Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 57,949   Posts: 1,194,872   Online: 863
      
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    1,820
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100

    6x7 back on my 4x5, focal length question

    I think I just made a fairly obvious observation but I'd just like to run it by you all. I have a 6x7 roll film back for my Wista 4x5 and have always wondered what focal length equivilents (in 6x7 format) I am effectively using when using large format lenses. Let's say I'm using my 210/5.6 lens on my 4x5 with my roll film back. The focal length is still 210mm, just in a different format.. right?

    So in effect you could carry a nice set of lenses with your 4x5 (90,135,210,300) and with a roll film back you could also have a nice medium format camera with a nice set of lenses (although longer in effective focal length) as long as you don't mind setting up a view camera for every shot.

    Sorry if this was obvious to others.

  2. #2
    Dave Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Middle England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,894
    Images
    2
    You got it in one.
    Regards Dave.

    An English Eye


  3. #3
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    New York, New York
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    16,370
    Images
    20
    Yup, that's how it works. Then if your longest lens isn't long enough for 4x5" and you don't want to crop from sheet film, you can switch to the rollfilm back. I've occasionally done a little bird photography with my 4x5" Technika, a rangefinder cammed 360mm lens, and a 6x7 rollfilm back.
    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

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Westminster, Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,471
    You got it. That's the same concept that DSLR shooters faced when they switched from 35mm to digital.

    Basically your 90mm wide angle becomes your "normal."
    When I grow up, I want to be a photographer.

    http://www.walterpcalahan.com

  5. #5
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    1,820
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    Guys, that's what I thought. Thanks for your help! This will be nice to know this next I go to shoot.

  6. #6
    Andrew Moxom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Keeping the British end up in Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,741
    Images
    255
    That's the same reason why I have 75, 90, 150, 210, 360 lenses, and 3 x 6x8 graflex backs with 1 x 100 iso film, 1 x 400 iso film, and 1 for E6. Plus I also carry roughly 10 x 4x5 double darkslides. So I am covered for most eventualities with my Canham DLC.

    I tried bidding tonight on Fleabay for a 58mm XL lens, but was sniped at the last minute. That lens would have covered 4x5, but it would mainly be for a wide end on the 6x8 format. That is going to be my next purchase when I can find one used.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    205
    What is the factor to apply to the focal lengths going from 4x5 to 6x7?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,901
    Quote Originally Posted by m_liddell View Post
    What is the factor to apply to the focal lengths going from 4x5 to 6x7?
    Diagonals are approximately 150mm and 90mm so 15/9 = 1.7x and 9/15 = 0.6x, i,e. 150mm on 6x7 has same diagonal coverage as 250mm on 4x5 inch; 90mm on 6x7 has same coverage as 150mm on 4x5 inch; 47mm on 6x7cm (the widest I've found that covers 4x5 inch) is like 78mm on 4x5 inch.

    Cheers,

    R.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE:


 
                     

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