dan_fromm1 Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 At the rear, 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic. In front, Century Graphic. 480/9 Apo Nikkor front-mounted on a Copal #1, focused on infinity. The tubes aren't strictly necessary but don't hurt and make setting up easier. The thing works! Cheers,<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn_thoreson Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Cool, Dan! Is this the film pack adapter idea to connect them? Looks like it worked out well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cenelsonfoto Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Behold, Frankenstein! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Dan, Congratulations! So, you finally got it done! How much did the adaptor/rigs cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandeha Lynch Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Didn't Captain Marvel carry one of those during the Kree-Skrull Wars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm1 Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 Glen, yes of course there's an FPA in there. And here's a picture of the bracketry. Vivek, if you have to ask how much it cost, you can't afford it. SKGrimes does nice work, but aren't cheap. They charge on a time and materials basis. I supplied most of the material, but setting up to put the holes in the t-slotted extrusion and molding in exactly the right places cost. Setting up to make the tubes -- lensboard to FPA, and an invisible one inside the FPA for light shielding and neatness -- was similarly time-consuming. It didn't help that they modified my original design, which called for the tube to be glued to the FPA, to allow it to slide in. Sandeha, of course I stole the idea. But not from fiction, from a hint in A. A. Blaker's lovely book Field Photography. Cheers,<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm1 Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 CE, this is by no stretch of the imagination a monster camera. I mean, it shoots only 2x3. Real monsters shoot bigger than 16x20. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Dan, I've only just managed to get a Schneider Super Angulon 47mm f5.6 lens onto a Century Graflex - after 1 year. <p> 480mm focal length....is a real achievement. <p> <p> I'm speechless. <p> <p> PS. does anything support the weight of the front lens element? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Dan, do you have some sort of special use in mind for this medium format super long rig? I almost said telephoto but I don't know if you lens is telephoto, probably not if you went through all this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 If Dan's APO Nikkor 480/9 is the later design (4/4 construction) then it would weigh 859g. My sample (same optics with the same physical dimensions), is a bit lighter at 775g. These APO Nikkors have quite a few extras (decorative rings as Nikon calls) which do not serve any functions other than the appearance. They can be unscrewed and left out. Dan, you would need a good shade for your monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen peterson Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Do you think that it would cover 4x5 with the tubes? I like the idea of the long focal length, but have shyed away knowing that it was on the longish side for my 4x5 speeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm1 Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 RJ, the front camera's front standard supports shutter, tubes, and lens. There doesn't seem to be a problem, but I don't intend to walk around with the thing slung over my shoulder. I'm puzzled at your travails, or perhaps it was just delay, in putting a 47/5.6 SA on your Century. Immediately my 47/5.6 SA arrived, mounted on an ex-Admiralty Shackman Automatic Dial Recording Camera, I sent it off to the shop to be removed from its focusing mount and put on a board. It came back on board and I've used it with no problems since then. Great lens. Mike K., the 480/9 Apo-Nikkor is a dialyte, i.e., of normal construction. Long, yes, telephoto no. I find to my surprise that my wife and I are going out shooting tomorrow. Since I have the borrowed digital p&s until Tuesday, I'll try to take a picture of the 2x3 Speed with its 12"/4 Taylor Hobson telephoto focused at infinity and post it here. I find that combo more astonishing than the tandem rig. Ex-RAF lens, RJ, came from an early Agiflite; the lens was also used on F95s. Mike, about applications, you have to get out of the 35 mm mindset. On 35 mm, 500 mm is usually too long, except when its too short. On 2 1/4 x 3 1/4, a 480 sees about the same view as a 200 does on 35 mm. It makes a 2 1/3 times large image, but isn't that narrow angle a lens. And I do find uses for a 200 on my Nikons. Sooner or later, though, I'll find a way to hang a Nikon behind the tandem rig's rear camera. Not sure, though, that that outfit will make infinity with the 480, there are potential interference problems between the 480's diaphragm ring and the front camera's bed. Nothing insuperable, but not cheap to fix. Vivek, I'm going to try it and the 305 without shades. We'll see how they do. If it comes to that, a short tube should be enough. Construction paper, most likely. The 260/10 has a shade, it is surprisingly short. Glen, on my analysis, which I think has a problem, the limiting factor is the rear camera's front standard. If you were to make a similar tandem camera from a pair of 4x5 Speeds, with the lens in shutter or front-mounted and very close to the shutter, it could work. You might want to use a larger shutter than a #1, e.g., a #5 Ilex. Remember that a pair of 2x3 Speeds with a coupling like mine between them will give at least 26" total extension. What size lens do you have in mind? Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Dan, The 260/10 (Process Nikkor) is a wide angle design (atleast 70 deg coverage) as opposed to the 480/9 and the 305/9 (46 deg). Yes, any improvised hood should do. Regards, Vivek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 Hi Dan, the main drawback of preparing a working Century Graphic isn't to do with the camera - it's the availability in Europe. Being a specifically American phenomenon, parts are uncommon here. The 47mm S.A. f5.6 was easy enough to come by (3 months later), however the Century 2x3" lensboard another 4 months. SRB whom you have previously recommended, took 3 months to drill a hole into the lensboard, and inertia from not finding a Kalart rangefinder is taking up the rest. On your set-up, I wonder which groundglass you use to view the 480mm f9 lens; on the raked glass I view on, this is challenging enough on f5.6. Best wishes, RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm2 Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 RJ, Yes, SRB can be slow. And with exchange rates as they are now, SKGrimes may charge you less, in UKP, for the same job. $US 25 for a 2x3 Pacemaker board, $US 15 for drilling. About focusing and composing with a slow lens. Basically, the longer the lens, the better the view on the GG is because the rays projected by the lens are nearly perpendicular to the GG. The shortest slowish lens I have is a 4.75"/7.7 Aldis Uno; the image it puts on the GG is easy to see and focus on. Next longer is a 6"/9 Cooke Copying Lens; easier still. The 480/9 is very easy to focus. Cheers, Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_iggers Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Does the National Security Agency know about this device? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_galli4 Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 OK Dan, time to quit messing around and get "Big Bertha"<br><p><img src="http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/Bertha.jpg"><br><p>Of course those were 1959 $$ when a new Ford was only about double that so 20 grand ought to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm1 Posted July 25, 2005 Author Share Posted July 25, 2005 Jim, as I've said many times, send money. And lend me your mule. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now