PDA

View Full Version : Difference Between Sinar F1, F2 - Finally found a definitive answer - FYI



Cletus
19-Sep-2012, 08:33
This is an FYI post for anyone with a newer Sinar F (1 or 2) series camera, or who, like me, was never able to get a satisfactory answer to this question. I have been searching for some time now, trying to find out once and for all, what the actual difference is between the Sinar F1 and F2 cameras. This applies to 4x5 and 8x10 cameras only, not sure about 5x7 or other formats, or Sinar P, X or F model variations, such as Sinar C. Many of these variations are simply different combinations of different Sinar model standards and other components and aren't something you could typically buy complete from Sinar. At least that's what I gathered from the Sinar literature...

I've heard several different ideas on the differences betwixt the F1 and F2 designations, but never quite the right answer, or two answers the same. I finally found a copy of an old Sinar Sales Brochure that outlines the differences between models. So far, this is the only satisfactory answer I've been able to find:

4x5 Sinar F1 uses the "Sinar Accessory / Utility Standard" as the front, or lens standard. The rear, or image standard on F1 and F2 are the same, with the difference being the fine focus knob along side the rise knob and a more robust rail clamping system with the bottom knurled rubber locking knob (instead of the plastic knob).

4x5 Sinar F2 has the fine focus feature on both standards, IOW, they are identical. Newer models of the F2 front and rear standards also have separate shift and swing lock levers, but this apparently does not differentiate the F1 and F2, or one F2 from another, as I had been given to understand. So the front standard type is apparently the only difference between F1/F2 of similar vintage.

8x10 Sinar F2 has fine focus and robust rail clamp on both front and rear standards and separate shift and tilt locks on the rear (and the separate locks on the "4x5" front too, depending on vintage). Technically, there is no Sinar 8x10 "F1" unless you find one with the 4x5 accessory frame serving as the front standard, instead of the fine focus type. This was something I was warned (by Leigh here on the forum) to look out for when shopping for an 8x10. Now I understand the difference. Fortunately, the F2 8x10 I found is a true F2 with the proper front standard. There is evidently no difference between front standards on 4x5 and 8x10 as long as it's truly an F2. The Accessory standard is probably not robust enough to be used for some of the heavy C-3 lenses used with 8x10.

So this is what I've been able to find and I feel satisfied now that I know the difference between the two camera models. Good to know if you're camera shopping (like I recently was), especially on Ebay or somewhere, where it's quite possible the seller doesn't really understand what they have. If someone else has another idea on this, or another difference I didn't point out, or catch, I'd be happy to hear it. Hopefully this post will finally answer the question, for those of you who were wondering about this too.

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
19-Sep-2012, 08:39
Very useful, thanks! How about the F and F+?

Drew Wiley
19-Sep-2012, 08:47
Not totally accurate. Depends when the cameras were made. The correct front for an
8x10 F2 has larger diameter steel posts, not alum ones like 4x5. F+ was a 4x5 with the
inferior multipupose standard on the front. All the older standards combined shift and swing
on the same lever. Then you had the C series which used a P back and F front. The literature called Sinar Code for a given vintage shows the details. Unfortunately, some of
the older used equip which shows up for sale might be jerryrigged from mismatched components. The camera might operate fine; but it's difficult to know exactly what you're
getting. I wouldn't want an 8x10 with a 4x5 front, or it might not hold heavier lenses steady.

Cletus
19-Sep-2012, 08:51
This applies to 4x5 and 8x10 cameras only, not sure about 5x7 or other formats, or Sinar P, X or F model variations, such as Sinar C. Many of these variations are simply different combinations of different Sinar model standards and other components and aren't something you could typically buy complete from Sinar. At least that's what I gathered from the Sinar literature...

Not sure about F+ or other models. The brochure I had only talked about Sinar F and P and I think those are the only "base model" LF cameras that Sinar was offering at the time. I know they have an "X" now too, but I don't know much about that one. Looks like an updated P2 to me.

I'm pretty sure the P, P1 and P2 are just updates of the same model and same standards. I think if you stick a P rear with an F front you get a C, or something like that, but not clear on all the variations and possible combinations. As you likely know, Sinar stuff is all standard and compatible, which is one of the reasons I chose it for my system(s).

Cletus
19-Sep-2012, 08:59
Drew -

I was told the 8x10 had a beefier front standard too, but I can't find anything about it in the Sinar literature. I was looking out for this when I bought the camera too, but in my case, the guy I bought my 8x10 from was the original owner, so I wasn't too worried about mixed parts and pieces. He said he bought the camera new and I believe him. He was a commercial pro and not the type to tell tales I think...

I also have a Sinar "F1" I bought used from Adorama and other than the separate swing/shift levers (my 8x10 front has 'em, the Adorama camera doens't) I can't tell the difference between the 4x5 rear and 8x10 front. They appear identical in every way (except the levers). The rise rails on both are the same size and both appear to be steel rather than aluminum.

I'm not trying to contradict what you're saying, just trying to understand this apparently complicated issue of Sinar models. :)

Cletus
19-Sep-2012, 09:06
Drew - Nope, I think you're right. Something isn't the same about the 4x5 rear vs. 8x10 front, besides the locking levers. The rise rails are exactly the same size and length, but with both of them bottomed out on the same rail, the 8x10 front sits about 1/2" higher than the 4x5 rear. I have my 4x5 set up as an "F2" right now, with the 8x10 front and 4x5 rear. The multipurpose standard that came with the 4x5 isn't being used right now.

So there's something and I don't know what. I'm going back over the Sinar brochure now trying to see if there's something I missed. It's not very detailed, so maybe it doesn't specify the differences between the 4x5 and 8x10.

Frank Petronio
19-Sep-2012, 09:14
Be careful on eBay because a lot of cameras are mis-identified. Personally I prefer Normas but a cheap F is a great entry-level camera. And a proper F2 is very nice, I consider it on par with the Norma in actual use (but it's not as pretty haha). The F2 knobs and such are a lot nicer than the F1 or earlier models.

Cletus
19-Sep-2012, 09:38
Frank - I agree completely with what you just said and some of those points are what prompted me to do this post in the first place. I thought I had done some pretty sound research, but Drew Wiley just pointed out that I may still be a little off on what I believed was the last word on Sinar F cameras.

And indeed, I've looked through a lot of Ebay ads for Sinar F type cameras and they're all over the place. Very few listings seem to accurately reflect the correct models for these cameras as I understand it. I'm sure it's mostly not the intentions of the Sellers to deceive. Sinar F model variations are evidently a rather convoluted and unclear subject. Even now, after I thought I had it all figured out!

rdenney
19-Sep-2012, 11:36
Both the changes you describe for 4x5 are actually part of the standard answer for the difference between the F/F1 and F2. I know I've typed many times that the F and F1 use the "multipurpose standard" (437.61 during the later era) and the F2 uses the "front standard/Sinar C2/F2" (431.61), with the main difference being that the latter has a full enclosure around the rail and geared focus, while the former has the advantage of being installable without having to slide it over the end of the rail.

Don't put too much stock in the brochures. My quoted descriptions above come out of the Sinar Code, undated but published certainly after the lineup included the F2/C2/P2. The titles used to describe pieces and parts vary.

Another difference between later F2's and the earliest F2's and previous F's was the separate control for locking shift. Previously, shift and swing shared the same locking lever.

The F2 also often came stock with the metering back. The F and F1 would, of course, accept the metering back but were not usually supplied with it. The 491.61 F1 kit did not include it but the 491.96 F2 Standard kit did.

The "special front standard" (431.62) was always included in the 8x10 kits. As Leigh and others have mentioned many times, it includes beefier and longer rise/fall columns. There were also bellows differences that he has mentioned.

The F1 differed from the F in cosmetics. It was all black, and included the new-style knobs that all operate from the right. The pictures indicate that the F1 knobs are the same as the F2 knobs, and the real change was between the F and the F1/F2, which may be what Frank intended to say.

Nobody has ever been able to distinguish the F from the F+ in my hearing, other than maybe the tripod clamp that was included in the kit.

All of these components were subject to continuous improvements over their production lives, without changing part or model numbers. Those changes are only documented in the service manuals.

I know I've written all of the above a bunch of times, and I bet Frank has written it even more than I have. Here are some randomly selected examples found in a quickie search using Google:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?58227-Sinar-F1-vs-F2-How-can-I-visually-spot-the-difference

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?22735-Visible-difference-between-Sinar-F-F1-F2-standards

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?15272-Sinar-models-what-s-the-difference

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?39385-Sinar-F-F1-F2-How-can-I-tell

And here's a quick mention of the most important difference in the articles on the home page:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/sinar.html#comparison

As you can see, this topic gets repeated a lot! But it needs to be, because the question gets asked a lot.

Rick "who googled 'site:largeformatphotography.info sinar f2 f1 differences'" Denney

Drew Wiley
19-Sep-2012, 13:57
It would be nice is someone put a database online with the various Sinar Codes. The camera has had many variations over the years, so some confusion over terminology is inevitable. But most components can be interchanged clear back to the Norma era. In
fact, I've replaced some things with newer equivalents, but by contrast, am now working
mostly with Norma components. I especially like the tapered bellows. Don't know why they
gave up on that unless it was simply a cost consideration.

Frank Petronio
19-Sep-2012, 14:10
If you didn't mind the bulk or silliness, a Norma front with a P2 rear and a F-P era back would be the best shooter in terms of strength and features.

Jerry Flynn
19-Sep-2012, 17:16
The difference between the f and f+ was that the origial f had a "low profile" rail clamp that had a lever that locked the rail. The f+ had, instead, the same rail clamp as the p.

The f and f+ had separate plastic knobs for the rise/fall and focus. The F1 and F2 have concentric knobs for focus and rise/fall with rubber grips.

The f and f+ used a pointer on the left side of the rear standard for the swing/tilt calculator. This did not work so well when using the fine focus on the rear since the pointer would stray off the "zero" mark as you focused. The f1 and f2 (and a1 for that matter) used a rotating drum on the left side of the rear focus block that you can zero after making the fine focus adjustments.

Lastly, the difference between f1 and f2 was the front standard. The f1 had a knob with rubber grip for rise/fall, no fine focus and latched onto the rail like any multipurpose standard. It did not have the separate lock for swing/shift that the back had.

I have used the 8X10 configuration of the f2 in both ways mentioned - with the proper beefed-up front standard as well as with a regular f2 standard. My experience was that the rise on the regular 4X5 f2 standard was insufficent to bring the lens up to a point where it cenered on the 8X10 format. You have to use the offset method to get any rise - the rear standard has minimal fall (5mm or so to my recollection which is not much on 8X10). The f1 standard might have a small fraction more rise because it does not have the same wraparound design as the f2, but I might question the stability of something like a 360mm Symmar S such as I had on that front.

Leigh
19-Sep-2012, 19:36
I was told the 8x10 had a beefier front standard too, but I can't find anything about it in the Sinar literature.
That's correct. I believe I mentioned it in a previous post, but I don't know in which thread of several on the subject.

The diameter of the support rods on my real 8x10 F2 is 15mm, as compared with 10mm on the 4x5 F2.

- Leigh

Leigh
19-Sep-2012, 19:40
My experience was that the rise on the regular 4X5 f2 standard was insufficent to bring the lens up to a point where it cenered on the 8X10 format.
I've encountered the same thing.

Somebody tried to sell me a supposed 8x10 F2 a couple of years ago, but it was
obviously put together using a 4x5 front standard and could not center the lens.

- Leigh

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 02:56
Leigh -

Yes, I cited your comments about this in my original post. The problem I have is, the F2 8x10 I have came from an original owner, who bought the camera directly from Sinar so I must assume it has the correct front end. I know people can say whatever they want, but I spent some time with this guy and I know he's not telling me fish stories.

I've taken a good, close look at the parts on both cameras and compared the 8x10 to the F1 4x5 I bought from Adorama. There is almost no difference between the rear std on the F1 (4x5) and the front on the F2 (8x10), which is confusing. The front on the 8x10 does have plenty of rise (enough to go way above center and exhaust my lens coverages) but the rails are the same length and dia as the F2 4x5 rear. I'll have to measure and see if they're 10 or 15mm.

Okay that's all probably just confusing everything. Suffice to say the front on my 8x10 should be correct for the camera and is almost identical to the 4x5 rear standard, save the seperate shift lever, which the 8x10 front has and 4x5 rear does not. I'm sure there's something here I'm just not seeing. In the end, my Sinar kit appears to me to be capable and complete.

I thought I was doing some good by posting the info I got from the Sinar book, but evidently this subject just isn't that simple! I wish all these things just had the Sinar p/ns on them! Would save me a lot of confusion anyway.

rdenney
20-Sep-2012, 05:49
Leigh -

Yes, I cited your comments about this in my original post. The problem I have is, the F2 8x10 I have came from an original owner, who bought the camera directly from Sinar so I must assume it has the correct front end. I know people can say whatever they want, but I spent some time with this guy and I know he's not telling me fish stories.

I've taken a good, close look at the parts on both cameras and compared the 8x10 to the F1 4x5 I bought from Adorama. There is almost no difference between the rear std on the F1 (4x5) and the front on the F2 (8x10), which is confusing. The front on the 8x10 does have plenty of rise (enough to go way above center and exhaust my lens coverages) but the rails are the same length and dia as the F2 4x5 rear. I'll have to measure and see if they're 10 or 15mm.

Okay that's all probably just confusing everything. Suffice to say the front on my 8x10 should be correct for the camera and is almost identical to the 4x5 rear standard, save the seperate shift lever, which the 8x10 front has and 4x5 rear does not. I'm sure there's something here I'm just not seeing. In the end, my Sinar kit appears to me to be capable and complete.

I thought I was doing some good by posting the info I got from the Sinar book, but evidently this subject just isn't that simple! I wish all these things just had the Sinar p/ns on them! Would save me a lot of confusion anyway.

Leigh is correct on this.

In the Sinar Code (http://www.butkus.org/chinon/sinar/sinar.htm) document I referenced earlier (which you can download from Mike Butkus's site--follow the link), the Special Front Standard (431.62) for use with 8x10 F and C cameras clearly shows both thicker and longer rise/fall columns than the F2 front standard (431.61) or the multipurpose standard (437.61, used on the F1 and prior F).

Remember that these are system cameras. Yes, there are defined kits, and the 8x10 F2 standard kit (491.96) includes the Special Front Standard (431.62). The standard and expert kit components are also listed in the Sinar Code. But it's also quite possible for someone to buy a 4x5 F2 kit and an 8x10 format changing kit (or just the F2 8x10 rear standard and the 8x10 bellows) and mix and match the components. Your friend is either fibbing or remembering incorrectly, or he special-ordered the kit as you see it.

I totally agree with you that it would have been good for Sinar to have put the part numbers on the parts, and a production date code. Often, they changed a part as a matter of a production change, which is noted in the service manuals but nowhere else, without changing the part number. And sometimes they changed the part number without making really obvious changes to the part. It is indeed confusing. That, and the tendency for the parts to be mixed and matched into complete cameras (a byproduct of the excellent Sinar design), is why there's such a lore about what's what with Sinar componentry.

Rick "trust, but verify" Denney

Frank Petronio
20-Sep-2012, 05:53
Adorama often gets it wrong and sells beat up stuff so be cautious buying used from them. Remember NYC has the rental studios and yahoos who beat the crap out of their gear and many cameras are assembled from odd parts.

rdenney
20-Sep-2012, 06:01
Adorama often gets it wrong and sells beat up stuff so be cautious buying used from them. Remember NYC has the rental studios and yahoos who beat the crap out of their gear and many cameras are assembled from odd parts.

I had similar issues with Samy's in Los Angeles. Not everyone has tried to figure out all the nuances of the parts to the depth some of us have, and often they just don't put it together to see if it actually works. I got an F rear standard from Samy's that had been billed as an F2 front standard, but it was obviously an F-era piece (chrome, bakelite knobs, etc.)--quite aside from the fact that the controls were on the wrong side--and it was missing the plastic follower on the rail clamp and would have distorted the rail if really tightened. Samy's paid shipping both ways and refunded my money, so I don't really have a complaint about their integrity, but their Sinar lore could stand some improvement if they are going to sell parts and ad-hoc constructions.

My own camera is an assemblage of parts. It has an early F2 rear standard (without separate shift lock) with an F-era back, a late F2 front standard (with separate shift lock), and F-plus-era chrome rails and tripod clamp. I spent some considerable effort making adjustments to the factory shims to get the standards to align with very tight tolerances--they were certainly not that way when I first put them together--but who knows what fiddling they'd endured already.

Rick "one piece at a time..." Denney

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 06:08
Frank - yes, I completely understand about the Adorama camera. I got a really good price on it and so, had little expectation of perfection, or even consistency. I had to go by a few decent photos as well as I could to make my buying decision. Turns out to be a decent 4x5 kit, but there is definitely some question in my mind about original parts!

It was a nice deal though - Adorama threw in a brand new (OEM) set of standard bellows AND brand new bag bellows (and extra 12" rail and caps and even a new case) for less than many were charging for old studio beater Fs on the 'Bay. I was (and am) pretty pleased with it, but there is still some questions about the 'originality' of the standards.

I rather regret making this original post now - I thought I had some pretty good information when I wrote it and had finally "verified" much of the different information I've gathered about the Sinar System over the last several weeks.

Turns out it wasn't nearly that simple! I appreciate the link to the "Sinar Codes" though (thanks Rick) and will be carefully reading through for a while now.

rdenney
20-Sep-2012, 06:24
I thought I had some pretty good information when I wrote it and had finally "verified" much of the different information I've gathered about the Sinar System over the last several weeks.

Don't worry about it--all of us who own Sinar cameras have been through it. I haven't even gone into the weird descriptions in a late-70's Wall Street Photo catalog about the Sinar F+ stuff. Seems like every time one of these threads comes up, some new tidbit comes to light.

And even the Sinar Code is only a snapshot and definitive for one period. Sinar may have said something that sounded quite different a decade or two earlier when the guys at Wall Street were assembling their catalog.

Rick "who once bought a 'Norma front standard' only to discover it was a Norma multipurpose standard--not at all the same thing--and another time bought an F2 4x5 back only to discover it was a (more desirable to me anyway) Norma back" Denney

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 06:33
Well, it appears to be official - the front standard on my "original" 8x10 F2 isn't the Special Front 431.62. More like 4x5 F2 431.61, although I am still holding out just a little hope, pending measurement with a metric caliper. 10mm v. 15mm rise rails, according to Leigh. I can't find anything about the difference in length between the two types and I seem to get adequate rise with my current 8x10 front, but than I have nothing to compare too. I can't imagine the steel (instead of aluminium) would be magnetic, so not much chance of doing that check, but I think the diameter of the rails will tell the tale. The difference between the two (on my camera) is subtle but it's definitely there. Drat! Drat drat drat.

Now I really regret starting this post! Ignorance CAN be bliss, sometimes! I'm still pretty convinced the guy I bought this from at least thought he was telling me the truth, but I guess u never know. It seems unlikely that Sinar would ship a new 8x10 with the incorrect parts, but maybe the seller had more than one camera and unknowingly switched some stuff around. Who knows. Ces't la vie.

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 06:36
Anybody have a Sinar 431.62 Special Front Standard for sale? I have a beautiful 431.61 I'd be happy to trade!

Frank Petronio
20-Sep-2012, 06:51
I wonder if a machine shop could extend the bars? I don't have one of those standards around to look at but I know there are rare-hard to get extenders for the Norma U standards, maybe the F-P bars are similar with threaded inserts?

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 06:54
You know Frank, that's not a half bad notion! I have plenty of access to machine tools and materials and I could get somebody like Hejnar Photo to engrave and anodize some new rails for me. I need to really look into that as a possibility. Thanks!

(makes me feel a little bad now about making fun of your tripod choice!) :)

rdenney
20-Sep-2012, 07:53
I wonder if a machine shop could extend the bars? I don't have one of those standards around to look at but I know there are rare-hard to get extenders for the Norma U standards, maybe the F-P bars are similar with threaded inserts?

This should be fairly easy. Just unscrew the bottom cap on the column, match its shape on the end of an extension rod that has been turned to match the diameter of the column. Looks like it could all be done easily on a lathe. Any good machinist could whip these out quickly.

I think that both columns on the F2 cameras are threaded for those caps, but I seem to recall (and I'm not where I can look) that the F-era columns have a cap only on one column (it's there just to keep from accidentally pulling the standard out of the carrier). There was a change at some point in how the caps are held in place. Originally, the were installed with lacquer thread locker, but later versions used an o-ring to provide enough friction to keep it from vibrating loose. I think that change was made during the F era, so F2's should have the O-ring design. That would be good to replicate on an extension.

The P standards are different--they don't use the rise/fall columns and would be much more difficult to extend. But there were special extended P standards just like the special extended F standard for use with an 8x10 rear standard.

Note that just extending them won't stiffen them, and the greater unsupported length might make them a bit less stable. That's why the Special Front Standard for use with 8x10 used larger-diameter columns.

Rick "who would just use the camera until a deal came along on a Special Front Standard, maybe as part of another camera the remaining parts of which could then be sold off" Denney

Frank Petronio
20-Sep-2012, 08:18
(makes me feel a little bad now about making fun of your tripod choice!) :)

I make fun of it too, it is insane to spend that much but everything else in my Norma system was dirt cheap and I think it is funny to use a tripod that costs 3x what the camera did. The truth is that a $200 metal Gitzo does 99% the same thing. The Carbon Fiber is somewhat more damp and stable but if it were really an issue then I have things set up poorly. Mostly it is a just nice thing to have and I'm lucky to be able to treat myself.

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 08:28
Rick / Frank -

Both of you are dead on the money with the details here. Wow. Talk about familiar with the intricacies of Sinar stuff, pretty impressive! So I've already had this thing apart in the last half-hour and got a good look at how it's put together. Mine does indeed have the caps with o-rings and they both come off easily to allow removal of the rack. The 'rack' that supports the (10mm, BTW) rails and tightening gear/knob/thingy has a little removable steel 'yoke' that fits around the diameter of the rails and is apparently used to support rails and the rise locking gear/screw/doodad. The rack assembly has the detent ball for the rise, but there's only one detent on the opposite side/rail from the locking gear/screw. There's a threaded brass insert for a second detent ball assy, but I'm guessing there's only supposed to be the one, as I mentioned.

I couldn't tell how the rails attach at the top of the mount/rack. If they're screwed in, they're plenty tight, or locked, and I won't force them. At first I was thinking to maybe try to replace the entire rails with longer, 15mm rails made of stainless steel. Enlarging the holes and the yoke to accept them looks like it would be a little tricky though, and I'd hate to ruin this otherwise nice standard attempting something like that.

The other possibility would be to do what I think Frank was suggesting - just make a 10mm extension rod, maybe 2 or 3ins long, that would be permanently screwed in where the little caps go and move the caps to the bottom of those. I agree that would probably introduce some stability issues. It could also be pretty tricky getting the extension rails to perfectly mate with the existing ones, causing a whole 'nother set of problems. I think I have to agree on keeping things as they are (I was blissfully unaware of any problems at all until I learned this wasn't the original "Special Front Standard") and keep my eyes open for one of these showing up somewhere. Either that, or find an old clunker F2 front standard and butcher it up trying to fab and fit the larger rails. If the mod were successful, I could probably interchange the necessary parts into my original front, or if not, I'd only be out a little for having tried, but still have a good camera.

It's amazing to see how much 'nuance', as you put it, in these Sinar system components. I've learned more in the last few hours than I even realized there was to know about this stuff. Guess I didn't know just how much I didn't know! Thanks for the link to the Sinar codes - funny, this looks like the same site I got the original brochure that kicked this whole thing off! - and I'll go forth in the world now, armed with the knowledge that Sinar is not quite as simple as it seems!

Maybe I should just go make some photos instead of worrying so much about my cameras...:)

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 08:34
Frank - I totally understand about the tripod, I was just kidding and I thought the "donkey doo" remark was pretty funny! I have a CF S3 Gitzo, FWIW and I think I have about $1200 into that one tripod and head, so I don't really have room to talk about expensive tripods. I also thought pretty much the same as you did. When I knew I was getting a new tripod, I just kinda said WTF, might as well have the good one. At the time I thought it would be last (yeah right!) tripod I'll ever have to buy. (I think I've acquired two or three more since then).

Anyway, surely no offense intended, just got a big kick out of your remarks to the OPs tripod questions! :) :) :)

marfa boomboom tx
20-Sep-2012, 08:45
cletus: just now in west plano havin a coffee before heading back to the ole triple-x ranch

here is a link to parts list:

http://www.image2output-support.com/downloads/sinar/Manuals/Sinar_Spares_parts%20list.pdf

MbbTx

Frank Petronio
20-Sep-2012, 09:05
Frank - I totally understand about the tripod, I was just kidding and I thought the "donkey doo" remark was pretty funny! I have a CF S3 Gitzo, FWIW and I think I have about $1200 into that one tripod and head, so I don't really have room to talk about expensive tripods. I also thought pretty much the same as you did. When I knew I was getting a new tripod, I just kinda said WTF, might as well have the good one. At the time I thought it would be last (yeah right!) tripod I'll ever have to buy. (I think I've acquired two or three more since then).

Anyway, surely no offense intended, just got a big kick out of your remarks to the OPs tripod questions! :) :) :)

I had to bite my tongue not to trash him for dropping that kind of money on an Ebony as a first camera, most of those guys never actually shoot.

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 09:42
Yah. Sure wish I had FOUR OR FIVE THOU to blow on a camera! It takes me a long time to figure out what I want (or need) to add to my arsenal to get where I wanna be - mostly from experience too - and even then I have to scrimp, save, sell stuff, etc. before I can buy any new (old) camera. And I still don't have anything that nice! Here's hoping the guy doesn't decide "film photography" just isn't for him, two weeks after he finally gets all that costly kit together.

rdenney
20-Sep-2012, 10:48
Yah. Sure wish I had FOUR OR FIVE THOU to blow on a camera! It takes me a long time to figure out what I want (or need) to add to my arsenal to get where I wanna be - mostly from experience too - and even then I have to scrimp, save, sell stuff, etc. before I can buy any new (old) camera. And I still don't have anything that nice! Here's hoping the guy doesn't decide "film photography" just isn't for him, two weeks after he finally gets all that costly kit together.

On the other hand, the only justification required for making a purchase is that one has the spare money and wants what he's buying. Keeps the guys who make high-end stuff in business, which supplies used stuff for the rest of us later on. More power to him.

Your 8x10 F2 is a more expensive camera, if you bought it new. The base F2 in 4x5 was $2864 in 2008. The 8x10 F2 had been discontinued by that time, but even the 4x5 F2 rear standard was over $2000, so the 8x10 rear standard would have been more than that. And the 8x10 tapered bellows was over $2000--nearly four times the price of the standard 4x5 bellows. The 8x10 F2 would probably be price at $6000 if it was still available new.

A P2 4x5 camera was $8500 in that 2008 price list.

An Arca-Swiss F-line 8x10 is $6460 right now at Badger Graphic. A-S has its fans that sneer at Sinar, but the F2 8x10 is comparable. And then there's Linhof.

The Ebony doesn't seem so expensive in that context. Whether it's a smart buy for a newbie is another matter, but that depends more on the newb's discretionary cash. If he buys an Ebony, it might not be the most appropriate camera, but it won't be junk.

We get to use fantastic stuff like this because it's being dumped on the market. Back when stuff was expensive, I though I was stylin' when I upgraded from a Calumet CC-400 to a Calumet 45NX, which cost about $500 much bigger dollars back when I had much less to spend. Sinar stuff was hopelessly out of reach, like much current medium-format digital stuff. Any amateur buying an F2 in the 90's as a first camera might have attracted the same comments as many of us are thinking when someone starts with an Ebony. But I'm sure the Ebony guys are glad for the work.

Rick "who bought his F2 assemblage at about 10-15 cents on the dollar" Denney

Cletus
20-Sep-2012, 16:28
Rick - I gotta give you that, for sure - meaning the price and availability of used LF gear on the market today. I could go on and on about some of the cameras I have and have had, without even talking about all the nice darkroom stuff I've acquired over the years for mere pennies!

Oh, and FWIW, I took a look at Ebony guy's website and he's probably not quite the newbie I might have assumed he was. He's got some reasonably nice work up there. Obviously of the HDR / Photoshop / DSLR variety, but that's most of it nowadays anyway. Looks like he's done enough to have seen the light and figured out that digital just doesn't quite do it anymore. Or maybe he saw a nice 4x5 transparency (A rich and super saturated Velvia sunset on a lightboard might just be enough to convert someone) and decided digital was just missing something. Anyway, he's evidently been busy with his camera, so maybe the Ebony will turn out to be a revelation for him. And yes, it is a nice camera. I guess we (or I) shouldn't be so quick to pass judgement.

Anyway, since we (were) on the subject of Sinar, I have another question for you. What the heck is this thing???? It was in the Pelican case along with the 8x10 and some other various and sundry accessories and I can't for the life of me figure out that this is supposed to be. It has a little octagonal hole that fits the Sinar shade rods and both the large and small diameters have rings with male threads that screw into them. With the rings removed, this 'thingy' had female threads, so it can't be the filter adapter type thing I thought it might be. It would have to have male threads to screw onto anything.

Any ideas? The larger diameter ring fits onto my Sironar W 210, so it must be a 100mm thread. The smaller dia appears to be 67mm. I'm sure it's an adapter of some kind, but I'll be danged if I can figure out what? Any ideas?

808328083380834

Frank Petronio
20-Sep-2012, 19:55
It's a nice Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän.


(http://german.about.com/library/blwort_long.htm)

I thought it was some sort of filter holder too but I've never had one in hand.

rdenney
20-Sep-2012, 21:11
Anyway, since we (were) on the subject of Sinar, I have another question for you. What the heck is this thing???? It was in the Pelican case along with the 8x10 and some other various and sundry accessories and I can't for the life of me figure out that this is supposed to be. It has a little octagonal hole that fits the Sinar shade rods and both the large and small diameters have rings with male threads that screw into them. With the rings removed, this 'thingy' had female threads, so it can't be the filter adapter type thing I thought it might be. It would have to have male threads to screw onto anything.

Any ideas? The larger diameter ring fits onto my Sironar W 210, so it must be a 100mm thread. The smaller dia appears to be 67mm. I'm sure it's an adapter of some kind, but I'll be danged if I can figure out what? Any ideas?

808328083380834

It's the Polarizer holder. It's very slick--I have one and I use it. It mounts on a rod--the same hexagonal rod that is used to hold bellows clips to turn a bellows into a compendium shade. When mounted on such a rod that is locked into the hex-shaped hole on the lower part of the standard frame, and positioned to sit just in front of the lens, it will rotate through 180 degrees from right in front of the lens to below the standard where you can look through it. Polarizers provide the same effect when turned 180 degrees. So, you rotate the holder around to see through it, adjust the polarizer to achieve the desired effect, and then rotate around to the front of the lens.

These usually came with the polarizer glass already mounted, but often it's missing (as it was with mine when I bought it). That lock ring holds that glass in place, near as I can tell.

Yours has a step-down adapter to allow smaller filters than the 105mm filters that screw into this holder. I don't use an adapter--I just bought a B+W 105mm linear polarizer and screwed it directly into this holder. (I also have a 105mm yellow filter, and someday will come across a good deal on a 105mm red filter.)

It was discontinued before that Sinar Code document was published, apparently, in favor of their more elaborate color correction filter system.

Rick "105mm filters ain't cheap, but you only need one set for all your lenses" Denney

Leigh
20-Sep-2012, 22:31
Regarding "factory original"...

The Sinar factory will build a camera in any configuration using any combination of parts you want.
That's one of the advantages of having a "system" product, it can be customized however the customer wants.

- Leigh

Cletus
21-Sep-2012, 02:51
Ahhhhh, nowww I seee! And now that I also fooled around with it some more, the middle piece with the 67mm step-down hole screws all the way out of there. I didn't catch that before and couldn't for the life of me get what damn good is this Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän with a permanent 67mm hole in it!

And yes on the high dollar 105mm filters. I already have quite a few hundreds into a Lee system (which was to be the last filters I ever buy) and which are useless on the big lenses. (Foresight is really more like 26/14 I am realizing!) So I've been idly shopping around for 105mm B+Ws in all the pretty colors (have you seen the price of HELIOPAN 105mms???, I thought BnWs were dear!) but so far haven't added any big round filters to my kit. I also thought about the Sinar 125mms, but they cost as much or more used, than the round glass ones new, it seems. Here goes another five-six hundred bucks pretty soon for filters. It never ends.

Leigh - I appreciate the comment on the "can get any config you want from the Sinar factory" too. I'd really like to believe this is what my seller did, rather than deliberately misrepresenting this camera. You'd a had to talk with the guy for a while, but I'm just having a terrible time believing he would have lied, or in any way sold the camera knowing it didn't have all the correct 8x10 front standard. You just had to be there I guess to see what I mean.

I'm really starting to think he must have had several formats or something and the 8x10 was a conversion from a 4x5, even though he bought it new from Sinar. I thought about just calling him up and asking him, but after all the talk on this subject when I bought the camera, I'm too embarrassed to tell him it's not what he thought it was after all!

I've been pretty happy with it since I got it and I'm sure it'll do until I can find a proper front for it. Heck, I may even decide 8x10 isn't for me in the meantime and whole point becomes moot. I'm still new to this format and haven't completely made up my mind that I'm staying with it, at this point.

Gavin Bowden
26-Sep-2012, 09:22
1st post here so hello to everyone. I'm thinking of buying an F2 and have this question about the amount of shift available between the old and new F2 4x5 standards. It appears that the older standards, without shift locks, provide a total of 10cm of shit (3 +7) whereas the newer standards, with shift locks, only provide 8cm shift (3+5). Is this difference down to mechanics or just the markings, i.e. will the newer standards still shift a total of 10cm. I'm concerned because I intend to create stitched panos using rear shift. Thanks.

rdenney
26-Sep-2012, 19:03
Is this difference down to mechanics or just the markings, i.e. will the newer standards still shift a total of 10cm. I'm concerned because I intend to create stitched panos using rear shift. Thanks.

It's a real difference, sure enough. I just looked.

I think lens coverage will be a bigger issue, though. Remember that you can add front and rear shift in opposite directions.

Rick "who has added opposite shifts when on the wrong side of the asymmetry" Denney

Frank Petronio
26-Sep-2012, 19:19
Most people bought their Sinars before the internet was invented, and unless you went a big professional dealer in NYC, the "pro" shop in Kansas City or Tampa might have a single Sinar on display and order the cameras when you wanted one. Often they didn't know the differences and the catalogs were nothing but codes and numbers like part 107.251b which meant nothing to anyone outside of the company.

So misinformation was rampant. Not just with Sinar but with any long-lived, complex product with thousands of part numbers and what not.

Plus, we all know the parts are interchangeable, albeit with caveats... sure the 4x5 front standard will work with the 8x10 bellows, but unless you were up on your Sinar lore, you might not ever realize that they made alternative taller front standards since from a glance they all look pretty similar.

If it came from Chicago or High Point, NC, where they shot a lot of catalogs and had really large studios, you can bet the camera were assembled from parts and never stayed intact throughout their working life. There were probably hundreds of Sinars in those big studios or schools like RIT, etc. Heck Rochester, NY used to support 80 full-time middle-class or better working commercial photographers (not wedding shooters).

Photography used to be a real industry.

Gavin Bowden
27-Sep-2012, 07:58
Thanks for checking. 8 cms on the rear will probably be just enough, certainly for the wider lenses. How likely is it to disrupt swing without the shift locks?

rdenney
27-Sep-2012, 10:38
Thanks for checking. 8 cms on the rear will probably be just enough, certainly for the wider lenses. How likely is it to disrupt swing without the shift locks?

If the swing is zeroed out, not likely. The detent ball will run in its groove as you shift. But if the swing is not zeroed out, the chances of affecting swing when you shift are much greater.

Rick "speaking from experience" Denney

Gavin Bowden
27-Sep-2012, 11:20
Good info, thanks.

Clive Gray
12-Oct-2012, 17:22
Just a litle extra information for reference

The F1 is a cut down F2 its not the case that the F2 is a development of the F1.

The Sinar code from 1988 has the following note for the F2 10x8

** Also available to order with SINAR f2 lens standard 431.61.

I do not have a F2 image standard to check but certainly the later P2 era one multi purpose / f1 front standard will centre on the F2 10x8 and perhaps has 2cm of extra rise, I have used one with and Apo Germinar 750mm in copal 3 with no ill effects.

For more detail on the sinar filter holder click here (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v467/ABBANDON/Sinarfilterholder.jpg)

The Sinar filter holder is one of the most usefull accessories to have especailly if you have the 542.21 Gelatine filter holder as then you just standardise on your prefered brand of 100mm square filters i.e. Lee Hitech or even the later Sinar ones

This has been posted about many times and a particularilly usefull suggestion from Straun Grey is that of course you can fit the Lee 105 adapter ring into the sinar holder and then add on any of your Lee bits

Note that the Gelatine filter holder is also highly usefull on its own with the Heliopan centre filters that have a 105mm diameter seeing as it is thin enough that you can get away without it vigenetting.


Clive thinking that Rick should get himself one of the gelatine filter holders


http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1286/4681921065_9ab9e641ab_z.jpg

rdenney
13-Oct-2012, 13:05
Clive thinking that Rick should get himself one of the gelatine filter holders

I keep a lookout for a gel filter holder at the right price. But I have to say that I'm just a bit too clumsy to get away with using gel filters. For the price, though, it's probably still an advantage, especially now that I'm starting to do a little black and white again.

But I'm probably pushing the limits of spare cash at the moment in any case: I just sent my Nikon 8000 scanner to Nikon to be repaired and serviced, and I just sent two Pentax 6x7 cameras in a different direction for the same purpose.

Rick "who also has the Sinar camera mount--the type that fits into the rail clamp and supports a regular camera--on the watch list" Denney

Frank Petronio
13-Oct-2012, 16:51
Try KEH as they sometimes undervalue Sinar parts and have some odd stuff buried in their listings. I got that camera mount adapter for $16 there - on eBay they are rare and many times more expensive (for a very simple piece).