Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,819   Posts: 1,581,648   Online: 822
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
  1. #21
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,422
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    156
    I just sold a mid '60's Linhof Color. I would concur that it is certainly an elegant solution. Collapses to 5" and stows nice even in a small ruck sack. It just wasn't for me I guess. I don't do enough 4X5 and actually I'm doing some soul searching about selling my Wisner too. The 4X5 back for the 5X7 'dorff could suffice fine at the cost of a few pounds.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota Tropics
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole
    I regularly use lenses like the 210/4.5 Xenar and 360/5.5 Tele-Xenar, both in Compound #3 shutters. This is the practical limit on a Technika board as to shutter size. For rear element size the 121/8 Super-Angulon is possible but hardly practical. [...]
    I thought so too, until David Goldfarb nuged us with his solution. (Thanks for that, David.) I went to the shop and front-flange mounted a 200mm Imagon in no time. Now, that's a good day!

    FWIW, the 75mm Super Angulon also works on the Linhof Color.

  3. #23
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Why front-mount a 200 Imagon? The 240 Imagon fits in a Commpund #3 shutter just like my other lenses - or at least mine does
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  4. #24
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,482
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by jjstafford
    I thought so too, until David Goldfarb nuged us with his solution. (Thanks for that, David.) I went to the shop and front-flange mounted a 200mm Imagon in no time. Now, that's a good day!

    FWIW, the 75mm Super Angulon also works on the Linhof Color.
    Don't thank me, thank Adam Dau and the folks at SK Grimes who came up with that. The light trap on the back of the board is machined out a bit, but is basically intact. There is a ring that screws into the rear threads of the lens, and another ring behind the board that screws into the first ring and holds the lens on the board. They say they've done a few of these to get a big lens on a small board.

    As far as the issue of lenses having a rear element too big for a Technika, it's not an issue with too many 4x5" lenses. The maximum rear element diameter is 86mm, if I remember correctly. I think the only lenses likely to cause a problem are modern (and expensive) fast 90mm-120mm lenses with really huge coverage.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota Tropics
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole
    Why front-mount a 200 Imagon? The 240 Imagon fits in a Commpund #3 shutter just like my other lenses - or at least mine does
    I'm not near the shop right now to check, but I think mine is in an Alphax #4 (2.618-30 size nut).

    I have no jam-hut (retaining ring) for the lens so I had to use a front flange mount. I even tried using the flange as a jam-nut, but it's just too big. I'd like to find the correct retainer. SK Grimes, Inc. will make one, but it's simply too expensive for me right now.

  6. #26
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by jjstafford
    I have no jam-hut (retaining ring) for the lens so I had to use a front flange mount. I even tried using the flange as a jam-nut, but it's just too big. I'd like to find the correct retainer. ...
    If you have a good measurement, or the Rodenstock specification, I can see if I have one. I've just got hold of a HEAP of flanges and retaining rings
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota Tropics
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole
    If you have a good measurement, or the Rodenstock specification, I can see if I have one. I've just got hold of a HEAP of flanges and retaining rings
    That's very generous of you, but if you have one I would be happy to trade; is there anything you need? (From you posts, it seems we each have an awful lot of old parts, but not what we really need.)

    I will get the measurement this evening when I return to the shop.
    Thank you.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    1,298
    I use monorail cameras for both my 8x10's, and I would not prefer it any other way! I can very easily slip the front and rear standard off the rail, and lay it down in my backback. I use really wide lens...so my rail is only about 10" long for my 8x10. I can fit the rail into my backpack as well! My monorail cameras are lighter then other 8x10 field cameras I have seen. Another plus, is having full camera movements, because on some field cameras they are limited.

    If you get a monorail, I suggest having a short rail, and a long rail. I keep the short rail with me all the time, then when I need to do a close-up image, I just walk back to my car and get the short rail.

    Ryan McIntosh

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    My first LF camera was a Sinar F...I got rid of it because it was a pain in the a** for field work.

  10. #30
    Frank Petronio's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    downwind from Kodak
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    218
    Images
    2
    Note to poster a page back - it was over 20 years ago that I learned to hate Cambos (and Deardorfs too) so my memory fades, but it may have been more to do with the fact that the owners of the cameras were dicks more than the camera's fault.

    But I do remember doing lots of work with the camera pointing down and really having a hassle keeping the standards from sliding forward out of their locked position. And the 8x10 Deardorfs I had to use were shakey and beat to heck, and the knobs were hard on my delicate fingers (so frail was I...)

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