Printable View
I love my Chamonix F1 but one inconvenience is that to use my 14" lens, I have to use an extension rail. I know there are camera design that has double or triple extension rail built-in. What are some of these models? Also, I found that the bellow dips a bit much with my Cooke PS945 so often the bottom of the image (top of the bellow) vignette.
These will be mainly for portrait work, so 150mm to 400mm, strong bellow etc. Any suggestions?
Thanks
Ebony has a number of 4x5 folding models with unusually long extension.
Thanks!
I know, Danny Burke is selling an Ebony that makes me drooling. Too rich for my blood though :-/
Now that I think about it Canham also has pretty long extension, but again, usually won't be cheap. Another way to get longer extension is to look for a 5x7 with a 4x5 reducing back.
To state the obvious: if you need cheap there are always monorails...
Hello.
for Linhof Technika lens type plate (and copies Wista or other) and VH ... Horseman lens plates are manufactured extension tubes (3 or 4 tubes).
They serve to macro, and also serve to use lens or tele lens without the need for a very long bellows
I use Tachiahara 4x5 with 2 extension tubes for a 400 mm tele lens
I think there were some Wisner models that qualify. Zone VI too (not the single extension early versions). My Walker Titan SF will handle a 450mm, but you have to use the base tilt forward and use back axis tilt to set the lensboard to vertical. Works great, pretty easy to set up to.
Zone VI? not sure of exact specs but they are usually mentioned for such requirements.
Edit : I don't usually take 10mins to write a one line reply... I'm at work! But as David mentions, dbl ext Zone VI & Wisners of similar design, or is that Zone VIs similar to Wisners :)
Shooting portraits with a 14" lens is going to need 20 or more inches of bellows, right? How about doing it backwards--differerent lens instead of different camera? The 15" Tele-Raptar/Optar is a pretty nice lens that uses about 9-1/2" of bellows at infinity, and if you use the front component alone you have a good 9 or 10" soft-focus lens. When they show up on Ebay in a shutter they're usually around $150---a lot cheaper than a new camera.
My Shen Hao XPO will go to 420mm.
I'd go for tele lens instead, as mdarnton suggested. I've got F1 and Schneider's Tele-Arton 360mm (cca 14") and it allows close portraits; that's why they invented tele lenses. Limitation are - surprise, surprise - camera movements if you want both eyes sharp in half profile picture.
I don't think someone is going to give up a ps945 for a normal tele lens if they are after what the ps945 is good at.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdarnton
I'd go for a cheaper used 5x7 or 8x10 camera. Plenty of latitude for the bellows to sag a little.
You can get a Wista metal field 4X5 (any model), and add a 600mm (!!!) extension kit (rack + long bellows). I think i have a complete kit of those somewhere....
If it doesn't have to be 4x5 size camera I would vote for getting an 8x10 camera with a 4x5 reducing back.
Yes. Find a used 5x7 with a 4x5 back and you are set. As a bonus you could shoot 5x7 too...Quote:
Originally Posted by jp
Like this 5x7 Cambo with 5x7 and 4x5 backs:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...lus-extras-500
Linhof TK 45 or 45S.
Deardorff 4x5/5x7; Wisner Tech 4x5 or 5x7.
I think you just have the wrong Chamonix, the 45N-2 will easily do a 450mm lens without using the extension rail.
Not easy to find.. but the 4x5 Baby Deardorff can do about 16" of bellows extension.
It seems you are trying to use a field camera for studio work.
Why not buy a good studio camera, they are very inexpensive these days.
Or sell your Chamonix F1 and buy a used Ebony SV45TI
My basic single-extension Ebony 4x5 will easily handle 360, even fairly close. The trick is to simply use base tilts for that extra bit of lens to film plane distance
that the gear rack doesn't quite accommodate.
The Toyo Fields (AX and AII) extend to 324mm but you can add up to 2 100mm extension backs giving you 424 or 524mm of extension: http://toyoview.com/ProductInfo/ProductInfo.html
Thomas
Those extension backs cost $500 each used... Not practical when the your camera only costs $500 used.Quote:
Originally Posted by tgtaylor
Bigger camera and reduction back is the answer, I think. You don't just need the extension, but you want a sturdier camera that can support all that extension easily.
If you want to stick with a 4x5" folding camera, a 4x5" Technika has 17" of extension (about 430mm with the back extended, around 400mm without extending the back), and you can use a top-hat type extension lensboard to give you more extension for close portraits with long lenses like the PS945.
According to the specs, my Canham DLC has a max bellows extension of 520mm, although I have never used anything longer than a 300mm lens on it. But have you considered something like a used Sinar F1 or F2? Adding rail sections makes it as long as you want, although I'm unaware of the max extension of the standard bellows. I had a Sinar F for quite a while, and while it is not as easily packable/transportable as a field camera, it folds up reasonably well, and Sinar intended it for field use (hence the "F" designation).
I second the Chamonix 45N-2.
What's so difficult about using the rail extension?
Just tuck something underneath the bellows to support it from underneath... or better yet, add a hook or two to the top of the bellows and support it with a thin rod.
Thanks all for suggestions. Lots to consider.
More info: The PS945 works fine on the F1, it's the 14" Dagor that I want to use "with ease."
A rail / studio camera is out, as I am traveling a lot to do my portrait projects. Oh, I don't have a studio space. Not enough garage....
Thanka again!
BSorry, for some reason my reply is the last paragraph of the quoted text and I can not correct it.Quote:
Originally Posted by richardman
Fits and supports are not identical. I've had a 14 inch Dagor on that standard and it's OK. But being a relatively heavy lens on a no. 3 shutter (though nowhere near
as heavy as fast plasmats that focal length), you'd be better served by an f2 front standard.
Drew, is this comment specifically regarding the TK45/S Standard or to other comments? Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew Wiley
No. Sinar F1 vs F2 standards. I'd honestly be worried about a TK45 and that kind of weight and vibration up front. Depends on the shutter. Copal 3S isn't so bad;
the Compur 3 has a distinct buzz vibration to it. And frankly, I prefer to shoot the Fuji 360A with 4x5, cause it's in a no. 1, and not the Dagor.
The N-2 spec calls for 395mm and I measured mine at 395mm. What is the trick to get 55mm without an extension?Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
David
WOw, the Sinar F2 is a steal, but at 8 lbs....
The question is what's the alternative. Any camera with the extension you want, sturdy enough to take big lenses on the front standard, and at a price you want to pay, is likely to weigh at least 6 pounds. Of course, you may have a preference for the handling characteristics of a folding field camera rather than a monorail.Quote:
Originally Posted by richardman
Hmm... I could have sworn someone told me they used their 450 C on the 45N-2 without extension but I am eating crow and feel foolish, I stand corrected and humbly apologize. They must have been using the extension board.Quote:
Originally Posted by TXFZ1
Sorry OP and others.
As an aside, I've considered getting the 5x7 Chamonix with ONLY a 4x5 reducing back, that's an option for you. I've spoken to Chamonix personally and they will sell it this way for the same cost as the 5x7 with 5x7 back.
Oh, if I get a monorail, I will for sure keeping my F1 for most of the uses....Quote:
Originally Posted by Oren Grad
The vibration is the main thing that bothers me on the F1, BTW. The needing to attach and detach the extension rail is a close second.
The best solution would be a sinar. Cheap too.
Yep, the 45N1, 45N2, and F1 all have the same max extension, which is way more than traditional wooden cameras of similar weight (Tachihara, Wista etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
If the OP is dead against using the extension rack then they could use a 450mm on a tophat lensboard, but then front tilt becomes harder to use (would need re-locking every time its moved due to the weight out front). Short of either buying an Ebony or a 5x7 camera with a reducing back - neither are particularly cheap or lightweight solutions- I reckon the extension rack is the way to go. Its what I'll do if I ever drop on a Fuji 450mm at a cheap price.