric distortion easily which is important for a wide-angle lens. And the Super Angulon design also projects a very round aperture to the edges of the frame, minimizing the darkening of the corners that occurred with the previous dagor designs.

Both Schneider and Rodenstock (at least) have two versions of their wide-coverage designs. The older, slower design has a bit less coverage than the newer, faster design, but other than coverage they perform similarly stopped down. The coverage is important for lenses of roll-film focal lengths if you end up using them for 4x5 or larger. A 65mm f/8 Super Angulon will just barely cover 4x5, but a newer 65/5.6 Super Angulon will provide room for movements.

Plasmats are normal lenses with moderate coverage, a largish maximum aperture and excellent performance. They are the general replacement for middle and longer focal lengths for the previous tessar designs. Tessars can be excellent, but with narrower coverage. That's no fault for longer lenses, of course. The tessars are all based on the original Zeiss Tessar.

In large format, lenses are all about coverage, which is how big an image they can make when focused at infinity. A 65mm lens for 4x5 will require a wide-coverage design, while a 65mm plasmat will only work with 6x9 or smaller formats, and a 65mm tessar won't even do that.

The XL series of Schneider lenses, the S series of Rodenstock Sironars, and the lenses intended for digital backs are newer and much more expensive. The Super Angulon XL and Symmar XL lenses, and the Sironar S, use low-dispersion glass to allow greater coverage without a performance compromise. The digital lenses are designed with some retrofocus qualities so that the lens doesn't have to be as close to the sensor as a conventional large-format lens, and so that the lens projects onto the sensor in rays close to a right-angle to the sensor surface.

The 47mm/5.6 Super Angulon is the shortest of the older, cheaper, more conventional lenses that will cover 6x9. If you want to go shorter than that, you'll need an XL design or one of the newer lenses designed for digital backs.

Rick "providing only the outline" Denney