Can I connect a Mamiya 645 to a 4x5 camera or is a 120 back on a 4x5 better?

[adam_s8]

I have a Mamiya 645 Pro TL and I would like to have full tilt-shift

capabilities for architectural subjects. Tift-shift lenses for the 645 are

ridiculously expensive, and I will not buy one. If possible, I also would

like the ability to shoot 4x5 at times, but with 120 being the primary format,

but this is not absolutely critical.

 

Is it possible to connect a Mamiya 645 to the back of a LF camera (I've seen a

MF camera connected to the back of a LF camera, but didn't understand fully

why it was done)?

 

Should I sell the Mamiya and buy a LF that can take MF backs? That way I

would have MF (120) and LF (4x5), but not in as portable as a package as a

Mamiya 645.

 

Is there a better solution?

 

I'd like any solution to be under US $700.

 

Thanks. I appreciate any feedback.

[michael_darnton1]

For $100 or so you can buy a used Calumet 6x7 roll back. The advantages are larger format, to go with the 4x5's longer lenses, and more available bellows space, since your Mamiya will put the effective film plane quite a bit back from where it belongs on the 4x5.

[sattler123]

A rollfilm back is far better than connecting your Mamiya. It is faster, easier and will most likely produce better results. Why lug another camera around, when all you need is a rollfilm back. Then again, I never understood why anyone would want to use anything but sheet film with a 4x5 - it sort of defeats the purpose - but that's just me.

[bruce_watson1]

Keep the Mamiya system since you already own it and like the portability. For those shots that require movements, use a 5x4 camera with a roll film back like the Calumet or Sinar backs. Slides in similarly to the way you'd use a normal film holder on the 5x4 camera.

 

The only drawback is that you'll probably have to use really short lenses with the roll film back, so short that you won't want to use them for 5x4 shooting (and they might not cover 5x4 anyway). So if you go this route, make sure the camera you pick has a sufficient minimum bellows draw so that you can use the short lenses and still have movements, or will take a bag bellows (the "normal" way to handle short lenses).

 

Another alternative is a 9x6 view camera like the Arca Swiss 6x9 technical camera, or a field camera like an Ebony SV23. But with these you loose the 5x4 size film.

[adam_s8]

Thanks for the advice. After reading more, I found an adapter that will fit a Mamiya 645 to a Sinar. However, I agree with all of you that this doesn't make sense. 120 roll backs for 4x5's are cheap.

[Vlad Soare]

<i>"Then again, I never understood why anyone would want to use anything but sheet film with a 4x5 - it sort of defeats the purpose"</i>

<br><br>

Because you get the movements without needing to invest in new darkroom gear and, most importantly, in a bigger enlarger. ;-)<br>

Also, whenever weight is an issue, a few rolls of 120 film are smaller and easier to carry than a bunch of 4x5 holders. ;-)

[dave_redmann]

Many people (rightly) complain about the 1.53x factor on common DSLR's--it makes all their old wide angle lenses into normals etc. But at least there are reasonably-priced lenses designed for the smaller sensors.

 

But the factor for a 645 on a 4x5 would be more like 2.3x, and even a 6x7 would be over 1.7x. Unless you mostly need long lenses, or unless you have some extremely wide lenses for the 4x5, this doesn't seem like a good solution. Yes, you can buy LF lenses that have shorter focal lengths but only have coverage for MF-size film, but do you really want to invest in new lenses?

[jimsimmons]

To mimic my 90mm on 4x5, I shoot a 55mm Rodenstock on 120 roll film backs. At what my local lab costs to develop 4x5 (quite high in New Zealand), shooting 120 is appropriate for some jobs. But then I retain the movements that architecture requres.

[wieslaw1]

I agree with Juergen. Using a smaller roll film on a 4x5 makes no much sense. I

have two Linhof 6x7 backs, one for a standard 120 film, the other for perforated film.

 

I shot no more than 5 rolls of 120 with this arrangement over 5 years and do not see

any advantage over full 4x5.

 

It is clumsy, difficult to focus and compose, you have first to foucs on the ground

glass, than remove the ground glass, put the casette instead, taking care that the

entire arrangement is not disturbed, etc.

 

I can sell you the Linhof 6x7 roll film back.

[winddancing__]

Please visit my gallery. Pictured is a 645 Piggy-backing technique from shutterbug ads January '93 by David Brooks.<div></div>