Sinar Norma, backwards step from P?

<p>After years of using my 4x5 Sinar P I've come to realize that for the urban and architectural work I'm doing I only ever use rise/fall and shift and the wonderful assymetrical movements are totally wasted on me, and I'm a bit fed up with the high centre of gravity, so I'm seriously considering going backwards in time and swapping it for a Norma.<br>

I work out of my car and love the modular Sinar system so please don't try to talk me into a field camera or an Arca Swiss or whatever. Also I tried the F and thought it was garbage, so forget that also.<br>

Two questions;<br>

1. I have a full compliment of Sinar accessories including bag and plain bellows, compendium shade, extension rails, etc. and will be using lenses from 65mm to 250mm, so will all these bits and pieces be backwards compatible? Can I carry on using the 65mm with a flat lens board?<br>

2. Did the Norma vary over the years? I would like to get the best I can and do not know what to look for, presumably the more recent the better, but I would like to know if it evolved over the years.</p>

Those accessories you mention will all fit, yes.<br>I also think the 65 mm will work on a flat board (don't have a 65 mm myself).<br><br>Unless i'm very much mistaken (i have never heard of, nor seen a Norma evolution), all Normas are created equal.

<p>Why go backwards? You could get an F2 and have a superior camera IMO.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

<p>I wouldn't try to convince you to buy a field camera, but you nearly describe it with what you want. No need for rise/fall/shift, and not liking the high center. The high center is pretty much the norm with these technical cameras. I would also think the Norma would be a step backwards, though probably lighter. </p>

<p>Sorry to disagree with Michael, but ...<br>

I think you'll certainly need rises and swings for urban and architectural work.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

<p>I worked professionally with Norma and P, when it came to slimming down my camera arsenal, I unhesitatingly sold the P and kept the Normas (4x5 and 8x10). All accessories will fit either model (apart from exposure meter attachments for rear standard), I was not impressed with the 2-way "gearshift" with P (one way for swing, the other way for tilt IIRC), which I thought not terribly robust. Normas are as tough as old boots, if you buy one in good order, it will last forever unless brutally abused (but I don't think there is much difference in terms of center of gravity, although I am sure a Norma is lighter overall). A Norma will not of course stay in focus when you apply tilt. 65mm lens on a flat panel is no problem if you reposition the rail clamp and bring the two standards close together (or even just move them together by means of the coarse focus racks). There are of course cosmetic differences (green or black lens boards, chrome or black rails).</p>

<p>Michael, I thought I made it clear I use loads of rise, some fall and some swing, most field cameras are poor for this with wide lenses. I already have a Technika for simple stuff but I find it poor for serious architectural work, where the Sinar really shines.<br>

Leigh, I know the F2 is better than the F, bit it's not by much, and I lived with the F for 18 months as a second lightweight camera, and I stand by my comment that it is garbage. Still has the high centre of gravity, appallingly sticky and imprecise rise and fall, poor plastic locks, very happy when I sold it.<br>

David, thank you, you've rather confirmed what I wanted to know. I do think the centre of gravity is lower because the rail clamp/tripod mount is so much shorter than the P or F. I was hoping to keep the standards either side of the rail clamp, and if I can do that by means of the focus racks I will, certainly on the P I did not like unbalancing the whole rig by putting both standards on the same side. I'm glad to hear the Norma is lighter as well.</p>

<p>Mark, a Norma with standard bellows and flat lensboard is near 65mm... I don`t have any 65mm myself but I`d be surprised if it doesn`t work. With a bag bellows, you can gain another 10mm for a 55mm lens but the issue is that the "tilting" loking knobs will be in the same rotation way, making them useless. Anyway, for a full and smoother operation, a recessed lensboard is always preferable.</p>

<p>Yes, the Norma have slightly varied over the years; from what I remember, at least the "older", "problematic" style tightening system in the focusing knobs was modified to a less elegant, more functional version. I don`t remember if other parts were modified, maybe the levers, cosmetically.</p>

<p>I like so much the Normas. They are not "the best", but are lighter, well made, very beautiful and functional. I have many other "better" cameras but the Norma is the one that I take with lesser laziness (it is a Technika if I`m outdoors). I think the difficult thing here is to find one in really good shape, without the need of being serviced; grease on them use to get dry or stucked, making the knobs so hard to move. Many are sold with missing parts, with broken spirit levels (not really an issue so it`s a standard size, easy to find), and other typical issues on LF cameras.</p>

<p>If you have a P you may miss that yaw-free design.</p>

<p>I have just re-read your post. <em>"Can I carry on using the 65mm with a flat lens board?"</em><br /> With a 65mm lens on a flat lensboard and a "standard" bellows, you`ll probably reach infinity focus. For movements operation, a bag bellows must be used. And as mentioned above, a recessed lens board is always preferable.</p>

<p>Thank you Jose. I almost always use a bag bellows, as my most used lenses are my 65, 75, 90, 121mm. I will keep a look out for the variation in controls. I am not bothered by losing the yaw-free design as I my camera is almost always level for my current work. Thanks for your advice, Mark</p>

<p>Having taken on board this advice and looked a bit harder I have found some variations in the Norma over the years. The earliest had only a spring back, not an international back, but this was changed early on in production.Also the bellows changed from a tapered style to a straight bellows at some point in production. As Jose says, there were variations in the control knobs and as David says, variations in colour of finish in either green or black and some are using later black rails.<br />Having at last looked at a few examples I think I'll have to be very wary buying one as the ones I looked at superficially looked good but were totally worn out mechanically and I'm not interested in restoring a camera, I want to use it. Even the youngest is pre 1970 and the earliest 1947! so we're talking 65 to 42 years old and most were used professionally for much of their life. I've pretty well decided I'll keep going with my P until I can find a really good Norma to replace it. Also it was quite noticible how much lighter and lower the Norma was than my P and the quality as I expected was so much higher than a Sinar F it was hard to believe they were made by the same company, the F I used felt like it was made by Fisher-Price, but according to my conversation with several professional dealers they were built down to a price, not up to a quality standard regardeless of price as the Norma and P were.<br />Thanks everyone for your advice.</p>

Some of those variations you mention are not Norma variations, but later ones (black rails first appeared with the P2. Straight bellows with the P. Black lensboards, black Copal shutter and black - and tall - rail clamp too.)<br>That you can see those used on/with a Norma demonstrates how 'compatible' the bits in the Sinar system are across quite a few decades.<br><br>My view on the F is that it's not a camera per se, but a lucky coincidence that happens when you add auxillary standards and extra bellows to your kit to extend the close up/long lens capability of your P and add a sunshade with support. Before you know it, you also have an F.

Mark,

Please could you let me know how to date my Norma?

Thank you

Ian

<p>Ian, the only way I know is to contact Sinar head office with the serial number, they are quite helpful.</p>

<p>Q.G. is right, most variations seen in the market are added-ons. The original veriations are just a very few ones; I know about the locks mentioned above, same for slight differences on the rails -always in aluminum finish- (earlier ones were easier to break in the connections), and I`m not sure if the look of certain levers have also changed.</p>

<p>I think I have seen the "original" spring back on a 5x7" Norma. Mine has the international (but still "original" one).</p>

<p>I think there were both tappered and straight "original" bellows (tappered for the camera and straight as an accessory).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"... were totally worn out mechanically and I'm not interested in restoring a camera... "</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Restoring a Norma is not that hard, but requires some knowledge and specialized tools. If you`re not used to camera restoration, I`d advice you to forget it. It`s so easy to damage parts while dismantling, and not that easy to adjust and calibrate it in the assembling. There are not replacement parts available, so you must made them by yourself or looking for a third party, compatible source.</p>

<p>Don`t know how much a Norma in 100% working condition is, but sending an old one for CLA will have a cost. Maybe you should keep looking and waiting for a good one, or cool down yourself and look for another model. What about a F2?</p>

<p>Mark, Thank you.</p>

<p><em>Having at last looked at a few examples I think I'll have to be very wary buying one ...</em><br>

Just to cheer you up - I bought my current Norma about 15 years ago for IIRC £300 from a well-known second-hand photo dealer in Sussex (now out of business). In the course of selling me the 4x5 Norma, the clerk asked me if I'd like an 8x10 "format changing kit" for £99 - I said yes.<br>

A few days later a courier driver came staggering under the weight of a huge Sinar marine ply metal-bound outfit case. On opening it, I found the 4x5 Sinar I was expecting, in great condition, and also a COMPLETE 8x10 Sinar with the addition of an 8x10/4x5 reducing back - all for the aforesaid £99. Presumably they just couldn't sell it so had marked it right down. I could have sold the reducing back and had a free camera plus enough change for box of film, but I kept it, and I don't think I'll ever sell it.</p>

<p>David, I just love those deals. After I bought my 4x5 P I found an 8x10 conversion set at a Brisbane professional dealer for $249 and the guy told me they had very little value in Australia. When it arrived it had the 8x10 back, standard and bag bellows in original boxes, it had never been used! It also included six film holders. Frankly it was worth too much to use, particularly when I have a Burke and James for the rare times I use 8x10, so I could not help myself an split the kit up and sold each part seperately on Fleabay, got a grand total of $1800, paid for a Rolleiflex 6006 plus 40mm and 80mm lenses, and a 65mm grandagon for my 4x5. Still kept the 8x10 film holders.Even some long standing dealers have no idea what stuffs worth in this current market. It does not always work in our favour but it's lovely when it does.<br>

Darkroom stuffs even better, I recently got a Durst L1200 with all accessories from a hospital for $99 and an Omega d5 with Ilford mutigrade head for $79 from a lab shutting down. So happy digital created all these opportunities for the luddites amongst us.</p>

<p>I own and use both systems: Sinar Norma Expert with 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 backs and Sinar P with same 3 backs.<br>

Agree with Mark: Norma is better made. The Norma's 8x10 back has much lower centre of gravitation than the P's one. The rail clamp is almost twice lower than P's one.<br>

The 65mm lens does not work with Norma 4x5 standard bellows when using a flat lens board. (I use Schneider 5.6/65 SA multicoating). But it works at infinity with bag bellows, however both standards gets together very tight (the main issue) and you have to fight for every millimetre. <br>

BTW, 90mm and 121mm lenses work on both Norma & P with 5x7 and 8x10 backs very well when using standard conical bellows.</p>

 

<p><em>The 65mm lens does not work with Norma 4x5 standard bellows when using a flat lens board.</em><br>

It sure doesn't! Even a 150mm lens at infinity is constricted in terms of possible movements by the standard bellows - bag bellows works much better.</p>

<p>Actually, I hardly ever use the standard bellows with my P, bag bellows for everything from 65-180mm, only use the standard with my 250mm.</p>

<p>I've had a couple of opportunities to become familiar with Sinar Norma cameras. A friend bought one a few months ago, and I recently purchased a late manufacture Sinar Norma 8x10 camera for a great price at a swap meet. Being machined as they are, Normas are elegant, precise cameras. They are certainly a step up from Sinar F cameras, and from a practical point of view, one might draw the same conclusion about the "P" series cameras.</p>

<p>Having the 8x10, I only have the "4x5" front standard, so I was interested putting together some sort of 4x5 conversion kit. Individually sold rear Norma standards are pretty rare, especially in black. (Versus gray or brown.) So, I found and bought a rear F standard on EBay. It's clearly not the build quality of the front standard, but I think that it will work fine. It also gives me the depth of field gauging of the post Norma models.</p>

<p>Ironically with this combination (F rear, Norma front), the front and rear standards can be brought physically closer together than with either an all "F" or all "Norma" combination, and that's using the low profile, Norma clamp. In practical terms though, the minimum distance is limited by the thickness of the Sinar bag bellows to that which can be obtained with the all "F" camera. It's about 50mm, and this means one can use a 47mm Super Angulon with a flat lens board.</p>

<p>Being somewhat vintage myself, had I been better acquainted with these cameras, I would have purchased one years ago.</p>