Using a variety of lenses on a 4x5 rangefinder/press camera

[Corran]

So I was thinking today about doing some specialized band/club/event photography using 4x5. I really love shooting b&w band shots and there seems to be a burgeoning market for both high-quality images and especially more unique ones...

Anyway, I was looking at Speed Graphics, Busch Model D, and other press cameras with a rangefinder for focusing. The rangefinder is only going to work for the focal length of the lens provided, so is it at all possible to reconfigure the RF "on the fly" for using different lenses?

I'm thinking a simple 3-lens kit would be enough for my needs, of course being wide/normal/long.

Is this at all possible? Or am I just fantasizing?

[Ari]

A Wista RF will do what you need.
There is rangefinder focusing for 135mm, 150mm, and 180mm lenses, and you don't have to change cams or anything; just turn a knob to the appropriate FL.
It's more expensive than SGs or their ilk, and it really works best with newer Nikon lenses, but that would be the best way to go, financial considerations aside.

[Corran]

Cool, I will check that out. Problem is I was hoping to use slightly more varied lenses, something like 90-150-210 or possibly even wider/longer. I know from research very wide lenses can be used on the Graphic. I guess I could simply guess for wider lenses after marking various focus distances from testing since I'd have more DOF to play with.

I have this image in my mind's eye that will require my 58mm Schneider....

[rdenney]

Is this at all possible? Or am I just fantasizing?

It is possible.

The late Pacemaker Speed and Crown graphic cameras with the top rangefinder use drop-in cams to allow the rangefinder to be reconfigured for different lenses. But the cams are small and fiddly, in addition to being hard to find.

The Super Speed Graphic, which followed the Pacemaker, had a larger and easier to find cam system.

Linhof Technikas also use replaceable cams in their rangefinders, though the cams are custom-ground for each lens and may be hard to find for any given lens without getting Linhof to grind a new one. There is no doubt that this was the best of the cam-configured rangefinders, though.

Most other press cameras used a Kalart rangefinder, which can be calibrated for any lens but cannot be reconfigured in the field. Some older rangefinder, such as the Hugo Meyer, cannot be reconfigured even on the bench. They are designed for the supplied lens, usually a 135mm.

The standard trick, though, is to provide several focus scales, one for each lens, on the focus rail. Then, focus using the rangefinder, read the distance from the focus scale calibrated to the rangefinder, and transfer that distance to the focus rail for the lens in use. This is cumbersome for me.

I have a top-rangefinder Speed Graphic that I've been playing with. The current project (sort-of on hold until I have time to fabricate a couple of pieces I can't seem to find) is to mount a Kalart on the side to go with the top rangefinder. The top rangefinder is already cammed for the 127 that came with the camera, and it's accurate. I will calibrate the Kalart for the 8-1/2" Paragon that I will use for people pictures. I also have a 90 for that camera, but that one is short enough to scale focus. That gives me 90, 127, and 215, which is about what you are describing. But it requires some surgery. The top-rangefinder box already has the openings and screw holes for mounting the Kalart--that part is easy. But it does not have the screw holes for the follower on the focus rail in which the RF actuator arm sits. That's what I need to fabricate when I get around to it. Round tuits are hard to come by these days.

If I was prepared to spend real money, I'd probably research which Linhof would provide the cheapest way to get into a cammed RF for which the cams I need can be found. Technikas have always been too expensive for the goofy applications I have in mind for a press camera, though, so I just don't know which model to suggest.

Rick "who really ought to buy a 4x5 Speed with a Kalart already on it to get the right pieces" Denney

[Two23]

Another thought might be an old Rollie with f2.8 lenses.


Kent in SD

[rdenney]

I have this image in my mind's eye that will require my 58mm Schneider....

Not many press-style camera will handle a lens that short. Maybe a Technika, but I'd doubt any others. The problem is whether the bed will drop far enough to get out of the picture. The drop bed on a Graphic was designed to avoid a 90mm, not something as short as a 58.

Rick "who didn't know about the Wista" Denney

[Corran]

Ah, of course! I don't have enough experience with RFs to think up that "trick." Perhaps this isn't such a bad idea...

I will also look for a Super Speed + cams and see what I come up with.

I'm also not prepared to spend the money on a Linhof for this idea. :)

By the way Rick, I noticed many busted-up Graphics on ebay, some with Kalart RFs, so you might check that out for parts...

I didn't think about the bed, I was just looking at minimum flange-focal distance. Dang. Well still perhaps there are other options.

[Frank Petronio]

Cameras like the Mamiya Universal/Super Press with a 6x9 back can make a more practical system. For live action (instead of posing) there is a reason smaller and smaller formats have been successful....

You might do best with the standard 135mm set-up and sneaker-powered zooming. More reliable, the cameras and rangefinders are really designed for that focal length, that's why the press photographers of their day used them like that. With butt-kicking flashbulbs that pumped out f/16 ala WeeGee. With ISO 400 film you might be able to stop down even more and that would forgive a lot of errors.

I have my doubts that a Kalhart or top rangefinder Crown can accurately focus a wide-open 210mm for reliable, consistent portraits, especially of "real people" instead of static models. Maybe a Linhof, but not only does the rangefinder need to be right on, but your technique and where you choose to focus really matters a lot (triangulating the distance gives you at least a little - inches - of flub).

[Corran]

Good points Frank. I know smaller formats are the smart way to go, but I want to do something crazy...

Flashbulbs are another thing to think about. I am researching WG's methods and such.

[rdenney]

I have my doubts that a Kalhart or top rangefinder Crown can accurately focus a wide-open 210mm for reliable, consistent portraits, especially of "real people" instead of static models.

I agree. The f/4.5 of that Paragon is fun to play with, but probably only for tripods and ground glass. It's one of those "f/8 and be there" sorts of situations when hand-held. But it's a fund project even if it doesn't work out.

I have made Fujiroids with the camera using that lens, but not wide open and not with rangefinder focusing. That f/4.5 makes using the ground glass a lot easier, though. Of course, Fujiroids are no test of critical focus.

Rick "trying it just for fun" Denney

[ic-racer]

Swapping the finder masks is easy, swapping the lenses is a little more cumbersome and swapping the cams can be fiddly, especially in the dark. What I'd do is figure on the two lenses you want to use and get two camera bodies and get each one set up beforehand.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Experiment away and have fun, but if this is to be a commercial venture I think you'd really be shooting yourself in the head were you to attempt to develop a niche using LF exclusively for dim club interiors and stage performances. Too many negatives working against you: slow lenses needing stopped way down just for adequate DOF, films being pretty much limited to ISO 400 nowadays and a huge one in that electronic flash is not going to win you many/any friends at these venues during performances. Further, album art is really tiny these days: at its largest its only gotta cover a jewel case. Event promotion is mostly done via the web and by social media on smart phones. No image resolution requirements that aren't being met by small formats.

There are numerous valid reasons why DSLRs swiftly became the coin of the realm for event work-- they routinely achieve ISO 3200 and 6400, can be coupled to lenses that autofocus accurately in low-light (with max apertures of f/1.4) etc, etc, etc. B&W conversions are trivially easy.

[Corran]

Of course...I already get paid to do this kinda stuff, and I use a Nikon D700 + fast primes. This would be a niche product that I would work into the "regular" stuff.

My favorite shot I've ever done for a band is one I took with my Pentax 67, 105mm 2.4 with TMax400 pushed to 800. I'm going to try some TMax400 4x5's pushed to 1600/3200 when I get a chance to see what is "possible."

[rfesk]

You may want to consider two cameras - one for the longer lens and another designed for the short lens - even if you scale focus. The total cost "could" be much less than a Linhof set up.

[Thomas Greutmann]

I think rfesk an ic-racer have a valid point. What you have in mind is calling for two camera bodies, one for a shorter lens, one for a longer lens.

I think 4x5 handheld is real fun, and I do this off an on. I have used different cameras for this: Speed and Crown Graphic, Linhof Technika, Converted Polaroid 110B, Gowlandflex. All have their pros and cons. Linhof Technika are the most versatile, but heavy and difficult to point and focus in action. The others are much easier to use, but swapping lenses is not very practical.

None of these cameras would be able to handle a 58mm lens handheld, though (except a Linhof Master Technika maybe, but without rangefinder focusing). You will need something different. I would suggest the following setup:
- A Crown Graphic with a 135mm lens (standard). Get a model with top-mounted rangefinder, I find them easier to work with than the side-mounted rangefinder models. I would use this as a starting point. And prices are reasonable.
- For a 58mm Schneider get a Cambo Wide body or a Chinese-made Gaoersi. Forget about rangefinder focusing, you will have to guess distance anyway.
- And get some Grafmatic film holders for fast action.
That should be some fun gear.

Greetings, Thomas

[Dan Fromm]

Rick, and Thomas, are you sure that a 58 can't be used on a 4x5 Crown Graphic?

I ask because although mounting it is a pain a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon works on a 2x3 Crown. Ain't no bed in shots made with it.

Why a pain? 'Cos mounting requires removing the rear cell and reattaching it from behind. There's not much room, reattaching the rear cell is very fiddly.

Back focus shouldn't be an issue, a 4x5 Crown's minimum flange-to-film distance is 52.4 mm.

[rdenney]

Rick, and Thomas, are you sure that a 58 can't be used on a 4x5 Crown Graphic?

No, I'm not sure. It just didn't look good when I visualized it.

But I was looking at a Speed, not a Crown, and the extra depth of the Speed box (to make room for the FP shutter) makes a different, I suspect.

It that is a requriement, it should be confirmed before spending money.

Rick "who can test with a 65 but not with a 58" Denney

[Neal Chaves]

You can mount and cam-couple a 58mm lens to the 4X5 TRF Crown but not the Speed. The infinity stops go on the inner tracks BEHIND the lens standard with the bed dropped. I have a 65mm f8 Fujinon W on mine. It folds up in the case and I use a 20mm Russian viewfinder in a shoe on top to compose accurately.

[ashlee52]

One more option... pick a medium wide lens such as 135mm or 120mm. Then for your telephoto simply use a 6x7 roll film back with the same lens. For me the reason to use LF is often that subjects react very differently to it than a common camera. And the speed at which you work affects your output. So using the RF back still gives you all of that. Then if you really want something wide, get a 75 or whatever and mark some scales along your focusing rails. You should have a second set of stops for the shorter lens. The whole kit... Crown Graphic, 135mm lens, and RF back could be found for $300 or so. Double that to add an extra wide lens. Personally I've owned Technika and a Wista... I find the Crowns vastly superior for hand held use.

[Corran]

I am out of the 120 game and have no desire to get back into shooting it...

I really appreciate all the suggestions here, and I am looking at several Crowns/Speeds on ebay. I will keep y'all updated if I start shooting with something soon :)

[Drew Bedo]

Corran: I don't think anyone has brought up the Polaroid conversions. Some folks really like them for hand-held 4x5.

Check out the Byron conversions at:
http://www.rangefolder.com/

there are others but this version is completly remanufactured and offers interchangable lenses.

cheers

[Corran]

Really neat...unfortunately I don't have the space, time, or know-how to go about a custom job like that. Is there anybody who specializes in conversions and sells them regularly?

[Drew Bedo]

Corran: The Byron is a camera that you buy from them. It may help them if you send in your own Polaroid and lens. Contact them and see what is possible.

[Corran]

Oh, I looked around for a price but I guess it's all custom work done for whatever he charges.

The 110b conversions look wonderful and compact.

[Chilidog]

With ISO 400 film you might be able to stop down even more and that would forgive a lot of errors.

Or you can use Fuji's "super speedy" ISO 3200 B&W instant film.

[Corran]

Got a Crown Graphic on the way :)

I shot a test sheet of Tri-X 320 pushed to 2500 and the scan showed the tiniest hint of grain at 100% magnification (4000DPI). I am ecstatic at the possibilities. I'm going to probably try another sheet at 5000. With an f/4.7 lens I think I can shoot in the places I've been to at about 1/100 wide-open pushed to 5000.

I think I'm going to look for a fast Nikkor 65 or 75mm lens, and keep the Schneider Xenar 360mm f/5.5 lens I was going to sell and see if I can find some cams or get them made for those lenses, either for the Crown or another one.

Thanks again for all the help. I think I'd love to play with one of those Polaroid conversions too...maybe I'll pick up some parts sometime and try to hack one together at my friends shop.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

If you were thinking of shooting it wide open, you might want to consider that the Nikon SW 65 f/4 only has a 110mm image circle at f/4... it achieves but 170mm at f/16.

[Corran]

Good point. I need to do more research on the image circles wide-open. Hopefully the 75mm will cover.

[Frank Petronio]

It will be expensive but a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 75/4.5 (or the Zeiss Biogon) will cover it wide open, or at least look good "almost" covering it.

Just because a lens won't cover 4x5 doesn't mean you can't use it, and given the nature of your work perhaps dramatic fall off and going to black could be successful? If so, pay attention to how certain lenses fall off as they vary the width of the "transition" based on optical and mechanical issues like the ass-end of the barrel holding the rear element.

You can't cam a 360mm normal lens and I don't think you can cam even the 360mm Tele-Xenar (that I think you're referring to) but I'm not sure. Perhaps an expert can confirm?

[Oren Grad]

You can't cam a 360mm normal lens and I don't think you can cam even the 360mm Tele-Xenar (that I think you're referring to) but I'm not sure. Perhaps an expert can confirm?

The 2008 brochure for the Master/3000 says you can rangefinder-couple the Master up to a 400mm tele.

[Frank Petronio]

yeah but not a Crown top rangefinder....

[Corran]

Yeah I might like the fall-off of the 65mm. Maybe I can borrow one first to try out.

Yes it's the Tele-Xenar I have. I'll have to just futz around and see what comes of it. Regardless the lens that is already on the Crown will do me for a lot of stuff.

[Bob Salomon]

The 2008 brochure for the Master/3000 says you can rangefinder-couple the Master up to a 400mm tele.

The Master Technika Classic, not the Master Technika 3000 as it does not have the rangefinder.

[Bob Salomon]

It will be expensive but a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 75/4.5 (or the Zeiss Biogon) will cover it wide open, or at least look good "almost" covering it.

Just because a lens won't cover 4x5 doesn't mean you can't use it, and given the nature of your work perhaps dramatic fall off and going to black could be successful? If so, pay attention to how certain lenses fall off as they vary the width of the "transition" based on optical and mechanical issues like the ass-end of the barrel holding the rear element.

You can't cam a 360mm normal lens and I don't think you can cam even the 360mm Tele-Xenar (that I think you're referring to) but I'm not sure. Perhaps an expert can confirm?

360 tele lenses can be cammed.

[Bob Salomon]

"Linhof Technikas also use replaceable cams in their rangefinders, though the cams are custom-ground for each lens and may be hard to find for any given lens without getting Linhof to grind a new one. There is no doubt that this was the best of the cam-configured rangefinders, though."

1: Getting a lens cammed just means that you send it to the Linhof service center. Not to the Linhof factory. Almost every country has a Linhof service center.
2: Not was, Linhof still is selling the Master Technika Classic. It is a current production camera.

[Greg Lockrey]

I didn't read all the posts so if I'm being redundant I apologize.

What I did with my three lenses on my Speed Graphic was to calibrate the longest lens to the rangefinder. I set up known distance references on the ground and marked them on a vernier scale using the range finder and ground glass as a guide. I then changed each lens, set it's infinity stop refocused with the ground glass to those known distance references and marked the range on the vernier scale for that lens. You will find that the margin for error is better for wider angle lenses and further away from the camera. That's why I chose the long lens as the standard.

In the field I use the range finder to read off the vernier the distance from the calibrated lens and use that distance and move the working lens to it's equivalent distance mark. Cumbersome.... yes, but with practice it becomes easy.

You could set up 50,40,30,25,20,17,15,12,10,8,7,6,5,4 ft on your vernier scale depending how small you can write and read.

You can look up a depth of field table for each lens and mark those on your verniers also. To make it easier to read make a vernier for each lens independent of each other.

[Bob Salomon]

Greg,

You might want to proof read and edit your technique.

[Greg Lockrey]

Greg,

You might want to proof read and edit your technique.

How about now Bob?


It's much easier to do than describe.... ;) ;)

[Bob Salomon]

How about now Bob?

Much more readable, at least for me.

[Greg Lockrey]

Much more readable, at least for me.

I monkeyed with it some more.... Have him bring his camera over and I'll set it up for him. :D :D :D

[Corran]

Thanks for the description of your technique Greg. I will definitely be trying to do something similar when I get the Crown and see what results!

[al olson]

Experiment away and have fun, but if this is to be a commercial venture I think you'd really be shooting yourself in the head were you to attempt to develop a niche using LF exclusively for dim club interiors and stage performances. Too many negatives working against you: slow lenses needing stopped way down just for adequate DOF, films being pretty much limited to ISO 400 nowadays and a huge one in that electronic flash is not going to win you many/any friends at these venues during performances.
. . .

Bryan,

It is not as difficult as Ivan indicates. Check out the DVD called Bill Gottlieb: Riffs. (If not available from Amazon, they are available from Freestyle.) It sounds like this is the style you wish to achieve. The low light images are superb compositions of jazz greats from the era.

Most of his photographs were done in clubs with available light using a Speed Graphic. Films were slower in those days, around ASA 200. I don't recall him saying anything about his lenses or that he mentions using a wide angle lens. Most of his photos look like they were made with a "normal" press lens around 127mm.

[Corran]

Cool, it seems to be available on Netflix too so I can get it that way.

I'm very close with a lot of jazz guys that I went to school with so it would definitely be an inspiration.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Like I said, experiment and have fun. You may even get something usable or salable.
Bear in mind though that much of what passed for commercially acceptable available-light and event photography in the 1940's and 50's (while adequate for newsprint and smaller uses of the era), would probably get you fired or out of the running for any future commercial work today.

Due to the limits of newsprint and the small size that most stuff ran, Speed Graphics were the camera of choice if you had to handhold when it was going to be a little blurry... you'd not notice it so much from the bigger neg. And you probably won't hear that mentioned in documentaries, or see the effect. (Probably not what we're aiming for when we choose 4x5 sheet film today at $2-5/sheet developed cost).

Time and technology marches on. In this case LF press camera tech had already been trampled by the late 50's with f/2.8 Rolleis, and certainly not later than the early 60's when Nikons Fs and Pentax Spotmatics showed up on the scene with f/1.4 and faster normal lenses.

And for what it's worth, I do own a couple of RF press cameras (Meridians) and enjoy them a whole bunch-- just not for (paying) low-light event work. Not when I've also got a couple of DSLRs at the ready.

[Corran]

I understand, but from my estimates I should be getting 1/100 shutter speeds or better pushing Tri-X 320 to 5000 according to the exposures I did on my last club gig. Here is a test shot at 2500 I did for comparison purposes: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=762856&postcount=2024

The grain is barely noticeable and better than I could get from my Nikon D700 at the same or less ISO setting. Of course the f/4.7 lens on the Crown I got will be a real limitation compared to f/1.4 primes but that's part of the fun of it, for me anyway. And boy I'd like to play with one of the Aero-Ektar f/2.5 lenses. I will still use my DSLR for most of the images on a paying gig though of course, especially until I have a technique nailed down for 4x5.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Will you be scanning and hybrid printing from 4x5 or optically printing on an enlarger?

[neil poulsen]

I agree w/Frank. The Mamiya Press is a neat system.

One can use multiple backs for the zone xystem, it's a range finder ideal for people, and one can shoot fairly wide w/a Biogon style, 50mm lens. One can also shoot fairly long w/the 250mm, f5 (heavy) lens. The 100mm, 150mm, and 250mm (f5) lenses are all supported by paralax correction.

[Corran]

Will you be scanning and hybrid printing from 4x5 or optically printing on an enlarger?

I just got a 4x5 enlarger but probably scanning mostly.