Best 4x5 camera to accommodate a 65mm lens?

[Dan Fromm]

A Speed Graphic has the ability to drop the front track and still focus the front standard while very close to the GG. I have done this with a 90mm, but never with anything as short as 65mm.

So you'll know, the 4x5 Pacemaker Speed Graphic's minimum extension is 66.7 mm. It will focus some, not all, 65s. Check the candidate lens' flange-to-film distance at infinity.

The 4x5 Crown Graphic's minimum extension is 52.4 mm. It is a much better choice for short lenses than a Speed.

Remember that these cameras' only usable movement is front rise.

[Paul Ron]

i am a bit confused about using short lenses. ive tried using a 75mm caltar on my wista and the rear lens was so close to the gg. i was advised to mount the lens on a ressesed board n did but the distance to the gg id still the same despite being able to advance the front the same distance of the recess.

so my confusion stems from the fact no matter how you use the lens, the rear lens will always be the same distance from the gg.

so why does it matter which camera or how the lens is mounted make any difference?

[Dan Fromm]

so why does it matter which camera or how the lens is mounted make any difference?

Flange-to-film distance is flange-to-film distance is flange-to-film distance. Not all cameras have the same minimum distance between the standards. Mounting a lens on a recessed board increases the distance between the standards for a given flange-to-film distance.

[Bernice Loui]

Best view camera for a 65mm lens.. assuming this is a wide angle, depends on what is needed to be achieved. There are NO best, just a mixed set of trade offs.

Field folders tend to lightweight, easy portable but limiting in various ways from the need for a recessed lens board (which restricts how shutter controls can be accessed). There is camera movement question, for images that require no significant movement a field folder would be no problem at all. If camera movements are required, issues and questions like ability for the bellows to accommodate camera movement, preventing the front bed of the camera from appearing in the image, ability to focus the lens with the front standard recessed. Generally, a mono rail with bag bellows works easiest, has the greatest ability to access the lens capabilities with short focal length lenses, but it gives up ease of portability, lightest weight and ...

Now, what are the image making needs? Again, this is what should decide camera, not camera deciding lens.



Bernice

[mdarnton]

The reason for the recessed board is to give more flex for movements, since the bellows are less compressed. It can't change the characteristics of the lens!

For 65mm I use a Cambo, recessed board, bag bellows, short rail. A couple of years ago that was a dirt cheap setup. . . .less so now. Anyway, that camera is for 65 to 108mm for me.

[jnantz]

what 65 do you have ?
I use a Schneider super angulon (65 ) with both a speed graphic (pacemaker) and toyo cx (with recessed lens board)

[Paul Ron]

i am a bit confused about using short lenses. ive tried using a 75mm caltar on my wista and the rear lens was so close to the gg. i was advised to mount the lens on a ressesed board n did but the distance to the gg id still the same despite being able to advance the front the same distance of the recess.

so my confusion stems from the fact no matter how you use the lens, the rear lens will always be the same distance from the gg.

so why does it matter which camera or how the lens is mounted make any difference?

Flange-to-film distance is flange-to-film distance is flange-to-film distance. Not all cameras have the same minimum distance between the standards. Mounting a lens on a recessed board increases the distance between the standards for a given flange-to-film distance.

i understad the recessed board gives standard to standard spacing to accomodate different cameras, but doesnt solve the problem of the rear lens being so close to the film. no matter how or what you do that seems to always be a problem.

are there special wide lenses that can increase the distance between the film and rear of the lens?

[Corran]

Paul, why is that a problem?

Secondly, what you are looking for is a retrofocus lens, as is common with SLR cameras. Most modern wides are very slightly RF but there was one, a Komura if I remember, that was very retrofocus. Someone will tell you the exact model I am sure, but just search 75mm large format retrofocus and I'm sure you'll find it.

[Bernice Loui]

Retrofocus lenses are virtually a given for Single Lens Reflex cameras due to the lens flange to film distance mandated by the mirror. Retrofocus design lenses compensate by increasing the back focus distance being longer than the lens focal length optically. This can help reduce effected light fall off by reducing the angle of the light cone reaching the film, trading off optical complexity with greatly increased optical elements, mechanical complexity of the lens and weight.

One of the wide angle boat anchor lenses once owned in the past was the 50mm f2.8 Zeiss Distagon for Hasselblad. Good lens, HEAVY, BIG and all that. Has an effective focal length shorter than it's back focal length.

Retrofocus lenses for view cameras are not common or needed as they have a different set of requirements and design trade offs. There is no need to allow for reflex mirror clearance or fixed back focus distance. There is a need for largest reasonable image circle and other optical advantages retrofocus lens designs do not offer.

This is much a camera question, not a lens question. IMO, 65mm lenses can be used effectively on field folders with specific limitations. Accept and live with them, move on.


Bernice

[Bernice Loui]

All that said..

Sinar Norma example.

5x7 Norma short, the rear element of the 75mm Gradagon is about 30mm from the ground glass. Optically, this can never work, camera is not the limitation. ~The will not post in original image position problem again.




With bag bellows and shift-rise. Same front to rear standards distance.



Bernice