Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,686   Posts: 1,482,291   Online: 928
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 46
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,822
    You could mount an enlarging lens in something like a polaroid press shutter & not need the FP shutter. You would have much fewer vibration concerns. Or a Packard?
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Central Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    232
    Images
    23
    Has the ideal medium format macro camera been made?

    The answer is, "No".

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    394
    There is a bellows available for both the Pentax 67 system and Pentax 645 system, but like all specialist equipment it is expensive:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

    A better way to go might be to get a cheap 4x5 Monorail (like a Cambo\Calumet) and then replace the ground glass screen with an adapter to mount your camera (basically a 4x5 sheet of 1/8" aluminium with a short extension tube screwed to it). This gives you very long extensions (depending on the camera) as well as all the movements you might want.

    Here are a couple of shots of one I made for my 35mm Pentax gear using a Calumet 401CC. It's something any machine shop should be able to knock up in a spare hour (if that).
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 4x5_MX.jpg   back.jpg  

  4. #24
    vanspaendonck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    132
    I second David Goldfarb's recommendation of the Bronica, though I would prefer the EC or ECTL. With acccessories, they have everything on your list. And, for some reason the bodies have become dirt cheap. I thought of selling one of my EC of ECTLs on eBay, but decided not to: at today's prices, it's just not worth the trouble.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,194
    Quote Originally Posted by glbeas View Post
    I'm curious to know what those reasons are. Think you could post a quick article sometime explaining that and how you arrive at a good setup?
    PMFJI. I don't agree fully with the reasons that Anupam gave you. I see several problems with using auto-TTL flash closeup.

    It seems that some camera/flash combinations are badly, um, flustered by specular highlights.

    The camera can't be counted on to recognize the main subject and illuminate for it. This is exacerbated by falloff of illumination when the background is far behind the main subject.

    Intelligent use of a lens-specific flash rig that is calibrated for magnification avoids these problems. I have a flash rig for my wife's 55/3.5 MicroNikkor, another for my 105/2.8 MicroNikkor AIS. And I have two for use with my Graphics, one that attaches to the lens (conceptually very similar to the rigs I use on 35 mm) and is calibrated for a 105/5.6 El Nikkor and another that attaches to the camera body and is calibrated for a 100/6.3 Neupolar.

    Using a pre-calibrated flash rig is equivalent to metering incident. For unusually reflective subjects, stopping down a bit below the aperture indicated in the calibration table is helpful. Similarly, for unusually dark subjects opening up a little is helpful. If it isn't obvious, the problems with auto-TTL flash that I gave above are due to metering reflected light.

    I also sometimes use a single hand held variable-power flash (Vivitar 283 with VP-1) with my Graphics and do the GN arithmetic, including adjustment for magnification, in my head. No big deal.

    I don't understand why people make such a big fuss over using flash closeup. I made my first closeup flash rig in 1971, used part of a roll of film to calibrate it, and since then have had very few poorly exposed closeup shots. Ain't much to it.

    Anupam made the point, but not strongly enough, that on-camera flash makes underexposed backgrounds possible. Ponder my patented (yeah, sure) idea of "depth of illumination" and you'll see why. The only way to guarantee that the background will be illuminated as desired (as many, including no, stops down from the main subject) is to position a flash off camera to get the desired result. A pain, but doable.

  6. #26
    Struan Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    914

  7. #27
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,045
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    424
    Nobody has mentioned the Hasselblad system. You could use a Hasselblad 500C/M body and get the older bellows (non-auto) which would be fairly inexpensive. It requires a double cable release system, but this is the advantage. You can set the double cable so that the first cable triggers the body, and then just screw the second cable into a generic leaf shutter where you've mounted your enlarger lens. This kit won't give you swings/ tilts, but it would be pretty easy to make an adapter flange to mount your shuttered enlarger lens. You can also get a Hasselblad->Contax mount adapter that would let you put a Contax SLR on the back of the bellows. There may be an adapter out there to put other systems behind it also, but I don't know.

  8. #28
    Anupam Basu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    504
    Images
    20
    Found a Bronica bellows in this completed EBay auction. This indeed looks a thing of beauty. Elegantly simple. Thanks for pointing me to it. I won't be able to buy it just yet but it gives me a lot of ideas.

    -Anupam

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,822
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    Nobody has mentioned the Hasselblad system. You could use a Hasselblad 500C/M body and get the older bellows (non-auto) which would be fairly inexpensive. It requires a double cable release system, but this is the advantage. You can set the double cable so that the first cable triggers the body, and then just screw the second cable into a generic leaf shutter where you've mounted your enlarger lens. This kit won't give you swings/ tilts, but it would be pretty easy to make an adapter flange to mount your shuttered enlarger lens. You can also get a Hasselblad->Contax mount adapter that would let you put a Contax SLR on the back of the bellows. There may be an adapter out there to put other systems behind it also, but I don't know.
    Didn't Hasselblad also have a couple of specialty bodies a while back Arc & somethin' else? One was basically a bellows with magazine & lens mount.
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    905
    John,
    try finding one that mere mortals can afford, for me, I'll stick with my RB67 back and lensboard on my Toyo 45E, all the benefits of an RB, and all the movements of a view camera, for too cheap to even consider anything else.

    erie

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin