Lenscap Pinhole for 35mm
I have played with a pinhole in a body cap for my Argus slr (pentax m42 mount). It works pretty well, but I'm hoping to get more of the whole image circle into the frame. I think the pinhole is too far from the film.
I was wondering if it would work better using a rangefinder camera with a focal plane shutter. I think that the distance from the body cap to the film would be less but, since I don't have a rangefinder right now I'm only guessing.
Has anyone ever done this and would the difference between an slr and rangefinder be noticeable with a body cap pinhole?
A recessed body cap pinhole could be improvised to work with mirror lockup on an SLE to give a somewhat wider view. A rangefinder camera might be a bit better. The once ubiquitous Argus C-3 would be a good candidate for this
Making one is fun but if you are feeling lazy, pinholebilly over on Ebay does a nice job. I can't remember if he specifically has an M42 cap available but he does say that custom products can be made. Also try him at www.pinholeedun.com
Not a paid advertisement, just happy with the product...
i bought my pinholes from him years ago.
really nice guy.
silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
artwork often times sold for charity
PM me for details
I already have a M42 pinhole cap. My problem is that I don't have mirror lock (at least I think I don't) on my SLR, so a recessed pinhole is a problem.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by Jim Jones
I have an old argus C2, but the shutter is part of the lens. Is it the same with the c3 or did the c3 have a focal plane shutter.
C-3 has a leaf shutter, somewhat in front of the focal plane. I am not at home with a C3 to measure
I mounted a pinhole on a Deckel mount from a broken Kodak Retina Reflex lens and installed it like a lens. I think it was 41.5 mm in my case (ended up slightly recessed, I guess). The camera flange distance is 44.7 mm. Coverage and angle of view were 'normal', and I never noticed (nor expected) light falloff at that distance. The problem with this configuration is that I could never do a wide angle. The mirror was not a problem in the 'mount in front of shutter' configuration.
See the link below for others.
Maybe I misunderstood your comment on distance from the film plane.
Nearly all SLR lenses are 'retrofocus' so, for example, a 200 mm lens need not be 200 mm from the film plane at infinity focus (as it need be in a view camera with a non-zoom lens).
I would assume the standard 50 mm lens on a C3 is not retrofocus. I don't know the lens flange distance but would assume it is 50 mm minus the distance from the flange mount to the relevant lens node (1. I don't know which one is important 2. Far easier to just measure the flange to film plane distance and note that it is probably less than the lens f.l.). Actually, looking at the referenced link above, there are some flange distances on some RF's that are shorter than typical SLR's.
Contax RF is 34.85 mm
Canon screw mount 28.8
Leica screw mount 28.8
Narcissus (here's lookin' at you) 28.8
So if Argus was thinking at all like everyone else, it may be on the order of 29 mm.
You could possibly (probably) accomplish a wide angle camera construction with a short flange distance RF, depending on the location of the pinhole vs. the shutter.
I once converted a Kodak 35 RF with a bad lens. When I was done I had a bad shutter too. I used aggressive double stick tape and slipped and got some on the shutter. Initially I left the lens body intact for looks, but it created a round image. I later took the lens barrel off and used a refrigerator magnet for a shutter after gluing a metal ring on the camera.
Originally Posted by Murray@uptowngallery
That's a bunch of info, thanks. Pardon my ignorance, but what's a Deckel mount?
I guess first I should try to figure out how close the pinhole needs to be to the film so that the image circle is just about the diameter of a frame.
Next, I realize that in my original post I claimed to not own a rangefinder, then went ahead in my next post and mentioned the c2. To clarify, I meant that I didn't own a rangefinder with interchangable lenses. The c2 has a fixed lens, although I have taken it off so I suppose it is a candidate.
On my Argus STL 1000 (the slr) the front of the body where the body cap sits, is about 47-48mm from the film plane. The mirror swings to within 10 mm of the front, so I guess I could get a recessed body cap pinhole to about 38mm from the film without interfering with the mirror. Would that get the image circle where I want it? I have to look up that calculation.
On the argus c2, it looks like the shutter is about 35-37mm from the film plane. I got the glass part of the lens off, but I can't see how to take out the inner threaded piece or the ring that connects to the range wheel. I suppose I could do something recessed, if I could figure out what the inside thread measurement was. Is that a good direction to go in?
(all measurements are approximate, I was trying not to poke the ruler through any shutters)
Well, maybe I didn't even need to bring it up, but since I did,
it's the bayonet mount on the Kodak Retina Reflex S.
I don't know if there was ever a body cap for that camera, and I don't want to spend more money on it at this time, and I had previously considered hacking a Japanese zoom lens onto that lens mount. It was the easiest removeable way to switch between pinhole & lens for me.
Nagel made the German-made Kodak Retinas and Deckel is who developed the mount. It's apparently used in slightly modified form on some other Geman cameras (Contax maybe?)
People call the C-3 ubiquitous (found everywhere).
I have three and can't find ANY right now. (Another 3 victims of my basement). I was going to measure.
Using the nominal 24x36 mm frame dimensions, not knowing if they are actual, I get 43.3 mm diagonal. That's why my 41.5 mm distance looked so 'normal'.
Some people get tired of the very wide angle camera constructions, but I like them (say, an f.l. less than half the diagonal length) because they look so different from 'normal' angle of view.
I have to break the habit of shooting 'normal' subject matter in a 'normal' angle of view pinhole camera. Due to my choice of subject matter, I get what look like blurry normal camrea pics. Very wide angle solves some that for me (called gimmickery by some, however).