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
  #31  
Old September 10th 04, 12:53 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


there aren't any 28mm hyperwide lenses covering 6x9cm (or even 6x7cm with
more conservative limits and w/o center filter?), and even 35mm coverage
(with an APO grandagon or biogon) is going to set you back kilobuck(s) ;-)

the problem is likely you need to custom build or adapt a camera body to
allow recessed shutter, and machine up lens mount adapter, all of which
isn't cheap or easy for average person ;-(

the second big attraction to me is from experiences with adapting nikon
rear lens cap to bronica body cap. Suddenly, all my 35mm nikkors are
closeup lenses, from wide angle perspective to telephotos far from
skittish critters etc., including micronikkors ;-) So an adapter from
nikkors for a panoramic nimslo 3D (or the plasticky version, easier to cut
as I noted) would be a nifty item, possibly opening up use of rectilinear
fisheyes (lots of excess coverage), my 12mm fisheye (covers a lot more
than 35mm frame ;-), plus as Gordon noted, many telephotos have excess
coverage.

and as gordon noted, I do have the lens, and if an adapter would not harm
the lens but let me use its full potential for panoramics too, then that
would be a double reason to use it. ;-)

but again, the big draw here for me is that there aren't any 35mm lenses
for many 6x7cm etc. systems, so custom building a body to use a $200-ish
35mm PC nikkor would be the only way to get there other than the APO
grandagon Rodenstock, and for the 28mm, not even that ;-)

regards bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
  #32  
Old September 10th 04, 12:53 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


there aren't any 28mm hyperwide lenses covering 6x9cm (or even 6x7cm with
more conservative limits and w/o center filter?), and even 35mm coverage
(with an APO grandagon or biogon) is going to set you back kilobuck(s) ;-)

the problem is likely you need to custom build or adapt a camera body to
allow recessed shutter, and machine up lens mount adapter, all of which
isn't cheap or easy for average person ;-(

the second big attraction to me is from experiences with adapting nikon
rear lens cap to bronica body cap. Suddenly, all my 35mm nikkors are
closeup lenses, from wide angle perspective to telephotos far from
skittish critters etc., including micronikkors ;-) So an adapter from
nikkors for a panoramic nimslo 3D (or the plasticky version, easier to cut
as I noted) would be a nifty item, possibly opening up use of rectilinear
fisheyes (lots of excess coverage), my 12mm fisheye (covers a lot more
than 35mm frame ;-), plus as Gordon noted, many telephotos have excess
coverage.

and as gordon noted, I do have the lens, and if an adapter would not harm
the lens but let me use its full potential for panoramics too, then that
would be a double reason to use it. ;-)

but again, the big draw here for me is that there aren't any 35mm lenses
for many 6x7cm etc. systems, so custom building a body to use a $200-ish
35mm PC nikkor would be the only way to get there other than the APO
grandagon Rodenstock, and for the 28mm, not even that ;-)

regards bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
  #33  
Old September 10th 04, 03:34 AM
jjs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

[...]
If you are really, really, really curious, I can upload some EPS files for
you. Those are the mock-up files I am using in Adobe Illustrator to
investigate spacing and dimensions. I could also e-mail them to you.


Of course I am interested, and of course I have the Adobe suite. I'd like to
see your work. I am john at stafford dot net


  #34  
Old September 10th 04, 03:34 AM
jjs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

[...]
If you are really, really, really curious, I can upload some EPS files for
you. Those are the mock-up files I am using in Adobe Illustrator to
investigate spacing and dimensions. I could also e-mail them to you.


Of course I am interested, and of course I have the Adobe suite. I'd like to
see your work. I am john at stafford dot net


  #35  
Old September 10th 04, 05:54 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

jjs wrote:

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

[...]
If you are really, really, really curious, I can upload some EPS files for
you. Those are the mock-up files I am using in Adobe Illustrator to
investigate spacing and dimensions. I could also e-mail them to you.


Of course I am interested, and of course I have the Adobe suite. I'd like to
see your work. I am john at stafford dot net


Okay, you should have two EPS files in your e-mail soon. Let me know if you
think of any different ideas, or directions to explore.

Ciao!

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


  #36  
Old September 10th 04, 05:54 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

jjs wrote:

"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

[...]
If you are really, really, really curious, I can upload some EPS files for
you. Those are the mock-up files I am using in Adobe Illustrator to
investigate spacing and dimensions. I could also e-mail them to you.


Of course I am interested, and of course I have the Adobe suite. I'd like to
see your work. I am john at stafford dot net


Okay, you should have two EPS files in your e-mail soon. Let me know if you
think of any different ideas, or directions to explore.

Ciao!

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


  #37  
Old September 10th 04, 06:24 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Monaghan wrote:

there aren't any 28mm hyperwide lenses covering 6x9cm (or even 6x7cm with
more conservative limits and w/o center filter?), and even 35mm coverage
(with an APO grandagon or biogon) is going to set you back kilobuck(s) ;-)


Okay, good points. I had not thought of comparing this to same focal length
lenses. However, the Grandagon will cover a larger area, which allows for
more movements. Whenever this device gets finished, I will go rent or borrow
the PC-Nikkor 28 mm, and try that out. I have only rented one a couple times,
and while the shift amounts are similar to the 35 mm, I don't know if the
coverage will match.



the problem is likely you need to custom build or adapt a camera body to
allow recessed shutter, and machine up lens mount adapter, all of which
isn't cheap or easy for average person ;-(


The aluminium is actually very low cost, and very stable with T6 treatment
(or similar grade). I have a couple mini lathe and a mini milling machine
available any time I want to use them. These are left over tools from when I
was making custom parts for road racing motorcycles. I would not consider
myself a machinist, though when the design is simple enough, I have no
trouble making something.

My hope is for a very simple design that can be repeated. When that happens,
it would allow more than just one to be built. Obviously, someone with a CNC
could probably knock one off fairly quickly. There are many machine shops in
my area, most near $50 to $70 an hour. It should take only one hour for a
simple design, so I don't think that is expensive either.



the second big attraction to me is from experiences with adapting nikon
rear lens cap to bronica body cap. Suddenly, all my 35mm nikkors are
closeup lenses, from wide angle perspective to telephotos far from
skittish critters etc., including micronikkors ;-)


Thanks for sharing that. It might make an easy comparison piece, or test rig.

So an adapter from
nikkors for a panoramic nimslo 3D (or the plasticky version, easier to cut
as I noted) would be a nifty item, possibly opening up use of rectilinear
fisheyes (lots of excess coverage), my 12mm fisheye (covers a lot more
than 35mm frame ;-), plus as Gordon noted, many telephotos have excess
coverage.


I think a few of the Nikon telephoto lenses might cover 645 frame. However,
many of those have a fairly large rear element. Another issue is that as you
focus closer, many of those same telephoto lenses move the rear element quite
a distance further from the film plane. It would seem that vignetting might
be more of a trouble than coverage.

This actually makes me think that an even larger shutter, like an Ilex #4
might be better. I don't have the body thickness measurement for an Ilex #4,
so I don't know if it would fit.



and as gordon noted, I do have the lens, and if an adapter would not harm
the lens but let me use its full potential for panoramics too, then that
would be a double reason to use it. ;-)


Any other large shutters I should consider? I know a Copal #3 would do it,
though it is much more expensive. Also, a Copal #3 is a very thick shutter
body, meaning I would have to fabricate a custom body to hold the film, which
I am trying to avoid. Maybe an Ilex #4, or something similar?



but again, the big draw here for me is that there aren't any 35mm lenses
for many 6x7cm etc. systems, so custom building a body to use a $200-ish
35mm PC nikkor would be the only way to get there other than the APO
grandagon Rodenstock, and for the 28mm, not even that ;-)


Okay, let's say closer to $300 for the PC-Nikkor 35 mm f2.8 (the 28 mm
version is much more). Those Ilex shutters seem to go for near $25 (or less),
though might need some maintenance. The AGFA 6x9 folder is a $10 to $20 item.
Blocks of aluminium, or even a little brass, and some fasteners, maybe
another $30. A Nikon extension ring, or a broken Nikon body, needs to be
scavenged for a lens mount bayonet, though should be under $25. Add in some
misc. costs, or an hour of machine shop work, and everything should be
possible for under $500. Obviously, I am not counting my time.

Possible problems: too much light fall-off, limiting coverage area, or
requiring a centre filter to compensate (centre filter would be more expense,
though a film mask to smaller size would be another solution); large shutter
might unbalance camera, making hand held shots tougher; adapter solution
needs to easy allow access for shutter maintenance, or removal; viewfinder
solution could be difficult, or only simple wire frame; external rangefinder
needs to be used to set distance, with the hope that the markings on the
Nikkor lens are close to accurate; single shutter plane might not block
enough light between exposures, causing film fogging unless lens cap is
quickly put back in place.

Ciao!

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



regards bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************





  #38  
Old September 10th 04, 06:24 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Monaghan wrote:

there aren't any 28mm hyperwide lenses covering 6x9cm (or even 6x7cm with
more conservative limits and w/o center filter?), and even 35mm coverage
(with an APO grandagon or biogon) is going to set you back kilobuck(s) ;-)


Okay, good points. I had not thought of comparing this to same focal length
lenses. However, the Grandagon will cover a larger area, which allows for
more movements. Whenever this device gets finished, I will go rent or borrow
the PC-Nikkor 28 mm, and try that out. I have only rented one a couple times,
and while the shift amounts are similar to the 35 mm, I don't know if the
coverage will match.



the problem is likely you need to custom build or adapt a camera body to
allow recessed shutter, and machine up lens mount adapter, all of which
isn't cheap or easy for average person ;-(


The aluminium is actually very low cost, and very stable with T6 treatment
(or similar grade). I have a couple mini lathe and a mini milling machine
available any time I want to use them. These are left over tools from when I
was making custom parts for road racing motorcycles. I would not consider
myself a machinist, though when the design is simple enough, I have no
trouble making something.

My hope is for a very simple design that can be repeated. When that happens,
it would allow more than just one to be built. Obviously, someone with a CNC
could probably knock one off fairly quickly. There are many machine shops in
my area, most near $50 to $70 an hour. It should take only one hour for a
simple design, so I don't think that is expensive either.



the second big attraction to me is from experiences with adapting nikon
rear lens cap to bronica body cap. Suddenly, all my 35mm nikkors are
closeup lenses, from wide angle perspective to telephotos far from
skittish critters etc., including micronikkors ;-)


Thanks for sharing that. It might make an easy comparison piece, or test rig.

So an adapter from
nikkors for a panoramic nimslo 3D (or the plasticky version, easier to cut
as I noted) would be a nifty item, possibly opening up use of rectilinear
fisheyes (lots of excess coverage), my 12mm fisheye (covers a lot more
than 35mm frame ;-), plus as Gordon noted, many telephotos have excess
coverage.


I think a few of the Nikon telephoto lenses might cover 645 frame. However,
many of those have a fairly large rear element. Another issue is that as you
focus closer, many of those same telephoto lenses move the rear element quite
a distance further from the film plane. It would seem that vignetting might
be more of a trouble than coverage.

This actually makes me think that an even larger shutter, like an Ilex #4
might be better. I don't have the body thickness measurement for an Ilex #4,
so I don't know if it would fit.



and as gordon noted, I do have the lens, and if an adapter would not harm
the lens but let me use its full potential for panoramics too, then that
would be a double reason to use it. ;-)


Any other large shutters I should consider? I know a Copal #3 would do it,
though it is much more expensive. Also, a Copal #3 is a very thick shutter
body, meaning I would have to fabricate a custom body to hold the film, which
I am trying to avoid. Maybe an Ilex #4, or something similar?



but again, the big draw here for me is that there aren't any 35mm lenses
for many 6x7cm etc. systems, so custom building a body to use a $200-ish
35mm PC nikkor would be the only way to get there other than the APO
grandagon Rodenstock, and for the 28mm, not even that ;-)


Okay, let's say closer to $300 for the PC-Nikkor 35 mm f2.8 (the 28 mm
version is much more). Those Ilex shutters seem to go for near $25 (or less),
though might need some maintenance. The AGFA 6x9 folder is a $10 to $20 item.
Blocks of aluminium, or even a little brass, and some fasteners, maybe
another $30. A Nikon extension ring, or a broken Nikon body, needs to be
scavenged for a lens mount bayonet, though should be under $25. Add in some
misc. costs, or an hour of machine shop work, and everything should be
possible for under $500. Obviously, I am not counting my time.

Possible problems: too much light fall-off, limiting coverage area, or
requiring a centre filter to compensate (centre filter would be more expense,
though a film mask to smaller size would be another solution); large shutter
might unbalance camera, making hand held shots tougher; adapter solution
needs to easy allow access for shutter maintenance, or removal; viewfinder
solution could be difficult, or only simple wire frame; external rangefinder
needs to be used to set distance, with the hope that the markings on the
Nikkor lens are close to accurate; single shutter plane might not block
enough light between exposures, causing film fogging unless lens cap is
quickly put back in place.

Ciao!

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



regards bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************





  #39  
Old September 10th 04, 06:53 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Monaghan wrote:

see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/polaroidtest.html polaroid lens specs by
models, hacking EE100s range and so on. there are some hacker's guides to
the polaroid cameras (SX-70..) online. Most of them have very simple light
meter controls, easy to rework, replacing CdS sensor with potentiometer of
desired range, or ND filters over sensor, and so on (typically
lighten-darken is a 2 1/2 stop range on many models).


Okay, maybe the potentiometer idea, and a marked scale. The big benefit would
be the 1/1200 fastest shutter. The downside is the shutter part of a 250
Automatic is almost as big as the AGFA 6x9 folder body, so it would look a
little bulky. Fitting the battery could be tough as well, and add even more
bulk, or unbalance the camera. I am still leaning more towards using a leaf
shutter solution.

I picked up a
captiva awhile back to do some hacking, but turned up a bellows leak, so
now a parts camera. But the idea of replacing the polaroid film holder
with a MF back, creating a compact autofocus MF camera, was a passing
interest ;-) Ditto, I keep thinking of adapting a polaroid 250 style
camera to a 4x5" film holder, and ending up with an auto-exposure LF kit
that folds up into a jacket pocket ;-) (mf/budgetlf.html ;-).


You must wear a very large jacket. The 250 Automatic is a large camera body.
While it is smaller than a 110 Pathfinder, it is actually somewhat heavy.
Everyone will know when you are using one, since they are tough to miss. The
pack film film area compared to the Polaroid 545 holder film area is not much
of a difference, so I don't know if all that work would be of much benefit.
The lenses on the various Pathfinder models are better, and perhaps why those
more often become 4x5 conversions, like the Littmann 45, the Four Designs
cameras, or a few others.



So many ideas, so little time ;-)


Pick one, and go with it until it is finished. It is easy to get too many
ideas, or add too much complexity. While tilt or shift might seem to be nice
additions to a project, the added complexity of construction could delay the
final outcome. Complexity could also make a camera a pain to actually use, or
simply add too much weight and bulk. An example is that I wanted a camera
that I could easily carry, and use for hand held shots; those needs direct me
to a simple and compact solution. I also considered that while I might use
shift hand held, I doubt I would use tilt.

Ciao!

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

  #40  
Old September 11th 04, 02:41 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


some good points again; try to avoid larger shutters, as they get both
thicker, heavier, and much harder to find cheaply ;-(

you might look into reverse -T mount adapters for nikon and others, this
would make your setup universal, not just for Nikon, but canon and other
oddball lenses (their tilt/shift comes instantly to mind..). the reverse T
takes the nikon lens and ends in a T-mount thread, such that it can go
onto T-mount bellows. That solves your nikon extension tube to X problem,
but universally, for all 35mm kits where reverse T is available. Now you
just need a ring threaded to take the T-mount to go to your shutter
mounting threads.

One non-trivial point here is the T-mount lenses are 54mm (as are my
topcor UV) lens registration, IIRC. Not only would the short and longer
telephotos also likely work to MF coverage, but you might get pretty good
coverage from wider angle older Tmounts with excess coverage (lots cheaper
than other shift lenses), yes, not as much as the shift lenses, but
perhaps enough to cover 645 or ?? Ditto, the fisheyes might work?

just a thought - ;-)

bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
 




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 10:07 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.