Any 8x10 lens. Even some 4x5 lenses. Just about any table too.
Any 8x10 lens. Even some 4x5 lenses. Just about any table too.
Staying in the normal range is not possible with 560 mm of bellows to get to 1:1 which the Intrepid has. With a 210 you need 17" of bellows so that's doable. If you don't need 1:1, then the 305 G-Claron is usable. A Deardorff V8 has 32" or 812mm of bellows, so you can use up to a 16" lens and still get to 1:1! You can also use Artars instead of G-Clarons. Both are process lenses and optimized for close-up work.Originally Posted by Torontoamateur
L
Lens, secondary, difficulty will be lighting and keeping that sculpture focused in areas that are important. Other factor becomes bellows, is there enough on the camera to be used to achieve the needed image size on GG then Film. If there are more than one object in the image, arrange the shorter-smaller objects in the front, with the taller-larger objects towards the rear, this will allow holding focus easier with camera movements applied.
Lens choice if you're interested in fine detail, APO Artar, APO Ronar, APO Nikkpr and similar. 300mm to 360mm depending on camera bellows available.
Table top stuff is easier on 4x5 due to the lower magnification and easier to hold focus where needed. 8x10 table top makes stuff that much more difficult.
Bernice
I worked with an "odd couple" for many years. A Fujinon 250 6.7 and a G Claron 355 9. A little bit wide and a little bit long. Made very pleasing 11X14s, 16X20s and 20X24s back through them using cameras as enlargers and later with a Beseler 45M converted to 8X10.
Yeah , it don’t necessarily need 1:1. This will be a jump to 8x10 so I’m not sure exactly what I am getting into. I build everything I photograph so the technical side isn’t my strong point. I absolutely love the perspective a 210 Schneider gives me on almost everything I shoot. The shooting distances range between 3.5 feet when I invert the camera and shoot stuff on the ground to between 5-7 feet for small scenes.
I’m already seeing that the perspective is going to be different with 8x10 and that simply buying some lenses at different focal lengths will be mandatory.
Let me chime in again. I would recommend you move to a camera made for table top work. With more movement and more bellows. Even the old green monster, the Calumet, can do well. The Intrepid is designed for landscapes and portraits. What lens have you been using now on the Intrepid?
If the belief moving "up" to 8x10 will improve table top image quality over 4x5... that is likely no.
What it will do is cause a whole lotta grief and difficulty that once never happened. Trying to hold focus will be a LOT more difficult, lighting demands will be more than expected, trying to keep the film flat will be surprise, camera stability and adjustments will be not as easy as expected.
~Lens choice will be the least of these difficulties.~
There were VERY good reasons why most table top images back in the day was not done on 8x10 and done on 4x5..
IMO, best camera for table top work 4x5, 5x7 or 8x10 would be a Sinar P for a very long list of reasons.. and if ya do this get a proper studio stand and table these make life a LOT easier.. Oh, if you're using strobe to make images. It will need to be in the few kilowatt/second range, adding light modifiers will and can greatly increase the demands on strobe power. Think f32-f45 typical for table top 8x10, where 4x5 often good with f22... and possible lens resolution is lower at f32 and more so at f45. If the images are contact printed, even f90 is likely ok, but to achieve f90 using strobe is going to be "interesting"..
Bernice
Just received and set up the camera. Put the 210 on. The perspective is wonderful! I will most likely use the 210 before I buy another lens. Definitely have enough depth of field. I think I misused the word tabletop. I’m basically shooting scenes I construct. The goal is to primarily shoot 4x5 and if something develops that looks great , simply snap an 8x10 of it and compare. If it’s all a failure then it will be helpful for landscapes or Ill throw my hands up and sell it all..
The only thing I’m worried about is keeping the film flat like you mentioned.
What you are describing sounds a lot more like dancing to the strange identikit whims of a catalogue art director wanting both deep focus and no strange distortions of the product than doing creative table-top work. And if you're doing the latter you don't need especially grand or fancy kit, just adequately precise for your final print size. I just want something that I can define my field of view & focus with, then lock it down - the real work is the arranging of the objects. The only positive for the Sinar in my view is the shutter system - and even then, it's a lot of unnecessary knitting & complications - for that matter I don't find Sinars (or most monorails apart from Linhof & possibly De Vere's ancient 8x10) terribly enjoyable to use - and a camera that irritates me is not going to lead to better work. Better to spend the money on big strobe power or a space with a good north light. Severe technical limitations (of the right sort) often lead to much more freely creative approaches than the absence thereof.
Laugh if you must, but I've had decent luck with a 159mm Wollensak WA yellow dot shooting still life marine specimens like shells, starfish and a seahorse. Working up close with a longer lens takes more bellows than I'm comfortable asking my old 'dorff to give.
It does require a lot of light and long exposures IIRC.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks