Roll film adapter for 4x5

[emendoz1]

Hello everyone, new here and this is my first post.
I own a calumet 4x5 field camera and a linhof knock off from India that I've used strictly with Polaroid backs and they seem to produce very nice images. I'm thinking of getting a calumet c2 roll film adapter to use 120 roll film instead of sheet film. How much of the frame would I loose by using a smaller film on the LF camera. I currently use a digital back on my Mamiya RZ and have to use wider lenses to compensate. Is this the same problem I'll be facing with LF and roll film?

Thanks in advance, and I sincerely hope I get over the fear of loading sheet film in a dark bag so I can shoot these wonderful cameras the way they where intended.

Ed

[Scotty230358]

Its not a case of losing any portion of the frame. If your cameras have roll film markings engraved on the ground glass you have to compose your image accordingly. As with your digital back you will need to use lenses of a shorter focal length. You don't mention which size of roll film back you use, is it 6x7 or 6x9 or 6x12? I have a switchable 6x9/6x12 back and in 6x9 my 90mm lens becomes a standard with my 75 being a gentle/moderate wide angle. When shooting 6x12 my 120 is a standard with 90 and 75 becoming gentle and moderate wide angles respectively.

BTW loading dark slides is simpler than you imagine. Its as easy as loading film onto spirals. Its a matter of taking your time. You will make things a lot easier if you invest in a changing tent like the Harrison. They are expensive give you plenty of room to move your hands about.

[B.S.Kumar]

Generally, 6x7cm or 6x9 cm formats are the ones most used with roll film on LF cameras, though 6x12 backs are also available. You'll be using only a small area of the image thrown by the lens, so yes, you would have to use wider lenses to get similar composition.

Kumar

[emendoz1]

I haven't bought one yet so I'm still open to size but I would like to get the widest possible so I can use to shoot landscape. I'll try to post an image of one of the cameras I intend to use the roll film back with.

Thanks

Ed

[Jack Dahlgren]

If you already have a MF camera, there is no need to turn your LF cameras into MF. Loading film holders is as easy as loading a roll-film back. Maybe easier. You don't need a changing bag. Turn off the lights and go into closet at night. Maybe stick a towel at the base of the door if there is a lot of light in the room outside the closet.

It is a worthwhile exercise to practice with a sheet of film in the daylight first.

Here is a guide I put together a while back:
http://zo-d.com/stuff/photography/how-to-load-4x5-sheet-film-holders.html

[emendoz1]

Thanks Jack! Your guide looks simple enough. I will try this week as I do have some film in the frige just waiting to be used.

Ed

[Scotty230358]

If you already have a MF camera, there is no need to turn your LF cameras into MF.

Agreed, up to a point. I found it cheaper to buy a roll film holder rather than a 6x9 camera and associated lenses. And, of course, I have all the movements. However - I still shoot more 5x4 film than roll film.

[emendoz1]

Agreed, up to a point. I found it cheaper to buy a roll film holder rather than a 6x9 camera and associated lenses. And, of course, I have all the movements. However - I still shoot more 5x4 film than roll film.

Hi Scotty, thanks for your input. What do you find easier to do, use a roll film holder on a 5x4 or on a 2x3 camera system? Which system is closer to the actual film being used, in this case MF 120?

Because I currently use a digital back on an RZ system and loose a lot of the film area due to the crop factor I would hate to go the same way with LF. I originally bought the digi back thinking I could shoot both film and digital on the same subject by merely changing backs but that proved to be a pain due to the changing of the backs and the lens of course due to the different size of area being captured.

I love film but I also love what digital does as well and since I have to digitize my film by way of scans anyways I can't see big value in film only shooting.

[Scotty230358]

As I only have a 5x4 camera I can't do a comparison based on direct experience. However one of the major differences between a 5x4 and 2x3 cameras is maximum bellows extension. I have lenses ranging from 75mm to 450mm. This gives me a gentle wide angle right up to a really long lens on 6x9. If you have a penchant for ultra wide angle shots on 6x9 you would have to get either a 58mm or 47mm lens. I can say that using a roll film back on a 5x4 camera is no more difficult than using film magazines on your RZ67

[emendoz1]

Quick question. I have a Carl Zeiss lens. It's a 18cm which I think means 180mm correct? I'm not sure so I ask!

Ed

[corgan4321]

18cm=180mm yes...

[emendoz1]

Thanks Corgan. Does this mean I'm shooting with and equivalent of a 60mm in a 35mm world? I read somewhere that with large format you divide lens by a third. Is this correct?

Thanks, I'm new to LF but I guess it shows huh.

Ed