A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Medium Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Leaf Shutter questions for project camera



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 9th 04, 01:16 AM
David J. Littleboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ralf R. Radermacher" wrote in message
...
David J. Littleboy wrote:

http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/33533884/large


Speaking of which, how good is the 35 mm Sekor in general?


It's pretty much on my camera all the time.

How are sharpness


Speaking of Tech Pan: http://www.terrapinphoto.com/jmdavis/ugly-c2.jpg

and distortion?


http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/22566107/large

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



  #12  
Old September 9th 04, 02:22 AM
Bandicoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
Greetings RPEM-F,

I have been exploring an idea of a low cost (relatively) wide view
camera, using a PC-Nikkor Shift lens. I currently have a 35 mm f2.8
version of this lens that I have been testing for coverage. A couple
things got me started on this, one was an adapter for an Xpan, and the
other was the thread about the 38 mm Biogon lens. I have posted a couple
drawings (not to scale) at:


Do elaborate on thh X-Pan adapter Gordon: I'd love to put other lenses on
mine (especially something longer than the 90mm).


[SNIP]

I am wondering if there is something wrong with ILEX shutters, since
they seem to sell at somewhat low prices. I also see many of the
Polaroid Macro camera shutters, which seem like they might be another
choice.


These Polaroids are basically Prontor Press shutters - prety accurate and
their abundance used has made them very cheap.


Peter


  #13  
Old September 9th 04, 02:22 AM
Bandicoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
Greetings RPEM-F,

I have been exploring an idea of a low cost (relatively) wide view
camera, using a PC-Nikkor Shift lens. I currently have a 35 mm f2.8
version of this lens that I have been testing for coverage. A couple
things got me started on this, one was an adapter for an Xpan, and the
other was the thread about the 38 mm Biogon lens. I have posted a couple
drawings (not to scale) at:


Do elaborate on thh X-Pan adapter Gordon: I'd love to put other lenses on
mine (especially something longer than the 90mm).


[SNIP]

I am wondering if there is something wrong with ILEX shutters, since
they seem to sell at somewhat low prices. I also see many of the
Polaroid Macro camera shutters, which seem like they might be another
choice.


These Polaroids are basically Prontor Press shutters - prety accurate and
their abundance used has made them very cheap.


Peter


  #14  
Old September 9th 04, 08:26 AM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bandicoot wrote:

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
Greetings RPEM-F,

I have been exploring an idea of a low cost (relatively) wide view
camera, using a PC-Nikkor Shift lens. I currently have a 35 mm f2.8
version of this lens that I have been testing for coverage. A couple
things got me started on this, one was an adapter for an Xpan, and the
other was the thread about the 38 mm Biogon lens. I have posted a couple
drawings (not to scale) at:


Do elaborate on thh X-Pan adapter Gordon: I'd love to put other lenses on
mine (especially something longer than the 90mm).


It is a little late, so I am only going to answer your post now. This item is
still and active auction, EBAY item number 3838011972. To me, it looks like a
Nikon K extension ring upper (not the better extension ring from Nikon),
grafted onto an Xpan bayonet. I am not sure if the Xpan part of it is
actually machined, or a salvaged real piece. One problem I see with the
construction is that the top of the lens is not left pointing upwards like it
should be, which indicates to me a lack of care in construction. Anyway, if
you find that item really interesting, the auction did not end yet.

I searched around to see if anyone made these, though I found no listings
anywhere. I suppose that SKGrimes, or a similar machine shop, could make a
similar item. I was mostly interested in his comments about the PC-Nikkor
shift lens, and the large coverage area.

I have been experimenting with the shift and flip method of getting two
frames, then overlapping them in software to get a panorama. However, it is a
slow method, requires a tripod, and moving items need to be minimal (or
avoided) . . . too many limitations.



[SNIP]

I am wondering if there is something wrong with ILEX shutters, since
they seem to sell at somewhat low prices. I also see many of the
Polaroid Macro camera shutters, which seem like they might be another
choice.


These Polaroids are basically Prontor Press shutters - prety accurate and
their abundance used has made them very cheap.

Peter


I thought the Polaroid ones were Prontor Press, so that helps me with the
dimensions a bit. One thing I liked about the Polaroid shutters is that there
is no aperture, just the shutter plane. In theory, that should make it fairly
slim, or able to be machined down a bit. However, I am still not decided, and
need to do more research. I will try posting more tomorrow to the other
responses.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com Updated!


  #15  
Old September 9th 04, 08:26 AM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bandicoot wrote:

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
Greetings RPEM-F,

I have been exploring an idea of a low cost (relatively) wide view
camera, using a PC-Nikkor Shift lens. I currently have a 35 mm f2.8
version of this lens that I have been testing for coverage. A couple
things got me started on this, one was an adapter for an Xpan, and the
other was the thread about the 38 mm Biogon lens. I have posted a couple
drawings (not to scale) at:


Do elaborate on thh X-Pan adapter Gordon: I'd love to put other lenses on
mine (especially something longer than the 90mm).


It is a little late, so I am only going to answer your post now. This item is
still and active auction, EBAY item number 3838011972. To me, it looks like a
Nikon K extension ring upper (not the better extension ring from Nikon),
grafted onto an Xpan bayonet. I am not sure if the Xpan part of it is
actually machined, or a salvaged real piece. One problem I see with the
construction is that the top of the lens is not left pointing upwards like it
should be, which indicates to me a lack of care in construction. Anyway, if
you find that item really interesting, the auction did not end yet.

I searched around to see if anyone made these, though I found no listings
anywhere. I suppose that SKGrimes, or a similar machine shop, could make a
similar item. I was mostly interested in his comments about the PC-Nikkor
shift lens, and the large coverage area.

I have been experimenting with the shift and flip method of getting two
frames, then overlapping them in software to get a panorama. However, it is a
slow method, requires a tripod, and moving items need to be minimal (or
avoided) . . . too many limitations.



[SNIP]

I am wondering if there is something wrong with ILEX shutters, since
they seem to sell at somewhat low prices. I also see many of the
Polaroid Macro camera shutters, which seem like they might be another
choice.


These Polaroids are basically Prontor Press shutters - prety accurate and
their abundance used has made them very cheap.

Peter


I thought the Polaroid ones were Prontor Press, so that helps me with the
dimensions a bit. One thing I liked about the Polaroid shutters is that there
is no aperture, just the shutter plane. In theory, that should make it fairly
slim, or able to be machined down a bit. However, I am still not decided, and
need to do more research. I will try posting more tomorrow to the other
responses.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com Updated!


  #16  
Old September 9th 04, 12:23 PM
Dan Fromm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Gordon Moat wrote in message ...
Greetings RPEM-F,

I have been exploring an idea of a low cost (relatively) wide view
camera, using a PC-Nikkor Shift lens. I currently have a 35 mm f2.8
version of this lens that I have been testing for coverage. A couple
things got me started on this, one was an adapter for an Xpan, and the
other was the thread about the 38 mm Biogon lens. I have posted a couple
drawings (not to scale) at:

http://www.allgstudio.com/support_files/PC-Nikkor_coverage.jpg
Estimated coverage comparison.

http://www.allgstudio.com/support_files/PC-Nikkor_mount.jpg Lens to
body comparison.

Today I had some time to do a few more informal tests. It appears that
when checked through a ground glass, the PC-Nikkor 35 mm f2.8 will
almost completely cover 56 mm by 82 mm. The corners just show some
darkness, unless I stop down to f11 or smaller. I think I would probably
mask down the image to 56 mm by 70 mm, or perhaps 44 mm by 80 mm, just
to avoid the corner darkness. Anyway, that is the background so far.

As shown in the second drawing, there is not much width for a shutter. I
am not opposed to trimming the body a bit, which would allow for a
larger shutter. So far, I have checked specs and drawings I found (some
at SKGrimes.com), and it seems that an ILEX #3 would work.

I am wondering if there is something wrong with ILEX shutters, since
they seem to sell at somewhat low prices. I also see many of the
Polaroid Macro camera shutters, which seem like they might be another
choice. The rearmost element on the PC-Nikkor 35 mm f2.8 is 22 mm
diameter. What other leaf shutters would fit (Alphax, Rapax, Acme, et
al)? Better choices? Things to watch out? Any comments or suggestions
greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!


To answer y'r question re shutters, there's nothing wrong with Ilex
shutters except that they have a low marked top speed that few
actually attain. The Ilex Universal is self-cocking, nominal top
speed usually 1/100; the Ilex Acme is cock-and-shoot, nominal top
speed 1/150 or 1/200, I've seen both.

But and however, many of the used Ilex Universals, especially #3s,
came from oscilloscope cameras. O'scope camera Ilexes are usually NOT
threaded externally at the rear. They can be used with front-mounted
lenses, but can't be put on board with a lens in shutter. Putting on
board requires an externally threaded flange that screws into the back
of the shutter and clamps the board between itself and the shutter.
The flange's inner diameter is what will matter for vignetting by the
shutter. Another headache with 'scope camera Ilexes is that they all
seem to need to be overhauled.

Rapaxes are not sized to the modern Compur/Prontor/Copal standard.
Neither are Alphaxes or Betaxes or Ilexes. My choice for
front-mounting is the Copal #1. Ex-Polaroid MP-4 #1 Press is the
nicest of the inexpensive lot, but top speed is only 1/125. Generally
not too limiting, but for out-and-about shooting with my 47/5.6 SA in
#00 Prontor Press and ISO 100 film 1/125 has been very limiting.

If you're looking for an inexpensive 6x9 camera that will take wide
angle lenses, just get a 2x3 Graphic. Century or 2x3 Crown, not
Speed. Don't screw around with doing it yourself, you'll end up with
something less flexible and more costly.

If you're looking for an inexpensive w/a lens that will cover much, if
not all, of nominal 6x9, I don't think the PC Nikkor is what you want.
If using one were a good idea, we'd all do it. Also, remember, the
Nikon F flange to film distance at infinity is 46.5 mm. This is very
limiting, leaves little room for a leaf shutter behind the lens.
Shutter in front of lens will vignette unless the shutter is enormous.

If you insist on trying, set y'r PC-Nikkor up on an improvised rig and
shoot before investing much in machining etc. Remember that
impressions of sharpness on a ground glass can mislead. You want
reasonable sharpness to the edge; a test shot is the only way to find
out what the lens will do.

47/8 Ilex Acugons are in the same price range as 35/2.8 PC Nikkors,
cover around 123 mm. So do 47/8 SAs, which tend to be a little more
expensive. Everything shorter that will cover the format is much more
expensive. Longer classic wide angles that will cover 2x3, e.g.,
65/6.8 Angulon, Raptar, Leitmeyr Weitwinkel/Aristostigmat, aren't too
expensive.

Good luck,

Dan
  #17  
Old September 9th 04, 12:23 PM
Dan Fromm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Gordon Moat wrote in message ...
Greetings RPEM-F,

I have been exploring an idea of a low cost (relatively) wide view
camera, using a PC-Nikkor Shift lens. I currently have a 35 mm f2.8
version of this lens that I have been testing for coverage. A couple
things got me started on this, one was an adapter for an Xpan, and the
other was the thread about the 38 mm Biogon lens. I have posted a couple
drawings (not to scale) at:

http://www.allgstudio.com/support_files/PC-Nikkor_coverage.jpg
Estimated coverage comparison.

http://www.allgstudio.com/support_files/PC-Nikkor_mount.jpg Lens to
body comparison.

Today I had some time to do a few more informal tests. It appears that
when checked through a ground glass, the PC-Nikkor 35 mm f2.8 will
almost completely cover 56 mm by 82 mm. The corners just show some
darkness, unless I stop down to f11 or smaller. I think I would probably
mask down the image to 56 mm by 70 mm, or perhaps 44 mm by 80 mm, just
to avoid the corner darkness. Anyway, that is the background so far.

As shown in the second drawing, there is not much width for a shutter. I
am not opposed to trimming the body a bit, which would allow for a
larger shutter. So far, I have checked specs and drawings I found (some
at SKGrimes.com), and it seems that an ILEX #3 would work.

I am wondering if there is something wrong with ILEX shutters, since
they seem to sell at somewhat low prices. I also see many of the
Polaroid Macro camera shutters, which seem like they might be another
choice. The rearmost element on the PC-Nikkor 35 mm f2.8 is 22 mm
diameter. What other leaf shutters would fit (Alphax, Rapax, Acme, et
al)? Better choices? Things to watch out? Any comments or suggestions
greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!


To answer y'r question re shutters, there's nothing wrong with Ilex
shutters except that they have a low marked top speed that few
actually attain. The Ilex Universal is self-cocking, nominal top
speed usually 1/100; the Ilex Acme is cock-and-shoot, nominal top
speed 1/150 or 1/200, I've seen both.

But and however, many of the used Ilex Universals, especially #3s,
came from oscilloscope cameras. O'scope camera Ilexes are usually NOT
threaded externally at the rear. They can be used with front-mounted
lenses, but can't be put on board with a lens in shutter. Putting on
board requires an externally threaded flange that screws into the back
of the shutter and clamps the board between itself and the shutter.
The flange's inner diameter is what will matter for vignetting by the
shutter. Another headache with 'scope camera Ilexes is that they all
seem to need to be overhauled.

Rapaxes are not sized to the modern Compur/Prontor/Copal standard.
Neither are Alphaxes or Betaxes or Ilexes. My choice for
front-mounting is the Copal #1. Ex-Polaroid MP-4 #1 Press is the
nicest of the inexpensive lot, but top speed is only 1/125. Generally
not too limiting, but for out-and-about shooting with my 47/5.6 SA in
#00 Prontor Press and ISO 100 film 1/125 has been very limiting.

If you're looking for an inexpensive 6x9 camera that will take wide
angle lenses, just get a 2x3 Graphic. Century or 2x3 Crown, not
Speed. Don't screw around with doing it yourself, you'll end up with
something less flexible and more costly.

If you're looking for an inexpensive w/a lens that will cover much, if
not all, of nominal 6x9, I don't think the PC Nikkor is what you want.
If using one were a good idea, we'd all do it. Also, remember, the
Nikon F flange to film distance at infinity is 46.5 mm. This is very
limiting, leaves little room for a leaf shutter behind the lens.
Shutter in front of lens will vignette unless the shutter is enormous.

If you insist on trying, set y'r PC-Nikkor up on an improvised rig and
shoot before investing much in machining etc. Remember that
impressions of sharpness on a ground glass can mislead. You want
reasonable sharpness to the edge; a test shot is the only way to find
out what the lens will do.

47/8 Ilex Acugons are in the same price range as 35/2.8 PC Nikkors,
cover around 123 mm. So do 47/8 SAs, which tend to be a little more
expensive. Everything shorter that will cover the format is much more
expensive. Longer classic wide angles that will cover 2x3, e.g.,
65/6.8 Angulon, Raptar, Leitmeyr Weitwinkel/Aristostigmat, aren't too
expensive.

Good luck,

Dan
  #18  
Old September 9th 04, 09:50 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Monaghan wrote:

interesting post, Gordon! 56x82mm (6x9cm)! Wow!


Before you get too excited, remember that I stated that the corners on the
ground glass were dark. I really think a smaller frame would be more
accurate, though it should cover 56 mm by 68 mm, especially stopped down. If
I had a 28 mm shift lens, that might allow for a super wide, though I don't
know if it would cover the same area. The 28 mm and 35 mm Nikkor shift lenses
are different construction optically.

That's better than I would
have expected from a 35mm shift lens, alright! Since I have one of these
35mm PC nikkors, I am going to be interested in your experiences here ;-)
Please keep us posted of progress and problems ;-)


Here is a weird and fast quick test. Take your ground glass, and hold it
against the back of a bellows (or use some tape). The place the small end of
the bellows against the back of the Nikkor shift lens. This is really
informal, but should give you the basic idea. I went a step further, and
rigged up the lens onto an AGFA 6x9 body for a quick look, though nothing
secure enough to try film yet.



Ilex shutters, from my shutter notes pages at
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/shutters.html


Thanks! Great resource.


. . . . . . . .


Ilex shutters do seem to require some caution, though they are quite
numerous. Cost is very low, though the size of the #3 is close to what I
would need. Some slight milling or turning down on a lathe would allow enough
room for mounting. Unfortunately, the most important specification I need is
still not to be found. I need the actual shutter body thickness, not
including the mounting flange. The only dimensions I have been able to find
show the total thickness.



later, Bob Fowler cautions polaroid shutters:
BEWARE! There are some Polaroid shutters that aren't
quite what they seem on the surface! Many of the Copal
Polaroid shutters for the MP-4 do not have an iris
diaphram. Some, like the 75mm Tominon, are in the
shell of a size 1 shutter, but the max iris opening is
limited to something like 17mm - smaller than a
standard size 0. Be careful when buying the Copal
Polaroid stuff sight unseen. They're GREAT shutters,
but purpose built and may not be exactly what the
doctor ordered. AFAIK, the MP-3 Polaroid stuff
(Prontor Polaroid) is all standard sized gear. A lot
of it's out there, and a lot of it needs servicing -
catch my drift?
endquote:


Okay, good to know. These are almost way too small, with only a 30 mm Iris
opening, though the thin body width would allow for an easy mounting. If I
wanted to make a 645 version, this might work well.



another "cheap big shutter secret option" is the 'scope cameras,
I looked at these for the 75mm f/1.9 lenses, but these are
setup for macro work at extension, and don't cover MF well
let alone LF 4x5" but you do get a large LF shutter very cheaply!


Obviously, I have some more information searching to do.



. . . . . . . . . . .

I used the Raptar lens mount to fabricate an adaptor for a 480 mm f9 Ronar
(I'm partial to German optics, my Ronars all seem to have either 0.75 mm
or 1.0 mm pitch threads on the mounting thread. I cut the threads on a
SothBend 10 K usimg metric transposing gears). The 1.4" diameter (appx)
maximum shutter opening calculates to be a maximum effective lens opening
of f13.5. Graphics arts lenses, like my Ronar collection work best at f16+
( I use f22) for distant objects. I use this lens/shutter on a Calumet 45
NX, which has a 21" maximum bellows extension. The lens mount acts like a
short extension tube and I'm able to focus to slightly less than 12 feet.
No problem focussing outdoors at my f13.5 wide open setting.


More similar to what I am thinking. The Nikon bayonet mount could screw into
the shutter face, though a different faceplate might be needed. With a large
enough opening, a threaded adapter is another idea. There may be some need to
shave off some material from the shutter. Also, I am looking at reverse
mounting an Ilex #3 to avoid vignetting at larger film sizes.



Rear shutter mounts have proven quite practical for me; the modest cost of
oscillioscope camera shutters makes the whole thing work. This particular
shutter set me back $7 - NASA surplus, your tax dollars at work, I'm
afraid.


Lots of Ilex #3 shutters for under $20, and some with a lens mounted. The
threaded lens parts with the glass removed could also be used for mounting
parts, or just as templates.


end-quote:

again, I don't know if this would allow a close enough mounting due to
shutter thickness, but 1.4" of opening will presumably handle 22mm
element? ;-) So might be worth checking out?


Only if it is close enough to that rear element, which I why I am considering
reversed mounting the shutter. If I wanted to pull apart the PC-Nikkor, then
I could use a small shutter, and not have any shutter thickness issues,
though I would rather not do that. The more likely vignetting concern is the
depth of the shutter body, and the front and rear opening diameters.



pseudo xpan. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Thanks for solving one of my Nimslo 3d vs. Xpan problems with your lens
test report on the 35mm PC;


Okay, I looked into the Nimslo camera bodies a few months ago, and I read a
few RIT articles about them. However, when I actually saw one of these in
person, the construction was really bad quality. Other than an epoxy
solution, I don't think a nice looking mount could be done.


. . . . . . . . . . .

But what to do about the wide angle lens? A 30mm with center filter on the
xpan has been impossible to match cheaply - until now!!! ;-) Thanks to
your note, it appears that the nikkor 35mm PC shift lens may cover the
nimslo 3d rather well - if a shutter can be grafted for it.


The Nimslo body is also thicker than an AGFA 6x9 folder body. It would
require lots of machining to remove enough material to allow a lens mount. I
think a Nimslo body would be a poor starting point, and might not be strong
enough after removing all the metal from the front.



Now if we could just get some similar "test" results on ground glass
coverage of some of the full frame fisheye nikkors, and esp. the russian
nikkor mount offerings (peleng 17mm, zenitar 16mm etc.)? This might offer
some other interesting ultrawide opportunities for medium format and
panoramic users?


Maybe the former Soviet types of lenses, though I doubt most Nikkors would
work. I tried out one of my Nikon 28 mm lenses (not a shift lens), and it
will not cover enough to fill a 645 frame. I want to have a bayonet mount on
the front of this, but I don't think too many Nikon lenses will work that
well on it.



Hasselblad Hyper-wide 17mm? ;-)

And yes, I am still looking locally for those 17mm ultrawide cheapy
disposable truely panoramic cameras so I can salvage the lens and see how
much it covers, and how well? ;-)


I think Konica makes a disposable. I have not seen them in stores yet, though
B&H sell them.

Now that would be a fun lens to try on
MF, even if a circular fisheye on 6x6cm, it has its own shutter already
;-) just build a shim with rubber bands to hold it onto a hassy 12 back
(with easy to advance peephole back) and you have a really different
"hasselblad" hyper-wide 17mm ;-)


I am thinking closer to a 21 mm to 19 mm similar view (compared with 35 mm
cameras). That is really wide. I placed two 6x9 folders onto tripods for the
test view yesterday. The 105 mm lens gave a view out the kitchen window, that
included most of the window. Placing the PC-Nikkor in position, that lens put
the same window onto about 1/3 of the 6x9 image plane . . . quite a huge
difference. Even if I need to crop down the image area, it will still be a
very wide view.

A completely different, and maybe strange idea, is to use a Polaroid
Automatic shutter. One issue is what to do about the auto exposure, since the
sensor eye controls that. I would also need to cut the hole in the guillotine
shutter plate larger to avoid vignetting. If I could figure out how to
control the light reaching the sensor eye, or how it changes with
adjustments, then that might provide another possible solution. I would
rather control the exposure time manually, though an aperture priority camera
might be okay in usage.

Definitely lots of things to still consider. Thanks for the help.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!

  #19  
Old September 9th 04, 09:50 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Monaghan wrote:

interesting post, Gordon! 56x82mm (6x9cm)! Wow!


Before you get too excited, remember that I stated that the corners on the
ground glass were dark. I really think a smaller frame would be more
accurate, though it should cover 56 mm by 68 mm, especially stopped down. If
I had a 28 mm shift lens, that might allow for a super wide, though I don't
know if it would cover the same area. The 28 mm and 35 mm Nikkor shift lenses
are different construction optically.

That's better than I would
have expected from a 35mm shift lens, alright! Since I have one of these
35mm PC nikkors, I am going to be interested in your experiences here ;-)
Please keep us posted of progress and problems ;-)


Here is a weird and fast quick test. Take your ground glass, and hold it
against the back of a bellows (or use some tape). The place the small end of
the bellows against the back of the Nikkor shift lens. This is really
informal, but should give you the basic idea. I went a step further, and
rigged up the lens onto an AGFA 6x9 body for a quick look, though nothing
secure enough to try film yet.



Ilex shutters, from my shutter notes pages at
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/shutters.html


Thanks! Great resource.


. . . . . . . .


Ilex shutters do seem to require some caution, though they are quite
numerous. Cost is very low, though the size of the #3 is close to what I
would need. Some slight milling or turning down on a lathe would allow enough
room for mounting. Unfortunately, the most important specification I need is
still not to be found. I need the actual shutter body thickness, not
including the mounting flange. The only dimensions I have been able to find
show the total thickness.



later, Bob Fowler cautions polaroid shutters:
BEWARE! There are some Polaroid shutters that aren't
quite what they seem on the surface! Many of the Copal
Polaroid shutters for the MP-4 do not have an iris
diaphram. Some, like the 75mm Tominon, are in the
shell of a size 1 shutter, but the max iris opening is
limited to something like 17mm - smaller than a
standard size 0. Be careful when buying the Copal
Polaroid stuff sight unseen. They're GREAT shutters,
but purpose built and may not be exactly what the
doctor ordered. AFAIK, the MP-3 Polaroid stuff
(Prontor Polaroid) is all standard sized gear. A lot
of it's out there, and a lot of it needs servicing -
catch my drift?
endquote:


Okay, good to know. These are almost way too small, with only a 30 mm Iris
opening, though the thin body width would allow for an easy mounting. If I
wanted to make a 645 version, this might work well.



another "cheap big shutter secret option" is the 'scope cameras,
I looked at these for the 75mm f/1.9 lenses, but these are
setup for macro work at extension, and don't cover MF well
let alone LF 4x5" but you do get a large LF shutter very cheaply!


Obviously, I have some more information searching to do.



. . . . . . . . . . .

I used the Raptar lens mount to fabricate an adaptor for a 480 mm f9 Ronar
(I'm partial to German optics, my Ronars all seem to have either 0.75 mm
or 1.0 mm pitch threads on the mounting thread. I cut the threads on a
SothBend 10 K usimg metric transposing gears). The 1.4" diameter (appx)
maximum shutter opening calculates to be a maximum effective lens opening
of f13.5. Graphics arts lenses, like my Ronar collection work best at f16+
( I use f22) for distant objects. I use this lens/shutter on a Calumet 45
NX, which has a 21" maximum bellows extension. The lens mount acts like a
short extension tube and I'm able to focus to slightly less than 12 feet.
No problem focussing outdoors at my f13.5 wide open setting.


More similar to what I am thinking. The Nikon bayonet mount could screw into
the shutter face, though a different faceplate might be needed. With a large
enough opening, a threaded adapter is another idea. There may be some need to
shave off some material from the shutter. Also, I am looking at reverse
mounting an Ilex #3 to avoid vignetting at larger film sizes.



Rear shutter mounts have proven quite practical for me; the modest cost of
oscillioscope camera shutters makes the whole thing work. This particular
shutter set me back $7 - NASA surplus, your tax dollars at work, I'm
afraid.


Lots of Ilex #3 shutters for under $20, and some with a lens mounted. The
threaded lens parts with the glass removed could also be used for mounting
parts, or just as templates.


end-quote:

again, I don't know if this would allow a close enough mounting due to
shutter thickness, but 1.4" of opening will presumably handle 22mm
element? ;-) So might be worth checking out?


Only if it is close enough to that rear element, which I why I am considering
reversed mounting the shutter. If I wanted to pull apart the PC-Nikkor, then
I could use a small shutter, and not have any shutter thickness issues,
though I would rather not do that. The more likely vignetting concern is the
depth of the shutter body, and the front and rear opening diameters.



pseudo xpan. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Thanks for solving one of my Nimslo 3d vs. Xpan problems with your lens
test report on the 35mm PC;


Okay, I looked into the Nimslo camera bodies a few months ago, and I read a
few RIT articles about them. However, when I actually saw one of these in
person, the construction was really bad quality. Other than an epoxy
solution, I don't think a nice looking mount could be done.


. . . . . . . . . . .

But what to do about the wide angle lens? A 30mm with center filter on the
xpan has been impossible to match cheaply - until now!!! ;-) Thanks to
your note, it appears that the nikkor 35mm PC shift lens may cover the
nimslo 3d rather well - if a shutter can be grafted for it.


The Nimslo body is also thicker than an AGFA 6x9 folder body. It would
require lots of machining to remove enough material to allow a lens mount. I
think a Nimslo body would be a poor starting point, and might not be strong
enough after removing all the metal from the front.



Now if we could just get some similar "test" results on ground glass
coverage of some of the full frame fisheye nikkors, and esp. the russian
nikkor mount offerings (peleng 17mm, zenitar 16mm etc.)? This might offer
some other interesting ultrawide opportunities for medium format and
panoramic users?


Maybe the former Soviet types of lenses, though I doubt most Nikkors would
work. I tried out one of my Nikon 28 mm lenses (not a shift lens), and it
will not cover enough to fill a 645 frame. I want to have a bayonet mount on
the front of this, but I don't think too many Nikon lenses will work that
well on it.



Hasselblad Hyper-wide 17mm? ;-)

And yes, I am still looking locally for those 17mm ultrawide cheapy
disposable truely panoramic cameras so I can salvage the lens and see how
much it covers, and how well? ;-)


I think Konica makes a disposable. I have not seen them in stores yet, though
B&H sell them.

Now that would be a fun lens to try on
MF, even if a circular fisheye on 6x6cm, it has its own shutter already
;-) just build a shim with rubber bands to hold it onto a hassy 12 back
(with easy to advance peephole back) and you have a really different
"hasselblad" hyper-wide 17mm ;-)


I am thinking closer to a 21 mm to 19 mm similar view (compared with 35 mm
cameras). That is really wide. I placed two 6x9 folders onto tripods for the
test view yesterday. The 105 mm lens gave a view out the kitchen window, that
included most of the window. Placing the PC-Nikkor in position, that lens put
the same window onto about 1/3 of the 6x9 image plane . . . quite a huge
difference. Even if I need to crop down the image area, it will still be a
very wide view.

A completely different, and maybe strange idea, is to use a Polaroid
Automatic shutter. One issue is what to do about the auto exposure, since the
sensor eye controls that. I would also need to cut the hole in the guillotine
shutter plate larger to avoid vignetting. If I could figure out how to
control the light reaching the sensor eye, or how it changes with
adjustments, then that might provide another possible solution. I would
rather control the exposure time manually, though an aperture priority camera
might be okay in usage.

Definitely lots of things to still consider. Thanks for the help.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!

  #20  
Old September 9th 04, 09:55 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"David J. Littleboy" wrote:

"Bob Monaghan" wrote:

Hasselblad Hyper-wide 17mm? ;-)

And yes, I am still looking locally for those 17mm ultrawide cheapy
disposable truely panoramic cameras so I can salvage the lens and see how
much it covers, and how well? ;-) Now that would be a fun lens to try on
MF, even if a circular fisheye on 6x6cm, it has its own shutter already
;-) just build a shim with rubber bands to hold it onto a hassy 12 back
(with easy to advance peephole back) and you have a really different
"hasselblad" hyper-wide 17mm ;-)


http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/33533884/large

While you guys are talking, some of us are out taking pictures: stitching
two frames together isn't all that much of a pain.


I know . . . I have been doing that a bit. One way is to shift this same lens
on 35 mm body in one direction and take one shot, then shift it the opposite
direction and take the second shot. Both frames then overlap a bit, and I run
them through Panorama Maker 3, and clean up in PhotoShop. Not a bad solution,
though it restricts one to a tripod only shot.

I would like to be out doing more pictures at the moment, even for work. This
little project takes up very little time. Unfortunately, I am working on a
music CD package currently, so most of my time is on print design currently. I
have a few exhibits coming up, and no images prepared yet, so that is the next
photography opportunity.

Lunch hour, or late at night, I like the little break of this project, and
this news group. You guys are a great wealth of knowledge.

Glad to here you are out taking more pictures. Thanks for sharing the nice
image.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!

 




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 Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Focal plane vs. leaf shutters in MF SLRs KM Medium Format Photography Equipment 724 December 7th 04 09:58 AM
zone system test with filter on lens? Phil Lamerton In The Darkroom 35 June 4th 04 02:40 AM
Name of photographer who used slow slit shutter? Daniel Kelly \(AKA Jack\) General Photography Techniques 6 April 6th 04 01:55 PM
camera ISO range questions Chris In The Darkroom 3 February 7th 04 10:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.