Macro setup possible

[PatrickMarq]

To keep myself busy, I would like to take some macro images of my great-grandfather’s gasoline lighters.
What do I have:
Chamonix 4x5-F2 standard bellows
lenses: 90mm,150mm and 300mm

Thinking of getting a 210mm if needed.

Thx
Patrick

[blue4130]

To keep myself busy, I would like to take some macro images of my great-grandfather’s gasoline lighters.
What do I have:
Chamonix 4x5-F2 standard bellows
lenses: 90mm,150mm and 300mm

Thinking of getting a 210mm if needed.

Thx
Patrick

I did this with a Chamonix and a fuji 135mm. It's slightly larger than 1:1, probably closer to 2:1

[PatrickMarq]

Ok, I’m going to try today.
Lovely picture

[Willie]

If you are thinking of a 210 - check out a 210 Macro or a 180 Macro lens. The Rodenstock Macro-Sironar-N in 210, Schneider's Macro-Symmar HM in 120 and 180 and Nikon made a few but I don't remember the focal lengths.

The macro lenses will do a better job than a normal lens for your close work. Check carefully the optimum magnification range to match what you are photographing. Check more carefully the bellows draw needed to work with close and macro images. A lot of cameras can't handle the bellows needed for lifesize images at 1:1 and if you go larger than lifesize on film - good luck. Then - distance from the lens to the subject you are photographing. 120 close up lenses sound fine til you realize you are often so close to the small subject that the camera interferes with your lighting.

The closer you get the more important your Tripod and technique become. Any errors are magnified.

Bob Solomon can probably give a lot more information on them - if he chimes in his information is always welcome as he knows his stuff.

[alexmuir]

You can use the screw-in Close-up lenses which come in +1,+2,+3 etc diopters. They fit on the lens like a filter, and remove the need for extra bellows draw. They are inexpensive, and quality is surprisingly good, as long as you work around f22-32. The View Camera Manual (?) by Leslie Stroebel makes reference to them as ‘positive supplementary lenses’. I have tried this technique, and found it be less hassle than using a normal lens on its own, and less expensive than a dedicated macro lens (which would, obviously, give the best results). A lot depends on how much close-up work you envisage doing.
Alex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Greg]

Attached (cropped) image shot with a 4x5 Sinar Norma, lots of bellows extension, and a barrel 120mm Micro-Nikkor. Natural lighting. Lens actually substantially stopped down. Exposure was around 1 minute if I recall correctly. Medium weight tripod with a Bogen/Manfrotto extension arm clamped to one of the tripod's bottom legs and duct taped to the front of the camera's rail. The whole set-up looked like it would never work and the exposure was a guess. Best thing to do is to just get out there and use whatever equipment you have. In this case shooting with a 35mm or even a 6x6 camera would have been the sane thing to do, but then what's the challenge...

[Drew Bedo]

I have used screw-in plus diopters in the past, and it can work out. I have a little Wista made Zone VI with ~12" of extension.

For these small set-ups, I rack the bellows to estsblish reproduction ratio and slide the composition around(on a cloth doily to place subject in the plane of focus. I am sure that there are more sophisticsted ways to do this.

[Peter De Smidt]

Something like a 150mm G-claron makes a terrific lens for shooting at about 1x magnification on 4x5. They're cheap.

[Drew Wiley]

A lens designed for close-up work is going to do a better job than a an add-on close-up filter. If you're looking for a focal length intermediate to what you already have, a 180 Fuji A or 210 G-Claron would provide exceptional performance from quite close up clear to infinity.

[PatrickMarq]

I thing I’m going with the screw-in filters if I can order them. Macro is not my thing but it will keeps me occupied for now.