Polaroid 110 to 4x5 conversion question

<p>I'm working on a 4x5 conversion on a polaroid 110B camera, and I plan to shoot fuji pack film solely. I'm looking to bypass the typical graflok adapter system and just mount a polaroid 550 or fuji pa45 holder, but I'm sure I'll need to build an adapter plate or 'extender' to get full 4x5 coverage from the 127mm lens. My question is, has anyone gone about building a pack film exclusive converstion 110 in 4x5? And what thickness plate (will probably use aluminum) should I be looking at to extend the pack holder far enough? Thanks,<br>

Nathan</p>

<p>http://option8.110mb.com/polaroid/rollfilm.php<br>

The only thing I know about this sort of thing is the link I just provided. Hope it helps.</p>

<p>Thanks, that's a really cool site and his diy is great, but it's for the smaller pack style, not the 4x5. I think I'll need to build an adapter to space out the polaroid 550 holder so it captures a true 4x5 frame, question is, how thick of a spacer should I be looking at?</p>

<p>Here's his Flickr set for mods. http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/sets/72157602173090062/<br>

He's also the moderator for the Polaroid group on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w=52241149316%40N01&q=4x5+conversion</p>

<p>Again I don't claim to have any real knowledge, but you should be able to find something in here somewhere. I know that if you click around on his site, the first link I gave, he's selling exactly what you're trying to modify.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Why not a Graflok? Chances are very good that some kind of 4x5 film will remain available forever. If you're going to the hassle of hacking a Polaroid camera, why not ensure that it's not going to become obsolete yet again, when or if Fuji decides to pull the plug on film-pack materials?</p>

<p>Thanks, unfortunately I am pretty allergic to certain chemicals for b&w processing, plus I have a passion for instant films. Also, I'm thinking just making a spacer would make the camera a little less "clunky" then adding a graflok back. I also have all the materials at my disposal to build a conversion camera, and it sounds like fun, which is why I am not looking to buy a conversion from another party just yet</p>

<p>Ivan is correct,<br /> It's best to make it a true 4x5 if your going to do all that work. it would not only be about the same trouble but also more versatile & more baluable, as you can use Instant film as well as sheet negatives and switch backs to take 120 panorama pictures or 70mm film backs or just keep the Polaroid back on it .. but the MAIN reason is so that your camera retains the Highest possible resale value. Because the hack to just use the Polaroid back requires cutting where as many of the 4x5 conversions don't require it and in some cased it eliminates the option to converting it to a 4x5 camera down the road.<br /> <br /> Only making it a 120 roll film camera would be simpler and less Thain half the work of the other hacks.<br /> Just do a 4x5 conversion and stick the Polaroid back on there and use it .. i bet some time down the road you will wanna try sheet Film in it too ..<br /> <br /> But is your still Insisting on making it a Polaroid Instant Film only camera ..<br /> heres a site with instructions and pictures on a very inexpensive hack.</p>

<h1><a href="http://www.rwhirled.com/landlist/how2-rollalt.htm">Film Alternatives for Polaroid Rollfilm Cameras</a></h1>

<p>But as to your chemical allergy , you don't have to process anything yourself , you can always send out to have your 4x5's developed. I do because i mostly shoot in color but also send out the B&W. Or if you use color roll film , many one hour places have machines that are adjustable so that they can develop 120 film, and some don't even realist it. I get most of mine done at the local one hour place; he didn't even know he could do 120 till i had him check out his machine ..</p>

<p>AS for Bulkinesss.. check out this conversion.. You cant get any less bulky than<a href="http://salihonbashome.blogspot.com/2009/10/byron-camera-conversion-service-going.html"> this guys conversion process</a><br>

<img src="http://lh3.ggpht.com/_gvRcWa2LHhg/S3Ym1cQPcoI/AAAAAAAAE9I/xZqQ6ANL74M/s640/P2131294.JPG" alt="" width="640" height="480" /></p>

<p>I'll throw my 2 cents in here... I too am a instant film lover and discovered Polaroid conversions a couple months ago. I've since converted 3 Polaroids to take 3x4 pack film, but recently I've had this same inkling to create a dedicated 4x5 instant Polaroid. I definitely understand those of you guys out there insisting on using a graflok back, however I have never used a graflok nor do I wish to pay for one ( they are getting more and more expensive...) I just want to say to Nate,,, Dont give up, I think you can definitely do it. I am planning on making one myself soon... I would hope that some of you guys instead of just criticising what Nate wants to do would use your knowledge to try and help him on his path. No disrespect to anyone though, I'm just saying... The only advice I can give you is what I was basically planning on doing which is to take the back door off the camera, and get yourself a large enough piece of ground glass or tracing paper even, then take a locking cable release and set the shutter to full open. Then (with the camera facing out a window on a sunny day) pull the ground glass or paper back until you see the image size you desire and try to get a measurement of that point. Anyway, good luck to you Nate, I hope it turns out well... Let me know...</p>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3898900">Dan Ferrel</a> , Mar 03, 2010; 01:17 a.m.</p>

 

<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://option8.110mb.com/polaroid/rollfilm.php" target="_blank">http://option8.110mb.com/polaroid/rollfilm.php</a><br /> The only thing I know about this sort of thing is the link I just provided. Hope it helps.</p>

<p>I'm a bit leery of the Option.8 information, his DIY on calibrating a rangefinder is vague at best, and there's actually a lot easier way to do it, than drilling bed rivets and adjusting the bed infinity stop- and anyone with average mechanical aptitude can find it in about 2 minutes. He can make a good camera, but use your own common sense first. Guys like Littman and Option.8 praise their own work to the point it's downright sickening- because they have a profit motive. These aren't $500-$1500 cameras by any stretch, more like $150-$400 cameras. The recent focus on fancy colored red coverings, has gotten away from actual performance and picture quality. The latter is almost a non-issue ! what I see is a lot of cameras being sold as shelf queens that collect dust, rather than cameras that get taken out and used in the field.<br>

in the car hobby we call those "garage queens" or "trailer queens"<br>

in the firearms hobby we call them "safe queens"<br>

I guess could call these cameras "shelf queens" or "closet queens"</p>

 

<p>Nate,<br>

Hi! I build these different conversions and the 4x5" packfilm based on a Polaroid 550 or Fuji PA-45 are actually my favorites to do. You actually don't need a spacer, but need to cut the back so that the film gate of the holder centers up with the lens and original film gate of the 110 series camera. If you email me, I can send you some photos of conversions I've done like this in the past and you can go by those. Beware though, these are not for the faint of heart and there's a great chance that you could end up ruining several backs or cameras before you get the intended results (just like I did)...</p>

<p>As far as the information above, you should also realize that A LOT of people ask for those fancy red coverings and custom leather as the original leatherette is a flat gray color and pretty boring or in just plain horrible shape depending on the person who owned the camera over the last 50-60 years. You should also realize that there ARE also A LOT of people who aren't do-it-yourself types (like yourself and me) and they would like someone to completely tear a camera apart, restore it and convert it for their intended use. Just like there is a representative slice of the population who would rather buy a new BMW/Porsche/Lexus/Mercedes/etc. etc. than restore an old '58 Lincoln with suicide doors or a classic Mustang, there are those who would rather carry a camera around that they built themselves and use to make their art. One more thing that goes in line with the cost of having someone do it--I'm not trying to talk you into having someone do it either--is that there is a lot of work that goes into it and like I said, it's not for the faint at heart or those who are only a little hands on. You need to take you time and consider every step of the process, just as if you were making prints in the darkroom (I know you're allergic :)). </p>

<p>Anyway, shoot me an email through p-dot-net and I'll help you out...that is unless you've already figured it out...which, in that case, this message with self-destruct in five, four, three...</p><div></div>

<p>Oh, and I can kind of agree with Mr. Williams...these may be $150-$400 cameras...they could also become $500 to $1000 cameras. Like any other project (that is always more expensive that originally intended), it comes down to quality work. If you put the time in, then it's worth what that time is worth...easily, these cameras are expensive in just getting the parts together. A Polaroid 110B model is selling for the minimum of $175 on the auction sites, the Polaroid 550 or Fuji PA-45 backs are selling from anywhere between $125 and $249 and then there's the money for the CLA on the shutter and you also have to consider what materials will be needed. If you don't already have a rotary tool or basic hand tools, then tack those on as well. Hope my four cents helps...it was two cents, but then I added this other two, so there you go! :D</p><div></div>

<p>Nate,<br />Hi! I build these different conversions and the 4x5" packfilm based on a Polaroid 550 or Fuji PA-45 are actually my favorites to do. You actually don't need a spacer, but need to cut the back so that the film gate of the holder centers up with the lens and original film gate of the 110 series camera. If you email me, I can send you some photos of conversions I've done like this in the past and you can go by those. Beware though, these are not for the faint of heart and there's a great chance that you could end up ruining several backs or cameras before you get the intended results (just like I did)...<br />As far as the information above, you should also realize that A LOT of people ask for those fancy red coverings and custom leather as the original leatherette is a flat gray color and pretty boring or in just plain horrible shape depending on the person who owned the camera over the last 50-60 years. You should also realize that there ARE also A LOT of people who aren't do-it-yourself types (like yourself and me) and they would like someone to completely tear a camera apart, restore it and convert it for their intended use. Just like there is a representative slice of the population who would rather buy a new BMW/Porsche/Lexus/Mercedes/etc. etc. than restore an old '58 Lincoln with suicide doors or a classic Mustang, there are those who would rather carry a camera around that they built themselves and use to make their art. One more thing that goes in line with the cost of having someone do it--I'm not trying to talk you into having someone do it either--is that there is a lot of work that goes into it and like I said, it's not for the faint at heart or those who are only a little hands on. You need to take you time and consider every step of the process, just as if you were making prints in the darkroom (I know you're allergic :)).</p>

<p>There are a few issues that always get left out, when discussing 4x5 instant Polaroid format. These are the realities that come to light:<br />1. the 4x5 film is EXCEEDINGLY expensive- now $20/pack or more, at least $2/shot, or more. I've seen it for $30/pack or $3/shot. The 3x4 format at $10/pack of 10 shots, is barely affordable the way it is. I don't know a single photo hobbyist that can afford to shoot film at $2-$3/shot, when they can shoot digital and print it out at Walmart for 18 cents/shot from their memory chip in the self serve machine. (those actually come out quite well for digital, BTW, the paper is high quality). Having said that, there's then this issue:<br />2. a lot of film is wasted getting the shutter speed/aperture settings right with a manual instant camera. Anyone who says different is just plain hiding the truth of the matter. Out of a pack of 10 shots, expect to waste at least 2, or as many as 5, making adjustments for ever-changing light conditions.<br />3. if one wants to delve into the 4x5 just to test the water, an old Graflex is the way to go. It is a more flexible camera, the better ones actually have 2 shutters, and faster shutters, and a bigger lens to boot- and were made to shoot 4x5 Polaroids by simply snapping the back on. Graflex invented the Graflok locking system, back in the 1940's- so there's nothing to convert- it's already done. These old Graflex cameras can be had for $100 or less on Ebay during the summer slow months. The downside is, they are big and heavy.<br />4. after converting a Polaroid to 4x5, it becomes nearly as heavy as a Graflex anyway. <br />on the "Mercedes/Lexus" vs. "1958 Lincoln/Mustang" issue, you are basically converting a 1958 Lincoln with the Polaroid anyway. The 110/a/b series cameras, were made in the 1950-60's era ! Hardly a Mercedes/Lexus, even if it is converted. A more accurate description would be, buying an old Mustang, and having someone else restore it for you, instead of doing it yourself. ( As a sidenote, it was the "Mercedes/Lexus" mindset, that ruined today's economy- everyone window dressing for maximum show effect, on cars/homes/etc. they could not really afford, and were bought on credit, and could not meet payments. I'd prefer to buy what I can actually pay for, and have money left for film.)<br />"hands on" issue- let's face it, half the fun with these old cameras, is building them and tinkering with them in the first place ! I've converted a few myself, and repaired many others, and there's nothing like finishing a conversion or repair, loading it with film, taking a test shot, and out comes a perfect picture, from a camera you created or fixed yourself. People who are just buying one already done, are missing out on half the fun. This isn't rocket science, the cameras are fairly easy to convert, it's a simple matter of bolting on the back, and sealing it up. It's more about patience than anything, because all you need is basic home tools, and a kitchen table to work on.<br />A 110/a/b series can be converted for the cost of the camera, cost of the back, and that's about it. Example- a 110a sells for $50, a back fo $25, bolt it on and seal it, you have a converted camera for $75. I actually prefer the vintage drab coverings- who wants to walk around with a red or yellow or pink camera ? That's a bit flamboyant. Why attract attention to your camera as you're walking around using it ? I'm after a picture, not attention. I mean, it's like painting the space shuttle hot pink or red, or painting the Empire State Building or Statue of Liberty red- it would look kind of silly, no ?</p>

<p>I just finished my own 4x5 packfilm converted 110a and I love it. To me even the Fuji packfilm as much as people use it just to check lighting and then discard the prints, provides a film quality that digital cant reproduce. And it has the instant gratification factor as well. As far as wasting film, I don't find that I waste all that much film at all... Using the old 625 light meter which is still super reliable, I really don't have all that much trouble getting good shots most of the time. Your all correct that it is very expensive but for me to buy a box every once in a while is fine. I love the photos my 110A yields... and there has to be something said for the fact that its still basically hand-held. So I guess my point is, to each his own... My 110a is red... I don't know why that's such a big deal... I like it red, I like making them look pretty, it doesnt take away from the photos it produces or the fact that I spent my time and hard work to convert it. And I don't find it all that heavy either, you remove a lot of the innards of the camera when you convert it... I must say I dont understand the small backlash I hear all the time about these Polaroids... I suppose you can take it really seriously or you can just have fun with them... Even my converted 95b takes great photos...<br>

By the way Gary, comparing littman and Option8 is the wrong thing to do. The fact that Option8 took the time to build a website teaching people how to convert cameras in the first place should tell you he is different. I have emailed him probably 50 or more times and hes always helped me out with any question I had. And I never felt like he was keeping secrets about the conversion process... William Littman on the other hand would probably threaten to sue you if you asked him for info. Option8 is a good guy...</p>

<p>I'd also like to say that just because you put a fancy covering on the camera does not mean that the person converting it spent less time working on the the quality of the conversion. I happen to know that Option8 is meticulous when it comes to the optics in his conversions and so was I when I converted mine...</p>

<p>Might be more than a year later but I just couldnt help myself...thanks for those who like my site and my work. I am here to help instant photography.<br>

<br /> Id throw my 2cents on the ranting inhere, but I doubt anyone is listening anymore.<br>

<br /><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6185/6054915258_c59303e20a.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="345" /></p>

<p>:P</p>

<p>And all the links to my "old" site need to be updated to www.instantoptions.com</p>

<p>110mb.com is crap and I shut it down.</p>