Does extending the center column accomplish the same thing as front rise?

[Schuster_Shots]

I've been feverishly shopping for a new lens and thinking a lot about how much rise I can squeeze out of the image circle on certain lenses. Because of this, I've come to desire the lens with the biggest image circle.

But now I'm wondering: if the bigger image circle only gets me 9mm of extra rise and costs me $200 more, can I get the cheaper lens and make up for the 9mm with 9mm of center column extension? In my mind there's no difference...but I'm not an optical engineer. I just like taking pictures.

The two lenses in question are the Fujinon CM-W 135mm f/5.6 (214mm image circle) and the Rodenstock Sironar-N 135mm f/5.6 (200mm image circle)

Any help would be appreciated!

[Vaughn]

No -- a center column does not change the relationship between the lens and the film...just lifts both up in the air equally. "Rise" functions by changing the vertical relationship between the two (film/lens)...one higher/lower than the other.

Will you need a lot of rise? This depends much on your subject matter.

You can increase the functional amount of rise of most view camera by tilting the camera up and making both standards vertical...but one's lens has to still cover.

[Schuster_Shots]

Hmm...

I understand why convergence is corrected with rise but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around why it's different then raising the camera.

I just shoot landscapes but I find shift/rise/fall great for fine tuning the composition when I don't place my tripod perfectly.

[Bernice Loui]

Raise the center column reduces the stability of the tripod/tripod head supporting the camera. While easy to raise the center column it is a trade off at best.

Raising the center column does not produce the same degree of change in the image as rise/fall_shift. This is most apparent and common in architectural photography of tall structures. Study this previously posted examples from the Linhof book:

Post# 3
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...ghlight=linhof

Best way to experience this, practice-experiment rise/fall_shift -vs- tripod center column lift with your current lens and camera. Know rise/fall_shift_center column lift often does not always make up for proper camera position. Camera position must be where it needs to be before camera movements should be applied.

As for why, what are the image goals?

If lots of rise/fall_shift is needed, the lens MUST be able to support this. Instead of the common f5.6 Plasmat (Fujinon CM, CMW and ... Rodenstock Sironar_, Schneider Symmar_, Nikkor _) apply a wide angle lens like the Fujinon 125mm f8 NSW or SW or Schneider 120mm f8 Super Angulon, Nikkor 120mm f8 SW, Rodenstock 115mm f6.8 Grandagon.. All will likely exceed the movement capability of a light weight field folder 4x5. There might be an issue with fitment due to the physical size of these wide angle lenses.


Bernice

Hmm...

I understand why convergence is corrected with rise but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around why it's different then raising the camera.

I just shoot landscapes but I find shift/rise/fall great for fine tuning the composition when I don't place my tripod perfectly.

[Jody_S]

Hmm...

I understand why convergence is corrected with rise but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around why it's different then raising the camera.

I just shoot landscapes but I find shift/rise/fall great for fine tuning the composition when I don't place my tripod perfectly.

Raising the camera does correct perspective in the same way that using rise can, but 1) it changes the angle of view (so you'll lose foreground in a landscape, for instance), and 2) to get the same effect you'll need to raise the camera to the height of the center of the subject. So if you're trying to correct the perspective of a shot of a 24,000 ft mountain, you'll need to raise your camera by approx. 12,000 ft. I am not aware of any tripods with a 12,000ft center column, and if they existed, they would almost certainly cost more than a lens with an extra few mm of image circle.

[Bob Salomon]

Raise the center column reduces the stability of the tripod/tripod head supporting the camera. While easy to raise the center column it is a trade off at best.

Raising the center column does not produce the same degree of change in the image as rise/fall_shift. This is most apparent and common in architectural photography of tall structures. Study this previously posted examples from the Linhof book:

Post# 3
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...ghlight=linhof

Best way to experience this, practice-experiment rise/fall_shift -vs- tripod center column lift with your current lens and camera. Know rise/fall_shift_center column lift often does not always make up for proper camera position. Camera position must be where it needs to be before camera movements should be applied.

As for why, what are the image goals?

If lots of rise/fall_shift is needed, the lens MUST be able to support this. Instead of the common f5.6 Plasmat (Fujinon CM, CMW and ... Rodenstock Sironar_, Schneider Symmar_, Nikkor _) apply a wide angle lens like the Fujinon 125mm f8 NSW or SW or Schneider 120mm f8 Super Angulon, Nikkor 120mm f8 SW, Rodenstock 115mm f6.8 Grandagon.. All will likely exceed the movement capability of a light weight field folder 4x5. There might be an issue with fitment due to the physical size of these wide angle lenses.


Bernice

And fall off with those wide angle lenses. Especially when displaced.

[ic-racer]

Of course it will work, but you will need a very long center column. Depending on your lens focal length and the distance to the subject, one millimeter of front rise might take a meter of center column rise for the same framing (though the perspective will be changed slightly).

[r.e.]

As I understand it, the perspective problem is the result of tilting the camera up. If that's correct, it follows that if the camera is level there's no perspective problem. Depending on what one is photographing, raising the height of the camera may indeed make it unnecessary to tilt the camera up. In some cases, it may be sufficient to raise the tripod height, leaving aside a centre column.

The one thing that I'd add is that tilting a camera up or down when using a wide angle lens is just asking for perspective problems. This can be demonstrated by using a wide angle lens to photograph a person and seeing what happens when the camera is level versus when it is tilted.

[Jim Jones]

Large format images often have high enough image quality to permit tilting the camera to record the entire desired subject, scanning the image, and restoring correct perspective in Photoshop or another digital editor. When planning to do this, also take one shot with the camera level and no tilts applied. This gives a partial image in the correct perspective as a guide to correct aspect ratio in the Photoshopped image. Some enlargers, such as my ancient deJur, permit perspective correction in the darkroom.

[Jody_S]

Some enlargers, such as my ancient deJur, permit perspective correction in the darkroom.

You can do this with any enlarger AFAIK by tilting the easel. You can also use whatever is at hand and curve the paper, for example to correct perspective with an ultra wide angle looking head on at a subject. Easier to do with smaller formats, as the standard 50mm enlarging lens has enough DoF at f16 or f22.