questions about 90mm used on 4x5?

[stradibarrius]

I am shooting 4x5 and recently got a 90mm lens. I quickly found out that to focus the lens at ANY focal length with a flat lens board I had to have both standards on the same side of the center block.
Is it normal for a 90mm to only have about 1/2" of usable focusing adjustment???
If I got a recessed lens board would the usable focal distance get longer?
I may not even be asking the right question but this is where I will start.

[E. von Hoegh]

The answer to your questions will depend upon the camera you have.

[stradibarrius]

I have a Cambo SC 4x5...

[Dan Fromm]

I quickly found out that to focus the lens at ANY focal length with a flat lens board I had to have both standards on the same side of the center block.

Barry, you really have to learn the language. The lens' focal length is what it is. I think that what you meant is "to focus the lens at any distance ..."

That's the SC. They're somewhat hostile to short lenses.

Does the lens focus to infinity on your SC?

A recessed board reduces the camera's minimum flange-to-film distance. A "top hat" or "extension" board increases it. You may need a recessed board to use a shorter lens. May because not all lenses of the same focal length have the same flange focal distance. Compare, for example, Super Angulons and Angulons, the information is here: https://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/index.htm

This raises another question. Which 90 do you have?

[E. von Hoegh]

I have a Cambo SC 4x5...

Why can you get only 1/2" of focus travel? Is the front standard hitting the center block? Can you focus at infinity?

[stradibarrius]

Thanks Dan! you are exactly right, I meant to say the distance it takes to focus the lens. Yes it will focus to infinity as well as focusing on things very close. Why would Cambos be any more hostile to shot focal length lens? Are not all LF cameras just bellows with a front standard and rear standard???? That is not a challenge to your statement just asking for and explanation and an opportunity to learn something.
I know if i want to have any movement to speak of I will need a bag bellows but that is a different issue than the distance to focus.

[Jim Noel]

The answers to your questions are - Yes, it is necessary to have the front and rear standards on the front side of the tripod block, and yes, a recessed board is almost a necessity with this lens/camera combination. You are also correct that you need a bag bellows to get any appreciable movement with the combination.

[stradibarrius]

Jim those are the things that I already know. My question is why do I only get 1/2" of travel when focusing? Is that normal for a Fujinon W 90 mm with a Cambo sc? The standards are not hitting the tripod block.

[rdenney]

Yes, that's what you have to do with an SCII. The Cambo recessed lens board makes the 90 a little more generous.

As to why the Cambo is hostile, one has to consider what lenses were available at the time the camera design was conceived. The original Super Cambo came out maybe in the late 50's, when using lenses wider than 90 would be pretty uncommon for most purposes. At that time, lenses were available in 75 and 65mm that barely covered 4x5, and these could be used with the Cambo using a recessed board, bag bellows, and double-lock standards. You could originally get them with a "double-lock" standard that offset the u-frame towards the center from the carrier. These are not particularly common, however--I've seen it only in the old catalog. And in those days, it was not common for people to uses lenses that short with 4x5.

With the common single-lock standards, you need to move the standards to one side or the other with short lenses. This was considered a reasonable accommodation for the rare use of really short lenses. The design of the camera made such reconfigurations easy, and for the day, that was a strong feature.

When I was using a Cambo as my main camera, 90 was my shortest lens and I used that with a recessed board. With the standard bellows, I was limited on shift, but was able to achieve most all the tilts and swings I needed. With the bag bellows, I had no such limitations.

The common rail cameras available at the time the Cambo came out included the original Calumet (which is a version of the Kodak Master View--a very old design), the Sinar Norma, the Linhof Kardan Color, and maybe one of the early Arcas. Of these, only the Norma design followed the trend to shorter lenses successfully, even though Sinar still replaced the Norma with two other models in 1971, though providing considerable interchangeability with the older camera components. Other cameras of the day transformed into different designs to do so. With the Calumet, using a lens of 90 or shorter required a different camera, though a really tiny 90 could be mounted in a recessed board. Designs were really transformed starting in the late 60's through the early 70's, when Schneider's f/5.6 Super Angulons came out. Cambo came out with the Cambo Wide for lenses shorter than 90mm in 1969.

If you want to see the roots of your camera, go to the Camera Eccentric web page: http://www.cameraeccentric.com/info.html

Click on the Super Cambo link to see the first iteration of the design of your camera. Note that the Super Angulon shown in the picture with the bag bellows is a late-50's through mid-60's vintage.

Rick "trends are slow in the LF world" Denney

[Dan Fromm]

Barry, there are many ways to make a standard. Not all view cameras do it the same way.

If you look at your 4x5 SC, you'll see that the rail riders are roughly 60 mm in diameter. With the camera set up as Cambo recommends -- carrier frames behind the uprights -- the minimum distance between front of lensboard and film plane is on the order of 90 mm (60 mm for two rail rider half diameters and 26 mm for two carrier frames' thicknesses).

But the SC is completely modular. You can take the rear standard off the rail and put it on backwards, with the carrier frame in front of the uprights. Set up this way, the two carrier frames will nearly touch each other. They won't come quite as close with a bag bellows in place. Unfortunately for me, this isn't possible with my 2x3 SC, whose standards aren't simply smaller 4x5 standards.

[stradibarrius]

Thanks Dan that explanation makes perfect sense. The standards in the "designed" configuration are to thick to allow the 2 planes to come close enough together or if they do just barely.

[rdenney]

But the SC is completely modular. You can take the rear standard off the rail and put it on backwards, with the carrier frame in front of the uprights.

When I was trying to find a way to get an SCII (in the Calumet 45nx form) to accommodate a 47mm lens, I tried this. I discovered that when the rear standard is reversed, one cannot slide in a film holder or pull the dark slide unless shooting in the vertical format--the upright is in the way.

Rick "been there, done that" Denney

[Bob Salomon]

All 90mm lenses are not equal. Just like all 45 cameras differ.
A Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90mm 4.5 has a flange focal distance (FFL) of 98mm. the 6.8 version is 94mm, a 90mm Schneider SA XL is 103.5 and the 90mm 6.8 SA is 103.4 while the 90mm 5.6 SA was 102.7 and the 90mm 8.0 was 98.8mm (all in Copal shutter)

So part of your problem may be which 90mm you are using.

[Dan Fromm]

When I was trying to find a way to get an SCII (in the Calumet 45nx form) to accommodate a 47mm lens, I tried this. I discovered that when the rear standard is reversed, one cannot slide in a film holder or pull the dark slide unless shooting in the vertical format--the upright is in the way.

Rick "been there, done that" Denney
Yes, of course you're right. I always forget that small detail until I try the trick, and shortly after I forget it again.

Dan "ars longa, memoria brevis" Fromm

[BrianShaw]

Whatever you do, Dan... if/when you try that again just remember to have the back open toward the TOP. One can easily configure to vertical and have the back open toward the rail. Then no film holder can be inserted. Ha ha ha. Sometimes we all need to be embarassed by those smal details to be reminded of them. Ha ha ha.

[Bob Salomon]

Apparently we are looking at different things. The Linhof Color 45 (1958 to 1964) and its replacement, the Linhof Kardan Color 45 (1964 to 1975) hd a fixed bellows and accommodated lenses from 65mm to 360mm. Both had a hinged rail block so it was no big deal to put the rail block between the standards or, if needed, behind the rear standard to allow moving the standards closer together. This feature was also used on the later cameras the Kardan B as well as the original Kardan Super Color with the round rail. On all later Linhof Kardan cameras the rail did not use a standard bearer and instead the rail bottom mounted directly to the head so at all times the standards could be positioned as close or as far apart without taking anything apart or reversing anything. A feature that has always existed on Linhof monorail cameras. Even the older Kardan 57 introduced in 1956 took lenses from 90mm up without reversing standards.

And the Linhof Color and the Kardan Color 45 cameras did not have or require a bag bellows so I don't understand what the following means in regard to Linhof monorails:
"Of these, only the Norma design followed the trend to shorter lenses successfully". Obviously the Linhofs did also. Easily to 65mm on some and down to 35mm on more recent ones.

[rdenney]

And the Linhof Color and the Kardan Color 45 cameras did not have or require a bag bellows so I don't understand what the following means in regard to Linhof monorails:
"Of these, only the Norma design followed the trend to shorter lenses successfully". Obviously the Linhofs did also. Easily to 65mm on some and down to 35mm on more recent ones.

By that I mean without having to fundamentally redesign the back, bellows, and lens-board attachments to create a system camera that could be adjusted for a range of lens lengths and still provide movements. I used a Linhof Kardan Color in college. To use those short lenses, you still had to move the tripod clamp out from between the standards, just as you do with the Cambo. And with a short lens, shifting is going to be a challenge. Of course, in those days, lenses that short didn't have coverage for movements anyway, so it didn't matter--but that was my point.

Sinar was the first with a common back-board-bellows attachment in 1948 or '49, as I recall reading. The Super Cambo came out the same year as the Linhof Color. It was the Linhof Kardon B that had the first such flexibility, in the late 60's?

Rick "who added two inches to his biceps hauling around that Kardan Color" Denney