4x5 on Medium Format Camera?

[steve_tenggala]

Hi everyone,

 

I have a beginner question, probably a stupid one, but I figure this is

probably the place I can get an answer.

 

Okay, bear with me. I have a Mamiya RZ Pro II camera and I have been thinking

if it's possible to put a 4x5 (or even 8x10) sheet film on the back of the

camera. Of course, the idea is not to put it directly behind the body, but at

certain space behind where the regular 6x7 film would be positioned. This come

to my mind after reading somewhere that one can put 8x10 film on 4x5 camera by

carefully placing the film holder behind the 4x5 film holder position.

 

So, can we used some kind of 4x5 bellows to cover and to seal the light of

that space between the film holder and the 4x5 film back? About where the film

back should be placed, we can always look at the ground glass, where the image

from the lens falls on it, right? I imagine it wouldn't be too hard adjusting

the position, since you can see the images on the ground glass on the spot, as

well as vignetting if any.

 

So far, that's just my theory. Please tell me if I oversimplified how things

work with Large Format photography. The only issue I can think of is the lens

not focusing at infinity. But, the RZ camera itself has a built-in bellows and

if I used bag bellows to cover the space between the camera and 4x5 film

holder, it should compensate the built-in bellow operation (but I'm not sure

if the images would completely fill the 4x5 film. I guess this can be figure

out through trial and error). In fact, maybe I can compensate that focusing at

infinity by working at hyperfocal distance. What do you guys think?

 

Your opinion is truly appreciated.

[Ed_Ingold]

An RZ lens will only cover a circle of about 3-1/2 inches at normal focus range. The image circle increases with magnification and smaller apertures, but would be unreliable for use with a 4x5 camera. You would also find difficulty meeting the back-focus requirements of the lens mounted on an RZ body.

 

If you feel compelled to try, attach the lens to a view camera - use rigger's tape and an old lens board if necessary. If you don't have a view camera at your disposal, use a shoe box as a "camera obscura".

[wayne_crider4]

Steve your trying to put a square peg in a round hole. 4x5's can be gotten for a couple of hundred dollars. Buy one if you need a 4x5 image.

 

And btw, what's wrong with 6x7?

[BrianS1664879711]

Steve... interesting question and an interesting thought. But, in a word -- no.

[steve_larese1]

It's not available in the US, but overseas there used to be available (I don't know if it still is)

a back for the RB/RZ that would take 4x5 Quick Loads. I believe you'd get an 8x8 cm

square image on the 4x5 sheet. I think Annie L. used one.

[steve_tenggala]

Thanks for the response guys. So, if get it correctly, it's just not practical to do this on RZ67 right?

 

Really, I'm still thinking that it would be wonderful to be able to put 4x5 sheet film on the back of RB/RZ, even if it only covers like 85% of the film area. Still, out of my stubborn curiosity, how about working at hyperfocal distance using short barrel lens? Would that compensate the infinity focusing problem?

 

Personally, I still think it's doable. if I can put that 4x5 film back on a monorail and the the RB/RZ body on the same axis, that should help in addressing the film flatness issue as well as adjusting the distance to enlarge the image falling on the ground glass. Anybody has tried this before?

[steve_tenggala]

One more thing, I know it's probably easier for me to just invest in LF camera, but I just don't have the budget for that, especially given the shooting turnover I can expect from it. I'm just curious about this thing and like to know if anybody has tried this before and whether it worked.

 

In fact, I think 4x5 on MF camera would be amazing since you can just use the Waist level instead of having to switch back and forth between film back and the ground glass, of course at the expense of the swing/shift/tilt movement.

[steve_tenggala]

Steve Larese: What's that 8x8 back that you mentioned called? Is it different than that 7x7 quadra back? I thought 7x7 is the max that you can get given the size of the opening of the camera back.

[steve_larese1]

That's what I was trying to think of -- the Quadra back; you're right, it's 7x7, not 8x8.

[wayne_crider4]

According to the old B&H catalog I have, the largest image you can get is 72mm square using the Quadra 72 Film Back. It uses polaroid 4x5 sheet film or Fuji Quickload or Kodak readyload films. It orginally sold for $520. In the end it will just cost you alot more for film as quick loads and Readyloads are not cheap, and Polaroid runs $3 to $4.25 a pop, and developing will cost you more if you are not setup for it. If you want individual expsoures to process, get a 2x3 cut film back adapter and some film holders to save money.

[david_tynan]

Wow, i did not realise that! Cheers guys.