Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Bigger than 35 RF's > 120 RF Folders

120 RF Folders 120/220 Format Folding Rangefinders, including the various classic Zeiss Ikontas, Voigtlander Bessas, and their Ruskie copies.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 07-23-2008   #26
David Goldfarb
Registered User
 
David Goldfarb's Avatar
 
David Goldfarb is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by oftheherd View Post
Self designed projects can be fun. I just wonder why not put that 50mm Press lens on a Press body. They aren't that expensive these days. Put a 6x9 back on it and you have an easy to use camera with a stunning wide angle lens.

But, to each his own.
I agree. The camera is very nice, but it's not really much more compact than a 2x3" press camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #27
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Goldfarb View Post
I agree. The camera is very nice, but it's not really much more compact than a 2x3" press camera.
Yessir, but that is because it is a press camera. I only recommended that as the owner of the 50mm Press lens was considering getting away from the original posit of a folding camera.

The Mamiya Universal and Super Press cameras are great with great optics, but they are not small or light. Their size and weight are offset by their performance (at least imho).
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=50'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #28
Ernst Dinkla
Registered User
 
Ernst Dinkla is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogier View Post
Most folding 6x9 range finders I have found so far have a 100mm lens.
Does any one know of any camera's with a shorter focal length?

Euhh and what about modifying an existing one by putting an other lens on it
Some years ago I tried to find that 6x9 folder with the wide angle lens as well. Nothing really comes close.
The Plenax with 75 mm I mentioned already but I have seen them advertised with longer focal lengths than the page I mentioned says. Most 6x9's either have a 105 mm (Europe) or a 101 mm (4 inches Kodak Anastigmat Specials US, or some prewar Ensigns UK). That's a small difference and often the actual 6x9 frame size has as much deviation. The Bessa I with a Color Skopar 105 mm on a 56x88 mm frame is almost equal in angle to the Monitor with a 101 mm Anastigmat Special on its frame size 56x82 mm. There is the French Demaria La Pierre Telka III with a 95mm 3.5 Sagittar (Tessar design) with coupled rangefinder. Some users say it delivers a good picture. I think it is getting rare these days. I do not know what the actual frame size is on that one.
http://www.geocities.com/antjam65/Telka.html
The original Plaubel Makina IIIR is a 6x9 (or 9,5 ?) with exchangeable lenses, among them a Rapid Wide-Angle Orther 73mmF6.8 (6-Elements in 2-Group) coated, angle of view 72 degree. More a press camera than the usual folder and more expensive too. The redesign with the Nikon 80 mm is expensive too and 6x7 cm.
http://www.cosmonet.org/camera/makina_e.htm
http://www.xs4all.nl/~lommen9/plaubel/index.html
The 645 Fujis with a wideangle are to my knowledge all non-foders but probably deliver better resolution than all the folders I mentioned before but the Nikon Makina.
The 690 Fujis are huge and so are Mamiya Press models and the Koni Omega (all non folders). They offer a good quality at an affordable price though.

The really wide: The Brooks Veriwide has a wider than 6x9 frame but is relatively small in size. 47mm lens. Someone overhere thought it was worth it to equip a Fuji 690 with a Super Angulon 47 mm and keep the rangefinder function on the Fuji. Done by a good camera technician in Holland. It was for sale not so long ago, something like 10K Euro if I recall correctly. Do not forget that the Mamiya 7 II 6x7 with a 43 mm lens beats many custom solutions on wide angle. Even Cambo wide angle cameras or the Alpa with a Biogon 38 mm.

Ernst Dinkla
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #29
Rogier
Rogier Willems
 
Rogier's Avatar
 
Rogier is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 1,186
Wow did I started a tread :-)

All these other solutions are wonderfull and very tempting.
(I am itching for the Mamiya 7II or Fuji GSW690III)

However, the point is that all these wonderfull camera's are not nearly as light and portable as these old folders. Also the fact that as a photographer you DONT want be taken "seriously" while using it alowing us a different kind of interaction ;-)

I visited a Japanese website the other day (hope I did not loose the URL) that seemed to offer repair and modifications. Have to look that one op again. Perhaps some one else has a alternative source.

Last edited by Rogier : 07-23-2008 at 09:02.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #30
shadowfox
Personal Photography
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by chippy View Post
i dont quite follow what you and Jan mean here?

but as i was typing it hit me you probably mean in comparison to 6x6? and as you say the cropping

because i was thinking of the term 'wide angle' i had in my mind the field of veiw on the width of the film. and is this respect its much the same as other formats i.e about 43 deg for 6x9 using 105mm , 39deg for 6x6 using 80mm, 40deg for 35mm using a 50mm lens and so on.....the 6x9 is a touch more i guess but not much

the field of view in height differs of course from 6x9 to 6x6 using the 105mm lens from about 30deg to 39deg again for the 80mm (theres your crop).

still i dont tend to compare 6x9 to 6x6 much, and if i did then one has to crop of course in which case they are simular then. i tend to compare it closer to 35mm because of the aspect ratio and its much the same, but it does vary slightly to 35mm film, i.e. field of veiw in height using a 50mm lens (on 35mm) at 27deg, and the 6x9 at about 30deg using the 105mm. almost the same though eh

nice pics both btw, the autumn colours are nice. was it a coated or uncoated lens out of curiosity?
Yes I meant the cropping effect and the format, that makes shots from a 6x9 looks like wide angle shots. I understand the fact that it's still from a lens with smaller degree of coverage.

That picture is taken using a Heliar lens on an old Bessa RF, if it's coated, probably it's single coated.
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #31
FallisPhoto
Registered User
 
FallisPhoto's Avatar
 
FallisPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogier View Post
Most folding 6x9 range finders I have found so far have a 100mm lens.
Does any one know of any camera's with a shorter focal length?

Euhh and what about modifying an existing one by putting an other lens on it
Not in a folding 6x9, no. The problem would most likely be that it would probably require a retrofocus design, and because retrofocus lenses are longer (having more elements), the camera wouldn't fold up with that lens on it. With modern technology, that wouldn't be a problem anymore, but then they are not making folders anymore.

Last edited by FallisPhoto : 07-23-2008 at 14:50.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #32
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallisPhoto View Post
...

but then they are not making folders anymore.
sigh
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=50'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #33
David Goldfarb
Registered User
 
David Goldfarb's Avatar
 
David Goldfarb is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 573
I don't see why a wideangle folding 6x9 RF would require a retrofocus lens. The bellows would just be shorter with a compact lens like an Angulon or Dagor. A 65mm Angulon should cover 6x9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #34
FallisPhoto
Registered User
 
FallisPhoto's Avatar
 
FallisPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Goldfarb View Post
I don't see why a wideangle folding 6x9 RF would require a retrofocus lens. The bellows would just be shorter with a compact lens like an Angulon or Dagor. A 65mm Angulon should cover 6x9.
It is because you have a fixed bellows length. You can't just put a non-retrofocus wide angle lens on a folder without completely redesigning the camera. A wide angle lens would have to be retrofocus because it would otherwise need to be closer to the film plane. It's the same reason why SLRs need retrofocus wide angle lenses (because they have to focus past the mirror box behind the lens). This is why cameras like Bessas, Perkeos, Super Ikontas, and so on didn't have wide angle lenses as options. You'd need a totally different camera.

Last edited by FallisPhoto : 07-23-2008 at 17:50.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #35
ZeissFan
Registered User
 
ZeissFan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,165
Here's one solution that would work:

I was looking at an old Contessa-Nettel folder that I have. The lens slides out on a rail. That serves as the ideal platform for fitting a wider lens to a shutter. It would have to be a simpler design so that it would fit a standard leaf shutter, so that it wouldn't protrude too far from the shutter because you would still need to slide the lens back into the body so that the lens door could close.

By having the lens slide to and fro on a rail, you could collimate the lens to certain distances and attach a new distance scale or engrave the distances on the lens door next to the rail.

Again, you would still need to make sure that your lens could cover that area, but I think this would work for this project.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #36
David Goldfarb
Registered User
 
David Goldfarb's Avatar
 
David Goldfarb is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallisPhoto
It is because you have a fixed bellows length. You can't just put a non-retrofocus wide angle lens on a folder without completely redesigning the camera.
Sorry, I thought you were talking about a wideangle folder designed for the purpose, not adapting an existing folder. Adapting an existing folder would require some surgery. Since in general there aren't compact wide retrofocus lenses with sufficient flange to film distance that cover 6x9 and could replace a standard 100mm or 105mm lens, a more likely adaptation would involve some sort of bracket that could put the lens farther back and still fold with the camera.

One other possibility might be afocal adapter lenses (wide and tele converters). I've occasionally seen such things for older fixed lens cameras, but they are not usually considered to be of good optical quality.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2008   #37
schaubild
light chaser
 
schaubild's Avatar
 
schaubild is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: near Lucerne, Switzerland
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst Dinkla View Post
...... Do not forget that the Mamiya 7 II 6x7 with a 43 mm lens beats many custom solutions on wide angle. Even Cambo wide angle cameras or the Alpa with a Biogon 38 mm.

Ernst Dinkla


Do you have any facts to substantiate such a statement?
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2008   #38
Ernst Dinkla
Registered User
 
Ernst Dinkla is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by schaubild View Post
Do you have any facts to substantiate such a statement?
The facts are dividing the focal length in mm by the diagonal of the film frame. For the Mamiya that would be 43/89,3 = 0,48 The Biogon on the Hasselblad 38/79 = 0,48. The Biogon on the special Alpa 44x66 mm holder 38/79 = 0,48. The Fuji 690 GSW 65/99 = 0.65 at most as I''m not sure the frame length is 82 mm. The customised Fuji 690 with the SA 47 mm 47/99 = 0,475. It is the original Brooks Veriwide that really beats that 0.48 ratio of the Mamiya with 47/115 = 0,41 if that frame length really is 100 mm. All more or less in the spirit of this thread. Relatively compact, MF and wide angle. The bigger Mamiya Press with the 50 mm lens on 6x9 (56 x 82 mm) = 0,50, the Koni Omega 56 mm on 6x7 even more.

Of course the Fotoman, Linhof, etc panorama cameras can go beyond that ratio. Not to mention the Cirkut concepts like the Voyageur that works with 120 film.

In readily available, not breaking the bank, MF, more or less compact and very wide, quality image, the Mamiya 7 II with a 43 mm lens is the obvious answer.


Ernst Dinkla
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2008   #39
Ernst Dinkla
Registered User
 
Ernst Dinkla is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeissFan View Post
Here's one solution that would work:

I was looking at an old Contessa-Nettel folder that I have. The lens slides out on a rail. That serves as the ideal platform for fitting a wider lens to a shutter. It would have to be a simpler design so that it would fit a standard leaf shutter, so that it wouldn't protrude too far from the shutter because you would still need to slide the lens back into the body so that the lens door could close.

By having the lens slide to and fro on a rail, you could collimate the lens to certain distances and attach a new distance scale or engrave the distances on the lens door next to the rail.

Again, you would still need to make sure that your lens could cover that area, but I think this would work for this project.
The Polaroid Pathfinders have that same focusing rail + a rangefinder that can be customised to other focal lengths.
Of the wide angles that can fit on a folder the nicest one must be a Kodak WA Ektar of 80 mm that is considered sharp according to Perez, then a good Schneider Angulon 90 mm or the WA Raptar of 90 mm. It is a pity that there are no 75 mm WAs so small as the combination of the folding structure of a 6x6 on a 6x9 folder body + the 6x9 bellows would make that a nice custom concept. All still moderate WA but foldable.

The new Fuji 80 mm on 6x7 folder could have been a 56x82 instead in my opinion. Would make a wider angle and sell more film for Fuji :-)

Ernst Dinkla

The
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2008   #40
besk
Registered User
 
besk is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Carolina (USA)
Posts: 261
I have had the same idea for years. Right now I use a 90 Angulon on an old 9X12 folding Voigtlander camera for traveling. (I scale focus.)

You may consider the combination outlined below.

http://coldlake0.tripod.com/MosculonT.html

This gives an angle of view equal to a 28mm lens on a 35mm camera. Scale focusing is very doable on a wide angle such as this. To date I have acquired all of the parts to build a similar rig but hesitate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2008   #41
schaubild
light chaser
 
schaubild's Avatar
 
schaubild is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: near Lucerne, Switzerland
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst Dinkla View Post
The facts are dividing the focal length in mm by the diagonal of the film frame. For the Mamiya that would be 43/89,3 = 0,48 The Biogon on the Hasselblad 38/79 = 0,48. The Biogon on the special Alpa 44x66 mm holder 38/79 = 0,48. The Fuji 690 GSW 65/99 = 0.65 at most as I''m not sure the frame length is 82 mm. The customised Fuji 690 with the SA 47 mm 47/99 = 0,475. It is the original Brooks Veriwide that really beats that 0.48 ratio of the Mamiya with 47/115 = 0,41 if that frame length really is 100 mm. All more or less in the spirit of this thread. Relatively compact, MF and wide angle. The bigger Mamiya Press with the 50 mm lens on 6x9 (56 x 82 mm) = 0,50, the Koni Omega 56 mm on 6x7 even more.

Of course the Fotoman, Linhof, etc panorama cameras can go beyond that ratio. Not to mention the Cirkut concepts like the Voyageur that works with 120 film.

In readily available, not breaking the bank, MF, more or less compact and very wide, quality image, the Mamiya 7 II with a 43 mm lens is the obvious answer.


Ernst Dinkla


Sorry, read the wrong message. From a view-angle point of view you're right. I received this as a quality related message, therefore the stiff answer

The Biogon for Alpa is no longer produced, but there are the Super Angulon XL 38mm (image circle of 96/139 mm (f5.6/f22)), the Alpar 35mm (image circle of 105/120 (f11/f22)) and the Helvetar 48 mm (image circle of 98/123mm (f5.6/f22)), all three easily cover 6x9. And the Switar 36mm with it's image circle of 90mm can be used on 6x7; direct comparisons against a Biogon have shown that this lens is at least as good, even full open. Just a side remark.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2008   #42
FallisPhoto
Registered User
 
FallisPhoto's Avatar
 
FallisPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Goldfarb View Post
Sorry, I thought you were talking about a wideangle folder designed for the purpose, not adapting an existing folder. Adapting an existing folder would require some surgery. Since in general there aren't compact wide retrofocus lenses with sufficient flange to film distance that cover 6x9 and could replace a standard 100mm or 105mm lens, a more likely adaptation would involve some sort of bracket that could put the lens farther back and still fold with the camera.

One other possibility might be afocal adapter lenses (wide and tele converters). I've occasionally seen such things for older fixed lens cameras, but they are not usually considered to be of good optical quality.

Well, the companies making folders back then were motivated by the same thing then that camera manufacturers are now -- making money. If they didn't do it, then there must not have been much of a market for it. The technology certainly existed. If Graphlex could put a wide angle lens on a baby Speed Graphic, then Voigtlander could certainly have put one on yet another variety of Bessa.

Yes, I have accessory lenses for a couple of my Yashicas and for an Argus C-3 "brick." Using them is more trouble than they are worth and they don't work very well. Also, I can easily envision someone forgetting to remove one from his folder and attempting to fold it up, clawing the hell out of the lens.

Last edited by FallisPhoto : 07-24-2008 at 08:25.
  Reply With Quote

Re: 6x9 wide angle
Old 07-24-2008   #43
marvin123
Registered User
 
marvin123 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1
Re: 6x9 wide angle

Anyone know of an inexpensive wide-angle lens? Can use something old, or something designed for medium format. Currently have a 90mm but that is not wide enough in the 6x9 format. Something in the 50-60mm range would be good.
Are there any wide-angle barrel lenses available?



-------------------------
Marvin


Wide Circles
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2008   #44
pagpow
Registered User
 
pagpow is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 815
take a look here for a start

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00IKzu
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-29-2008   #45
Rogier
Rogier Willems
 
Rogier's Avatar
 
Rogier is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 1,186
Very interesting camera however it not quite a folder camera. At least I don't see myself putting this one in my pocket...
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-30-2008   #46
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 20,154
Cheap WA lenses

The small, cheap 65/6.8 Angulon (not Super) will JUST cover 6x9; the 65/8 (bigger, but still not expensive) does so easily. So will the 47 SA, f/8 or f/5.6, though the f/8 was a significantly inferior lens: Linhof and Professional once rejected 11 out of 12 of a batch they ordered (decades ago) and Sir Kenneth Corfielld used to test them indivdually for use on the Corfield WA67.

Why no 'classic' WA folders

The big objection to a WA folder is that WA lenses must be held more precisely, relative to the film plane, than longer lenses. Struts therefore need to be stronger and less prone to wear and play than if you have a longer lens. The 'baby' Linhof could handle a 65mm, but with the 47mm you needed a lens in a focusing mount and the bellows 'foot' on the back rails (I've had 65 Angulon and SA and 47/5.6 SA on mine). This is a major reason why they were never made in the classical days of folders, though there was the rigid-bodied Envoy Wide-Angle: http://www.gaspweb.co.uk/cameras/envoy.html

(I always wanted one, but they were absurdly expensive and the 64mm lens, probably by Wray, was somewhat lacking in contrast in my friends' examples)

Also, looking at the design of most folders, I suspect that the size of the trapdoor (dictated by the size of the body itself) might mean that the edge of the trapdoor might get into shot even with a 65; this is why 'baby' Linhofs had a drop bed, though of course the trapdoor is much bigger.

Film flatness

Again, as others have remarked, film flatness varies widely with RF backs and folders, and most folders are at the poor end when compared with most backs. Also, the bigger the format, the harder it is to ensure flatness. This is why, arguably, you can get better sharpness from 6x9 cropped to 4.5x9 than from 6x12 (though the bigger the enlargement, the more the 6x12 will score on tonality). Flatness is more important with WA lenses than with longer ones, of course.

In other words, a 6x9 WA is always likely to be a lot bigger and heavier than a conventional folder, though a doppel-klapp design (like a Plaubel W67 with 55 Nikkor, apparently made by Konica) offers one way around it.

D-I-Y Wide-Angles

A friend of mine, the late Colin Glanfield, built quite a lot of ultra-wides, and his approach was to take a roll-film back and build a 'cone' on the front with a WA lens in a focusing mount -- or on one occasion, set at the hyperfocal distance for f/11.

The ultimate solution: Alpa

I use an Alpa 12 WA with the Biogon on 66x44 (21mm equivalent on 35mm) and my wife uses the 35/5.6 Apo-Grandagon on 6x9cm (15mm equivalent) with her 12 S/WA. The Alpa 12 TC is more compact than either, and takes the same lenses and backs, but although it is cheaper, it is still alarmingly expensive and not pocketable unless you have REALLY BIG pockets: http://www.alpa.ch/index.php?path=pr...detailpage=135

Cheers,

Roger
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com

Last edited by Roger Hicks : 07-30-2008 at 01:01.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-30-2008   #47
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 20,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by toyotadesigner View Post
The ultimate solution could be as well a Horseman SW 612 Pro with a 35mm Grandagon and a 6x9 back. Or a 6x12 back if you need an even wider angle. And it doesn't require deep pockets as an Alpa <sigh>

On the other hand a view camera like the Arca Swiss F line compact 6x9 would the the non plus ultra in terms of versatility - folded it's smaller than one of my Fujis.
The Horseman is, if I recall (I've not used one for years) bigger than a TC, but I'd certainly agree that it will achieve much the same thing.

Rather than Arca Swiss, look at Toho. http://www.toho-machine.co.jp/FC-45Mini.htm. Even smaller and lighter. In order to get movements with the 47mm you need the eccentric lens panel, but you can then use 47mm to 210mm, with movements, on rollfilm formats up to 6x12 or of course 4x5 inch/9x12cm. It takes about as long to assemble as the Arca-Swiss does to unfold, but a rigid-body (Alpa, Horseman, Envoy...) will always be quicker.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-30-2008   #48
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 20,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by toyotadesigner View Post
The ultimate solution could be as well a Horseman SW 612 Pro with a 35mm Grandagon and a 6x9 back. Or a 6x12 back if you need an even wider angle. And it doesn't require deep pockets as an Alpa <sigh>

On the other hand a view camera like the Arca Swiss F line compact 6x9 would the the non plus ultra in terms of versatility - folded it's smaller than one of my Fujis.
The Horseman is, if I recall (I've not used one for years) bigger than a TC, but I'd certainly agree that it will achieve much the same thing, and cheaper.

Rather than Arca Swiss, look at Toho. http://www.toho-machine.co.jp/FC-45Mini.htm. Even smaller and lighter. In order to get movements with the 47mm you need the eccentric lens panel, but you can then use 47mm to 210mm, with movements, on rollfilm formats up to 6x12 or of course 4x5 inch/9x12cm. It takes about as long to assemble as the Arca-Swiss does to unfold, but a rigid-body (Alpa, Horseman, Envoy...) will always be quicker.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-31-2008   #49
David Goldfarb
Registered User
 
David Goldfarb's Avatar
 
David Goldfarb is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 573
The widest lens that Linhof supplied for the 2x3" Technika was the 53mm Biogon, I believe. I have a 55mm/4.5 Apo-Grandagon, cammed, for mine.

Some of the latest LF wide lenses are slightly retrofocus, so it might be possible to get a 47mm SA-XL or 45mm Apo-Grandagon on the main rail, maybe with a recessed lensboard, though the recessed Tech 23 boards I've seen are only about 5mm recessed. Have you looked into this, by chance, Roger? Otherwise, the solution for the 35-47mm lenses is a focus mount, as you say, if the mount is small enough to fit on the board and not interfere with the front standard.

Then again, if I know I'm going wide, I can always shoot the 55mm Apo-Grandagon on my 4x5" Technika, which is probably a better solution anyway. It's good, I think, to have a larger negative to capture all the information a wide lens can take in.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:23.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.