Sinar Wide Angle Bellows 1 vs. 2

[magicman]

Dear all,

I could not find any informations about the real difference between the Sinar wide angle bellows 1 and 2, and I really hope you can help me.

- Can the bellow 1 fully be replaced by bellow 2?
- What is the smallest/largest lens which can be used with them?
- What is the smallest/largest extension which can be used with them?

Many thanks in advance for your help.

Best regards,
Mario

[DJG]

According to the Sinar System Catalog 2000/2001 version (Page 3-9):

For 4x5 format:
Wide Angle Bellows 1: for use with 75 to 135mm lenses at infinity
Wide Angle Bellows 2: for extreme wide angles (65mm and shorter)

[Sevo]

If mine are the same as the ones they sell today (post SA-generations of 47mm and shorter lenses grew added coverage after I bought mine), the #2 bellows is shorter so that it has no risk of sagging even though it is not spring loaded. It is of little use with lenses longer than 75mm, as it is already quite restricted in close distance and movements with the 90mm.

[B.S.Kumar]

I use the WA Bellows 2 with lenses from 35mm to 150mm, shooting with a Sinarback 54, 6x9 film and a Betterlight. I primarily shoot architecture, interiors and landscape and do not find the bellows restrictive in any way. With still-life and other studio based work, it might be different.

Kumar

[Sevo]

I think newer versions of the #2 are more extensible - they certainly ought to be, as the image circle of current LF wides is quite significantly bigger than thirty or forty years ago.

[B.S.Kumar]

Don't know about that. I bought mine over 20 years ago, along with my Sinar F2.

Kumar

[rdenney]

1. Can the bellow 1 fully be replaced by bellow 2?
2. What is the smallest/largest lens which can be used with them?
3. What is the smallest/largest extension which can be used with them?


1. Yes. For example, my WA Bellows 2 will focus to infinity with a 210mm lens. If you use longer lenses, you'll still need a standard bellows, but that is true with either of the wide-angle bellows.

2. With the WA Bellows 1, it's easy to focus a 65mm lens at infinity, when using the standard back (rather than the metering back). A 47mm lens is possible, but it requires considerable care to make sure the pleat does not get caught between the standards. In practice, I ended up using a recessed board, which was an alternative I did not much like.

With 65mm lenses and shorter, shifts at minimum extension are stiff with the WA1, and free and easy with the WA2.

With a 47mm lens, the WA2 bellows permit a flat lens board and allows easy movements, with tilts up to about 6 degrees or so. That's more than enough for a lens that short for infinity subjects. For closeups, where more movements might be necessary, the extension will permit them.

3. Never measured it, and to me it really doesn't matter. I'd rather know what lenses work than have to do all that math to determine the distance from the film to the board and subtract. So, let me say this: If you never intend to go shorter than 65mm, you can make the WA1 bellows work, though the WA2 bellows are nicer and more flexible. If you use lenses as short as 47mm, you'll struggle with the WA1 bellows, but the WA2 bellows will just work. On the long end, I am not tempted to switch from the WA2 bellows to the standard bellows for a 210mm lens, but I am for a 12" lens, particularly if I need substantial movements.

The mechanical difference is in three aspects. The first is that the mounting frames on the WA2 bellows are thinner. The second is that the double pleat on the WA2 bellows allows at least as much extension (really, more extension), without stuffing as much material between the two frames, and without a lot of stiffness in shift movements. And the third is that the material is softer.

Rick "warning that the Sinar specifications are assuming the use of the metering back, which adds back thickness, and the shutter, which consumes space between the standards" Denney

[Ed Richards]

I use the old #1 with everything between 47XL to 210. I do not think I have ever had to use the standard Sinar bellows.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Curious, can anyone describe how one can tell the difference between these bellows?

[Ivan J. Eberle]

I had a synthetic wide angle bellows that came with a Norma that I suspect was either a Number 1 or a Horseman. It worked just fine with a Nikon SW 90mm f/8.

[DJG]

Curious, can anyone describe how one can tell the difference between these bellows?

Just look at the Sinar System Catalog pdf (page 3-9 for the 2000/2001 catalog):

http://www.dicam.pl/sites/dicam.pl/files/katalog-sinar-modular-system-en.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/43451850/Katalog-Sinar-En
http://www.kenleegallery.com/pdf/Sinar_system_katalog.pdf

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

OK, I see. The Sinar wide angle bellows version 2 has two connected bag bellows (or a double pleat as Rick describes it), while version 1 is a traditional single bag bellows. That is all I wanted to know.

As an aside, I looked at the Sinar catalog and found it odd that the picture on front of it, a Norma, has a broken bubble level.