Ed - With the 480 Ronar on the end of an extension you'll have one hell of a lever, I wouldn't trust most cameras front standards with that stress. A 450 Fuji would make a much lighter load.
Ed - With the 480 Ronar on the end of an extension you'll have one hell of a lever, I wouldn't trust most cameras front standards with that stress. A 450 Fuji would make a much lighter load.
Wayne is correct that the Ronar is a heavy lens.
I've just completed a 5 1/2" extension tube for a 480 mm Ronar; the tube has its own lensboard to mate with the front standard of the camera and the lens is mounted in a second, removable board at the opposite end of the tube. I've tried it, with the Ronar, on a Calumet CC-400 without any apparent problems. The front standard seems to be able to handle the weight and with the standard tightening knob good and snug, the front standard remains vertical with no creeping.
If this hadn't proved to be the case and the front standard alone were not able to accomodate the weight, I'd add a short extension bar to the rail and support the tube at both ends.
The lens will focus down to about 12 feet with this tube. I built the tube as a low cost means to permit use of the Ronar on this camera (22" rail) for landscape photography and it should be just fine for that purpose. One issue to keep in mind is that with this lens and tube mounted, there is a lot of weight at the top of the tripod and one need be careful that things are balanced.
Thanks for all the advice. The tube sounds interesting. My rail is only 19" long.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks