6x17 backs - options ?

[gliderbee]

I have a Shen-Hao 5x7 camera with extra 4x5 back, and I'm looking for a 6x17 rollfilm back.

What options do I have ? Does a 6x17 back on the 4x5 back give the same result as a 6x17 back on the 5x7 back ?

I think I don't really understand how these 6x17 backs can work on a 4x5 back, since 6x17 does not fit a 4x5 neg ... Can anybody explain that to me ?

Thanks,
Stefan.

[vinny]

Canham or something else that's made for 5x7 graflock backs if you want to have the ability to use all your lenses.

[Lachlan 717]

Search the archives here; all will be answered.

[evan clarke]

I have a ShenHao 6x17 for my 4x5 and it is extended..works very well and is well made..Evan Clarke

[Larry Gebhardt]

I have a ShenHao 6x17 for my 4x5 and it is extended..works very well and is well made..Evan Clarke

I've got one too. They work by moving the film plane behind the normal 4x5 film plane by about a.5 inches. Lenses within the range of 90mm to 180mm work very well, beyond that the 4x5 camera gets in the way and reduces the image size down a bit or you can't compress the bellow enough at the short end. Given that you have a 5x7 I would definitely look at getting the Canham 6x17 roll holder over the 6x17 backs made for 4x5 cameras. I am thinking of picking up one of the Canham cameras just so I can use this back. I really don't want to get a separate 6x17 view camera.

[gliderbee]

Search the archives here; all will be answered.

That's what I did, and not all is answered :o

- There's no explanation anywhere about the difference in using such a back on a 4x5 or 5x7

- Often, it isn't even mentioned if the treath is about a back for 4x5 or 5x7; I guess 4x5 is presumed.

- I would like to know if I'd better buy a back for 4x5 that I can use on a 5x7 also (I don't even know if these exist) or if the 617 backs for 4x5 have disadvantages versus the 5x7 backs

For what I've found in the archives (looking for "617 back") yields a lot of threats, and it's nearly impossible to read the all, since a simple mentioning of these words is enought for the threat to be shown, even if it's only mentioned in passing ...

[gliderbee]

thanks; I looked at the Canham back. Am I right in thinking there's _only_ a motorized version (which is quite expensive) ? I don't see the point of having this motorized, but each his own I guess :confused: .


I've got one too. They work by moving the film plane behind the normal 4x5 film plane by about a.5 inches. Lenses within the range of 90mm to 180mm work very well, beyond that the 4x5 camera gets in the way and reduces the image size down a bit or you can't compress the bellow enough at the short end. Given that you have a 5x7 I would definitely look at getting the Canham 6x17 roll holder over the 6x17 backs made for 4x5 cameras. I am thinking of picking up one of the Canham cameras just so I can use this back. I really don't want to get a separate 6x17 view camera.

[Oren Grad]

thanks; I looked at the Canham back. Am I right in thinking there's _only_ a motorized version (which is quite expensive) ?

Yes, there's only the motorized version.

[Gem Singer]

Larry,

Keith Canham designed his 6x17 motorized back to be utilized the all-metal MQC 5x7 camera.

The Canham 6x17 back can also be used on the 5x7 Canham Traditional camera. However, on that camera, it needs to be inserted under the ground glass. Keith warns about the possibility of damaging the ground glass and recommends the use of a ground glass protector.

I have a Canham MQC, with the 4x5 reducing back, and the 6x17 roll film back. I describe it as the "Swiss Army Knife" of cameras. Versatile, and folds into a compact package.

[Joshua Dunn]

I have both the 6x17 Canham back for 5x7 and an Art Panorama 6x17 back for 4x5.

A few points to remember when dealing with a 6x17 back on a 4x5 camera; 17cm is longer than 5 inches. So in order for the 6x17 backs to fit a 4x5 camera the camera has to have to have a Graflock back. This enables you to secure the 6x17 back to the Grafock back and extend the film plane backwards to allow for the 17cm dimension of the film plane. This is what Larry was talking about in his post. You can see it here (https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=123) on Badger Graphics website, seeing it makes it easier to understand. Buying a 6x17 roll film back for your 4x5 back is probably the least expensive option.

Shen-Hao also makes a 6x17 back specifically for their 6x17 cameras (seen here (https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=2881)). It would be easier to use if you could make it work but I don’t know if there is an option to mount these to a 5x7 camera. But it’s worth looking into (I’m not a Shen-Hao expert so if someone knows please chime in).

I love my Canham back but do not buy one unless you know that it will work with your camera. To use it Canham back the way it was designed you need a large bail back on the back of your camera. The Canham 6x17 back is very thick so you need a lot of clearance to be able to fit it under the ground glass like a normal film holder. If you can’t find someone who has used it on a Shen-Hao then call Keith Canham and ask him. He’s very helpful.

PM me if you are interested in the Shen-Hao 6x17. I’ve been meaning to sell it since I got the Canham but have just not gotten around to it.

Hope this helps.

-Joshua

[anglophone1]

This is the best thread on this subject I've seen so far,
I'm looking at one if these ut unsure whether it'll fit on my linhof Technika , so looks as though back will fit OK only other issue will be lens-film distance, I use a 75mm on a recessed board, any ides from anyone whether this wil be OK, I'm assuming 150mm and upon problem.
Or will I need a 90mm?
Thanks
Clive

[Joshua Dunn]

Clive,

When you say you are looking for one of these which one do you mean? I’m assuming you mean the Shen-Hao Art Panorama, I don’t think the Canham back will fit under the ground glass of a Technika 5x7 (but I have never tried it).

So if you are talking about the Art Panorama for a 4x5 (and your Technika has a Graflock back) a 75mm will be difficult to use. I have used the Art Panorama on monorail cameras (more versatile than a Technika) with a 72mm Super Angulon XL which has a huge rear element. Keep in mind with the Art Panorama the film plane is moved backwards so using a recessed lens board is more like using a flat lens board in terms of bellows compression and movements, but given the film plane has moved backwards the recessed lens board is absolutely critical for such a short focal length lens. Using a short focal length lens with such a large rear element can be tricky; due to the design of the Art Panorama back the rear element on short focal length lenses can make contact with the roll film back when focused at infinity. Such is the case with the 72mm Schneider Super Angulon XL.

If you are using a 75mm with a smaller rear element than the 72mm XL (and it will cover 6x17 format, at least a 190mm image circle) than you can possibly make it work, especially if you are not focusing at infinity.

A 90mm on a recessed lens board would be a lot easier. But like everything else, you just have to try it and see what works for you.

Hope this helps.

-Joshua