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
  #1  
Old September 8th 04, 08:23 PM
Gordon Moat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Leaf Shutter questions for project camera

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!

  #2  
Old September 9th 04, 12:29 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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

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

quoting the highly regarded Richard Knoppow
My experience with Ilex shutters is that they are practically
bulletproof although not always very accurate. Steve Grimes thinks the
very early ones, with the small speed setting dial at the top, are dogs
and should be avoided. Later rim set types can all be brought back to
life.
end-quote

and a later posting cautions:
I responded once recommending Steve Grimes but maybe wasn't clear.
Its not an easy swap. For one thing there was no such thing as
standardized shutter threads when this lens was made. Each make had
its own set of dimentions and threads. In fact, the Ilex shutters used
by Kodak had special threads different from Ilex's standard line.
endquote

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:

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!

quoting again same URL:
Last week another oscilloscope camera arrived in my mail, a Tektronix
Model
12. This had another Ilex #3 and an (essentially useless) 75 mm
"Oscillo-Raptar" lens. These Ilex shutters are really reliable mechanisms,
the most I've ever had to do on one is lube the escapement - 30 minute
job.
The 75mm lens was mounted in a pair of 3/8" wall, 3" diameter aluminum
tubing sections; one end already 1.75 x 52tpi to mate with the shutter.
Tektonix evidently uses first rate material for these lens mounts; this
stuff was lovely to machine.

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.

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.
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?

pseudo xpan
if you want to consider an xpan style camera, the Nimslo 3D camera (was
$225 for metal body stereo camera) is often cheap used ($20-ish+) and
provides an metal (flat) film channel 24x72mm long (vs. 64.5mm for xpan,
so longer and wider with same lens etc.) see sample 24x72mm photos at
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/photofile-c/nimslo-1.jpg by Andrew Davidhazy of
RIT fame on http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-nimslo.html This URL jpeg
shows a nimslo 3d modified to take a leaf shutter mounted lens
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/photofile-b/nimslo-12.jpg - no focal plane
shutter, unfortunately, but the camera body is relatively thin as a
result. There was a cheaper plastic 3d camera later version, easier to
cut/work?


nimslo wide lens tip- Thanks!

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

a 90mm angulon can reportedly cover up to 6x18cm (not a typo, see Roger
Hicks dual ensign 620 "Longfellow" camera in Brit. Jrnl of Photogr. (or
his MF & LF Handbook, IIRC). This is a rather modest cost wide angle lens
(best stopped well down obviously) on 4x5", so overkill on Nimslo 3d
(still wider 72mm vs 64.5mm on xpan, so wider image coverage and 6x7cm
enlarger needed etc.).

And you can find lots of 75mm TLR lenses that will also cover the Nimslo
72mm channel stopped down, with a leaf shutter, making a wide-ish xpan
clone at very low cost possible ($20 for nimslo, taking lens from TLR with
shutter, epoxy ;-).

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.

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?

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 ;-)

grins bobm


--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
  #3  
Old September 9th 04, 12:29 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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

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

quoting the highly regarded Richard Knoppow
My experience with Ilex shutters is that they are practically
bulletproof although not always very accurate. Steve Grimes thinks the
very early ones, with the small speed setting dial at the top, are dogs
and should be avoided. Later rim set types can all be brought back to
life.
end-quote

and a later posting cautions:
I responded once recommending Steve Grimes but maybe wasn't clear.
Its not an easy swap. For one thing there was no such thing as
standardized shutter threads when this lens was made. Each make had
its own set of dimentions and threads. In fact, the Ilex shutters used
by Kodak had special threads different from Ilex's standard line.
endquote

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:

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!

quoting again same URL:
Last week another oscilloscope camera arrived in my mail, a Tektronix
Model
12. This had another Ilex #3 and an (essentially useless) 75 mm
"Oscillo-Raptar" lens. These Ilex shutters are really reliable mechanisms,
the most I've ever had to do on one is lube the escapement - 30 minute
job.
The 75mm lens was mounted in a pair of 3/8" wall, 3" diameter aluminum
tubing sections; one end already 1.75 x 52tpi to mate with the shutter.
Tektonix evidently uses first rate material for these lens mounts; this
stuff was lovely to machine.

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.

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.
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?

pseudo xpan
if you want to consider an xpan style camera, the Nimslo 3D camera (was
$225 for metal body stereo camera) is often cheap used ($20-ish+) and
provides an metal (flat) film channel 24x72mm long (vs. 64.5mm for xpan,
so longer and wider with same lens etc.) see sample 24x72mm photos at
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/photofile-c/nimslo-1.jpg by Andrew Davidhazy of
RIT fame on http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-nimslo.html This URL jpeg
shows a nimslo 3d modified to take a leaf shutter mounted lens
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/photofile-b/nimslo-12.jpg - no focal plane
shutter, unfortunately, but the camera body is relatively thin as a
result. There was a cheaper plastic 3d camera later version, easier to
cut/work?


nimslo wide lens tip- Thanks!

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

a 90mm angulon can reportedly cover up to 6x18cm (not a typo, see Roger
Hicks dual ensign 620 "Longfellow" camera in Brit. Jrnl of Photogr. (or
his MF & LF Handbook, IIRC). This is a rather modest cost wide angle lens
(best stopped well down obviously) on 4x5", so overkill on Nimslo 3d
(still wider 72mm vs 64.5mm on xpan, so wider image coverage and 6x7cm
enlarger needed etc.).

And you can find lots of 75mm TLR lenses that will also cover the Nimslo
72mm channel stopped down, with a leaf shutter, making a wide-ish xpan
clone at very low cost possible ($20 for nimslo, taking lens from TLR with
shutter, epoxy ;-).

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.

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?

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 ;-)

grins bobm


--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
  #4  
Old September 9th 04, 12:55 AM
David J. Littleboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


  #5  
Old September 9th 04, 12:55 AM
David J. Littleboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


  #6  
Old September 9th 04, 01:03 AM
Ralf R. Radermacher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David J. Littleboy wrote:

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


Speaking of which, how good is the 35 mm Sekor in general? How are
sharpness and distortion? I'm more than a little tempted but then again
I've been spoiled by the linearity of my 21 mm Contarex Biogon.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated April 29, 2004
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
  #7  
Old September 9th 04, 01:03 AM
Ralf R. Radermacher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David J. Littleboy wrote:

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


Speaking of which, how good is the 35 mm Sekor in general? How are
sharpness and distortion? I'm more than a little tempted but then again
I've been spoiled by the linearity of my 21 mm Contarex Biogon.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated April 29, 2004
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
  #8  
Old September 9th 04, 01:08 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Hi David,

nice photo, that mamiya 35mm is a nifty lens, and surprisingly cheap too!

not all of us (ahem) are as talented or have the skills and scanners to do
this kind of work though ;-)

and besides the issue of shots in which there is motion (cityscapes etc.)
there is also the problem that I still like slides for many reasons ;-)

besides, it is a lot of fun to "hack" around with cameras and lenses.

I'm doing digital, but it is digital video ;-) - I did several short video
programs for our club group this last week, duping to my TV/VCR at home
last night. One was on a high altitude ham radio balloon launch last
weekend here (13 min.) ;-) Lots of fun. But lots different from MF too ;-)

regards bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
  #9  
Old September 9th 04, 01:08 AM
Bob Monaghan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Hi David,

nice photo, that mamiya 35mm is a nifty lens, and surprisingly cheap too!

not all of us (ahem) are as talented or have the skills and scanners to do
this kind of work though ;-)

and besides the issue of shots in which there is motion (cityscapes etc.)
there is also the problem that I still like slides for many reasons ;-)

besides, it is a lot of fun to "hack" around with cameras and lenses.

I'm doing digital, but it is digital video ;-) - I did several short video
programs for our club group this last week, duping to my TV/VCR at home
last night. One was on a high altitude ham radio balloon launch last
weekend here (13 min.) ;-) Lots of fun. But lots different from MF too ;-)

regards bobm
--
************************************************** *********************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
  #10  
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



 




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 10:58 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 11:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:05 AM.


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.