My perfect fixed lens LF camera - decision 1, the lens.

[EdSawyer]

I have a lot of similar needs and such, as far as shooting and results go. I have a lot of 4x5 cameras, and have tried others as well. Here's what I think will work the best.

(aside: 105mm is going to feel somewhat wide I think. 120mm feels wide-ish normal, not as wide as 35mm on 35mm film, more like 40mm as I had mentioned. I haven't shot 105mm on 4x5 but I have shot 90mm a lot, and it feels wide, with some corner-pulling type distortion, feels like a 28mm or wider on 35mm film. I think you might find 105mm a bit wide for your taste if you don't want any of that sort of geometric distortion in the corners. )

1st: Saber. It's a great piece. There's a reason they are expensive. Buy once, cry once. It's worth it, I'd get one again in a heartbeat, it's the lightest/smallest 4x5 I have ever seen (when folded up, with a grafmatic). The rangefinder is the key to the speed here, no real need for ground glass if you are at least shooting at f/11 or smaller.

2nd: Crown Graphic with Kalart. It can be calibrated to the 105mm and can be spot-on, so you can trust the rangefinder. Again, this will help the speed a lot. (And you can definitely get sharp hand-held photos on 4x5.). It folds up quite compact, very versatile, rather light weight too. Get the version with the Graflok back.

3rd: Polaroid Byron: I haven't used one of these, but it is by far the best of the Polaroid 900-style conversions. Not cheap but can be made to suit your needs very well I'd think. It's the only 900-type polaroid conversion I'd consider worth pursuing. The rest are too compromised in many ways, and that includes DIY versions.

4th: Some sort of custom Cambo Wide type, fixed cone helical or bellows-based camera. There's many varieties of these, from the DIY Fletcher type stuff, to an actual Cambo Wide, to the Fotoman and other chinese versions. The downside is no coupled rangefinder on any of them, so you are either guesstimating focus (which can work ok on say a 65mm lens, at f/16-f/32, but not so easy with a 105mm at wider apertures). This cuts down on speed-of-use a lot, since you mostly need to use GG to focus. If going the DIY route, expect to spend a fair bit of time building something to a high-level of precision, even stuff like calibrating focus and curing light leaks can be a huge pain in the ass and take a lot of time.

If money is not a big problem, spend the $1500-ish and get a Chamonix Saber with the 120mm and see how you like it. They are in enough demand you could easily resell it and not lose any $. Chamonix might even be able to fit it with a 105mm for you, it's worth asking them if it's possible.

Good luck.
-Ed

[xkaes]

... And you can definitely get sharp hand-held photos on 4x5. Ed

I agree, but Adrian started out wanting a "decent image" which later became "tack sharp". In short, "good enough" is left undefined, and I gave up playing guessing games years ago. For "decent image" a 105mm fixed at the hyperfocal distance -- with or without a viewfinder would work. Simple, cheap, and easy. For "tack sharp", add a tripod, rangefinder, and helicoid. Say goodbye to simple, cheap, and easy.

[Corran]

I like this also. http://www.largeformatphotography.in...=1#post1360865

I think Bryan a member here bought.

I bought a previous camera from Dirk that was 2x3, that one I think Dirk still has. Haven't seen him around lately.

There's a lot of the typical posts going on in this thread...I don't feel like parsing through it all but to the OP if you want to get down to shooting I would recommend getting a converted Polaroid with coupled RF with whatever focal length you are looking at (they can be modified to fit 90mm through 150mm or so). I have a Polaroid 900 with 135mm f/3.5 lens and for street/documentary it is very good. I retired it for a while in favor of a Linhof but the Polaroid is smaller, lighter, folds up with the lens, has a combined RF/VF which is way better to use quickly than the Linhof (or other press cams), and didn't cost as much as a Linhof either. A Speed Graphic is good too, especially if you want/need faster shutter speeds (action).

I've used all three options for various types of images:

Sports/Action with the Speed Graphic:



Documentary with the Polaroid 900:



Portraits/Handheld with the Linhof Technika:

[adrianlambert]

I have a lot of similar needs and such, as far as shooting and results go. I have a lot of 4x5 cameras, and have tried others as well. Here's what I think will work the best.

(aside: 105mm is going to feel somewhat wide I think. 120mm feels wide-ish normal, not as wide as 35mm on 35mm film, more like 40mm as I had mentioned. I haven't shot 105mm on 4x5 but I have shot 90mm a lot, and it feels wide, with some corner-pulling type distortion, feels like a 28mm or wider on 35mm film. I think you might find 105mm a bit wide for your taste if you don't want any of that sort of geometric distortion in the corners. )

1st: Saber. It's a great piece. There's a reason they are expensive. Buy once, cry once. It's worth it, I'd get one again in a heartbeat, it's the lightest/smallest 4x5 I have ever seen (when folded up, with a grafmatic). The rangefinder is the key to the speed here, no real need for ground glass if you are at least shooting at f/11 or smaller.

2nd: Crown Graphic with Kalart. It can be calibrated to the 105mm and can be spot-on, so you can trust the rangefinder. Again, this will help the speed a lot. (And you can definitely get sharp hand-held photos on 4x5.). It folds up quite compact, very versatile, rather light weight too. Get the version with the Graflok back.

3rd: Polaroid Byron: I haven't used one of these, but it is by far the best of the Polaroid 900-style conversions. Not cheap but can be made to suit your needs very well I'd think. It's the only 900-type polaroid conversion I'd consider worth pursuing. The rest are too compromised in many ways, and that includes DIY versions.

4th: Some sort of custom Cambo Wide type, fixed cone helical or bellows-based camera. There's many varieties of these, from the DIY Fletcher type stuff, to an actual Cambo Wide, to the Fotoman and other chinese versions. The downside is no coupled rangefinder on any of them, so you are either guesstimating focus (which can work ok on say a 65mm lens, at f/16-f/32, but not so easy with a 105mm at wider apertures). This cuts down on speed-of-use a lot, since you mostly need to use GG to focus. If going the DIY route, expect to spend a fair bit of time building something to a high-level of precision, even stuff like calibrating focus and curing light leaks can be a huge pain in the ass and take a lot of time.

If money is not a big problem, spend the $1500-ish and get a Chamonix Saber with the 120mm and see how you like it. They are in enough demand you could easily resell it and not lose any $. Chamonix might even be able to fit it with a 105mm for you, it's worth asking them if it's possible.

Good luck.
-Ed

Thanks Ed for the cordial and thoughtful response. I’m really hoping that I’ve got the right lens because there’s no 35mm equivalent that I’m aware of but I know that 40mm is too tight and 35m is great but even them sometimes slightly too tight. But that 28mm is too wide. I know equally from my experience that 90mm is too wide and that 135mm is too tight. It’s a bit of a stab in the dark but comparing horizontally equivalent focal lengths on a 135 camera I’m pretty sure I’ve go it right. I won’t have objects close to me that are at the edge of the frame in my shots so any distortion I’m hoping would be acceptable.

Money isn’t quite no object but I do like the idea of talking to chamonix about the 105mm. I’ll email them tomorrow. For a number of reasons I’d like to steer clear of cameras with any lens movements. I know I’ll be too tempted to use them and for the usage that I have in mind, it wouldn’t be apt.

I’m glad you agreed that shooting 105mm would require some focusing. I couldn’t imagine using a lens of that length, fixed at the hyper-focal position, and expecting great things. It might be a little bit on the wide side but it’s still ~105mm out and that’s a pretty long way. Zone focusing could be a goer though but again not ideal.

You’re getting me thinking about the Byron conversion again though!

[adrianlambert]

I agree, but Adrian started out wanting a "decent image" which later became "tack sharp". In short, "good enough" is left undefined, and I gave up playing guessing games years ago. For "decent image" a 105mm fixed at the hyperfocal distance -- with or without a viewfinder would work. Simple, cheap, and easy. For "tack sharp", add a tripod, rangefinder, and helicoid. Say goodbye to simple, cheap, and easy.

“Tack sharp” lies within a subset of “decent image” does it not? I’ve gotten a lot of “tack sharp” hand held 6x7 trannies over the years on longer focal lengths than 105mm - many of which have been drum scanned to Reveal the grain structure clearly enough to see what’s what. Hyperfocal is good for only modest enlargements. Great for street. Amazing for Instagram. Substandard for large format prints. You are the only person to repeatedly talk about simple, cheap, and easy in this thread. I wish it were going to be easy but I knew it wouldn’t be. Btw I have a couple of friends that are respectively a CAD designer and a tool maker. I’m expecting to be owing a few favours to them before this is completed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[xkaes]

“Tack sharp” lies within a subset of “decent image” does it not?

Welcome aboard. Defining words and terms helps us help each other, better. One man's ceiling is another man's mirror.

[adrianlambert]

Ok good. Maybe we can dispense with the ‘google is your friend’ and “2nd hand keyboard impressionists” rubbish now.

Some folks here need to get their social skills up to spec when it comes to new folks.

So, the 105mm lens arrives in a few days. I’m excited to put it on my sinar and see how it fairs before the next step.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[EdSawyer]

If you do get a Byron, let us know how you like it. I have long been interested in those, they seem like a nice solution and well engineered. Given the cost and timeilne, they are not that common, esp. on the secondary market. Probably at least as rare (if not more so) than the Saber.

[adrianlambert]

If you do get a Byron, let us know how you like it. I have long been interested in those, they seem like a nice solution and well engineered. Given the cost and timeilne, they are not that common, esp. on the secondary market. Probably at least as rare (if not more so) than the Saber.

I have a feeling that having a fair amount of the required parts for a Harman titan type mod I’ll go there first. If the focusing isn’t satisfactory then I’ll be on the saber/Byron path. I’m going to test out the 105 on my sinar first and make sure I’m right as far as it’s field of view goes. This process will take a while I suspect. Maybe a year but it’ll be a lifer when (if) I get it right.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[DrTang]

those Angulon 90's are very small and cover

maybe just buy one of those travelall cameras.. they seem like what you want