modifying a bellows for tilt/shift

I am looking for a cheap way to use tilt/shift in 35mm photography without

having to but an expensive lens (I use canon eos). Does anyone have any ideas

about modifying a bellows to allow for tilt/shift. Can i not simply take one

off the rail and find a way to attatch it to a tripod??? I am aware of the

nikon pb-4 bellows with a nikon to canon lens mount adapter option. the pb-4

doesnt seem to run cheap on ebay. cant find a spiratone bellows master

anywhere. novoflex too expensive. what about medium format pc lenses with 35mm

adapter? i believe most of these lenses would be over $500 however. i want to

use my 30d digital 35mm body, not a medium format camera with a 35 back and pc

lens. any advice?- thanks

The problem is you cannot focus at infinity with a bellows, so this will only work for macro.<br>

Regards<br>

Martin

Study how homebrew monorails are usually made and build something around what you have. Go for a bagbellows if you don't want to close up too much.

If you grab a rather long lens, like something for MF cameras you might be lucky. Focussing a 80+xmm lens(head) to infinity should be no problem.

You realise that in addition to the movements provided by the bellows, you also need a lens with an image circle big enough to cover the tilts and shifts. A medium format lens will do the job, but even so you still may be reduced to a macro-only set-up with bellows. A large format lens may be the go - it will have a very generous image circle and should also still focus to infinity when on the bellows.

<p>

There are only two potential drawbacks with this idea I think: firstly, it will be large and heavy; and secondly, you *may* have trouble finding a large format lens with f=80mm or less (I'm guessing here so the details may be wrong, but 80mm should be a wide angle on LF). However, I'm sure it will work, and I believe that some large format lenses are quite reasonable in terms of price (although I have no direct experience so I may be mistaken about price).

<p>

OTOH, there is a lens made by Arsat which is tilt and shift and comes in several mounts (not sure about EF mount as it's not an electronic lens, but you could get it in Nikon F mount and use an adapter). I own the 80mm version, but it also comes as 35mm. Yes, and it actually works! See <a href="http://www.kievcamera.com/shutterbug1.html"><b>this link</b></a>.

hey thanks everyone for the advice.

I knew about the hartblei 80mm but not the arsat 35mm 2.8. The website says they both cone in Eos mounts! I knew that there would be problems focusing to infinity with a bellows t/s setup but i do a lot of macro work so i would probably just stick to that. As far as image circles go, I have read that keeping tilts/shift to a minimum would allow for a smaller circle to be effective. would this range be 100-135mm or longer for a 35mm lens??? how about using an enlarging lens or finding a specific short mount lens? would this allow focusing to infinity??? I have read that large format lenses would not give enough resolution on a 35mm frame. Any merit to this claim???? I will have to read up on homebrew monorail creation. thanks

look up lensbabies, they aren't quite the precision you may be looking for, but they do tilt and shift.

I have an old Spiratone Bellowsmaster SST (Hama-made) bellows for 35mm with full shift, tilt, rise, fall, all the movements.

Are LF lenses good enough to use on 35 mm still? Depends on the LF lens. I have one, an Industar-51, that I wouldn't use on its intended format, but to economize on film I try all of my process lenses out hung far in front of a Nikon. One standout is the 210/9 Konica Hexanon GRII, better than a 200/4 MicroNikkor AIS at 1:2 and at ~ 40' at f/8-9, f/11, f/16, and f/22. I haven't shot any of my Apo Nikkors against a lens for 35 mm still, but they're also very very good. One of these days I'll make a Nikon-to-Graflok adapter so I can shoot 35 mm with my 480/9 Apo Nikkor.

 

You mentioned wanting to use movements for "macro." I don't know whether you meant what's usually called closeup (1:10 or to to 1:1) or what's often called photomacrography (1:1 and higher). Either way, the best way to deal with a subject that's not parallel to the film plane is to manipulate the subject to make it parallel, second best is to tilt the entire camera/lens assembly. Using scheimpflug is far from best in this situation. As for landscape photography, well, that's in another universe.

 

If you're interested in photomacrography, the great classic camera stands, e.g., Nikon Multiphot, Leitz I-forget-the-name, are all about controlling illumination and vibration. The 4x5 cameras that mount on them are very basic, shoot straight ahead only. This should be a strong hint.

 

One of my neighbors has the Spiratone/Hama bellows that Mr. Jones mentioned. Pretty thing, IMO pretty useless. AFAIK, he admires it but doesn't use it. Wiggy, do you use yours very much?

 

I bought a PB-4 new in 1970, still have it and use it from time to time. IMO its movements are a cruel joke. Useless and I paid for them.

 

Basically, if you want the benefits of using a view camera you should buy one.

 

Good luck, have fun,

 

Dan

dan,

curious to know why the nikon pb-4 and spiratone bellows master are useless??? Im assuming that your comparing them to actually using a real view camera. Im sure that there is no substitute for using a view camera with 35mm, but i simply wanted to try and find a way to get some basic movements. By the way how effective are the canon ts-e lenses??? i am instested in both closeup and photomacrography.The nikon multiphot and leitz Aristophot look impressive but $$$$$. Any advice on getting a photar, luminar, or macro-nikkor and attatching to a bellows with adapter for photomacrography??? thanks

Damon, I'm no expert so take my thoughts with due care, but my impression is that the closer you focus, the greater the tilt needed to give the same angle on the plane of focus. I may be wrong here, but I had a similar idea about using tilts on macro shots but found that I couldn't crank the lens out enough, even though a similar angle with the plane of focus was obtainable at 'normal' distances.

 

I never figured out if the maths/physics predict this, or whether my impressions are just plain wrong. But if I'm right, then you would need much greater tilts when shooting macro on a set of bellows than you would normally.

 

Perhaps someone who knows about these things more can confirm or deny what I say here.

Fair questions, Damon.

 

The PB-4 offers shift and swing when mounted normally, rise and tilt when flopped on its side. It doesn't offer full movements. It will not focus a short lens to infinity. It offers variable extension, like all bellows, and quite useful focusing travel. Unlike inexpensive bellows, it has a movable rear standard so it can be used with very short lenses. The bellows itself is quite useful, but the movements it offers aren't. Same goes for the Spiratone/Hama beauty.

 

Also, there are very few short lenses with the coverage needed to take advantage of the Spiratone/Hama's movements. You might look into the Ilford Kennedy Industries Monobar, not to buy but because its interesting. The Monobar is a 35 mm view camera.

 

Before you spend money on anything else, buy a copy of Lester Lefkowitz' book The Manual of Closeup Photography. Out-of-print, available from on-line book search services such as, in alphabetical order, abebooks.com, addall.com, amazon.com

 

The Canon TS-E lenses have a very good reputation. I have no experience with them.

 

Luminars, Macro Nikkors, Photars? Vivek Iyer insists that Macro Nikkors are best. I've tried a 19 mm, it is at least as good as, possibly better than a 16 mm Luminar, clearly better than the 25 mm Luminar.

 

But there are less expensive alternatives. My 25/1.9 Cine Ektar II, shot reversed and at f/2.8, is better than any of the 25/3.5 Luminars I've tried, including the one I own, shot wide open. With all of these lenses, image quality is worse at smaller apertures than, respectively, f/2.8 and f/3.5. All this from 10:1 up.

 

My 55/2.8 MicroNikkor AIS shot reversed and at f/4 is at least as good as, at some magnifications better than, any of the 63/4.5 Luminars I've tried shot wide open. Again, image quality deteriorates when the lens is stopped down farther. All this from 2:1 to 8:1.

 

Luminars, Macro Nikkors, Photars are cult lenses, uncommon and somewhat costly. I got mine for, relatively, pennies, but I was lucky. And there are alternatives. If you must have a fer shur real macro lens, the various Tominons made for the Polaroid MP-4 system are all usable, the shorter ones are better. But on the whole if you were invested in Nikon you'd be better off with a reversed 55/2.8 ... Since you use EOS mount Canon the 65 mm Canon macro lens is probably your best choice for 1:1 to 5:1.

 

Adapters from RMS thread to M-39x1 and T-mount exist. And there you are.

 

Good luck, have fun,

Dan, sorry for the delay getting back to you. No, I seldom use mine. I don't do much tabletop photography that requires movements, though. Still, if I did, it would be just the ticket.

DAN FROMM: This thread renews my interest in a project I had to abandon a year or so ago for medical reasons. The idea was to use a view camera with swings and tilts to project the image on the ground glass plane, then remove the ground glass and photograph the aerial image with a 35mm camera. I assume this would require a second bellows between the GG plane and the 35mm camera. At the tme I had access to a Graphic view camera but it is no longer available. I am still interested in the idea but unable to experiment further. However it would be interesting to have the observations of such as you or anyone else experienced in macro photography. I expect to renew the experiments when health conditions permit. Thanks, Dan Flanders

Dan Flanders, I'm all for solidarity among Dans but I'm not sure I can help you here.

 

Suggest you think about relay lenses,investigate the Speed Magny that was made to fit Nikon F and F2 cameras. People doing photomacrography who need to tilt the plane of best focus tilt the whole camera/lens assembly or. much more often, the whole subject.

 

I mean, if you want what an LF camera will do, just use one, don't screw around with 35 mm cameras too. Minimize complexity.

 

FWIW, I recently pointed out to someone that the Aristophot, Multiphot, and such devices don't allow for movements front or rear. Neither do the MP-3 and MP-4. There must be a reason why, I suggest you ponder it.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

Thanks, Dan F.

There are some Hama bellows with tilt and shift. every once in a while, they pop up on eBay.

There is one right now on eBay.de that is like a mini view camera. Look for Hama balgenr䴬

that is the name in German for bellows.

 

I got mine (a simpler version, with tilt and shift on front standart only) for less than 150

euros.

The PB-4 offers shift and swing when mounted normally, rise and tilt when flopped on its side… It will not focus a short lens to infinity… there are very few short lenses with the coverage needed to take advantage of the Spiratone/Hama's movements.

 

Sorry for reviving a zombie thread, but I wanted to note that the Olympus OM Zuiko 135mm ƒ/4.5 Macro was designed for a prototype tilt-shift bellows that was never marketed, and has a huge image circle. I use it often on the Nikon PB-4, upon which it does focus to infinity.

 

To be fair, I'm not sure what Dan considers a "short" lens; probably not 135mm.

 

Just in case anyone winds up here from a search engine, like I did…

see Shift and Swing Bellows and the Nikon PB-4 Bellows

 

You can use regular lenses for macro, but there are still short barrel lens available for regular use, Ditto for copy lenses, and more

short "barrel" --the focal length (as always) is what it is.

135mm seems to be about the shortest FL you can still use at infinity with a PB-4 on a Nikon camera. I have a plethora of enlarging and copying lenses, but the shortest one that focuses to 'normal' distances on a PB-4 is a Schneider 135mm f/8 Repro-Claron. Maybe reversing a small diameter lens and mounting it inside the bellows would work to get a shorter FL, but I haven't yet tried that.

 

There's always going to be an issue getting movements with a pleated bellows and short FL lenses though. The shorter bellows are collapsed, the more rigid they become. That's why many monorail cameras had a 'bag' bellows as an accessory for use with wide-angle lenses.

135mm seems to be about the shortest FL you can still use at infinity with a PB-4 on a Nikon camera. I have a plethora of enlarging and copying lenses, but the shortest one that focuses to 'normal' distances on a PB-4 is a Schneider 135mm f/8 Repro-Claron. Maybe reversing a small diameter lens and mounting it inside the bellows would work to get a shorter FL, but I haven't yet tried that.

 

There's always going to be an issue getting movements with a pleated bellows and short FL lenses though. The shorter bellows are collapsed, the more rigid they become. That's why many monorail cameras had a 'bag' bellows as an accessory for use with wide-angle lenses.

The other issue with tilt/shift bellows on 35 mm cameras will be the inevitable vignetting from the lens mount/mirror box with SLRs. Even if the lens has enough covering power the camera body will interfere at some point with the light getting to the film or chip.