Lens to use with a DSLR on a LF camera

[tjfuss]

<p>Following an idea I saw posted right here on photo.net, I've adapted my Canon 5DII to the front of an old Calumet 4x5 in order to have lens tilt for table-top close-up photography (particularly jewelry and other products). The set-up is working very nicely although I need to make another bag bellows that will allow more movement and extension. So it goes with trial-and-error. Naturally, I'm not expecting to use shift - the mirror box on the Canon wouldn't allow much.</p>

<p>Anyway, my situation is this: I don't really need the coverage of a 4x5 lens, something in the medium format range would suffice. For a focal length of 80 to 90mm, I could go with a 4x5 lens (Super Angulon, Caltar , Grandagon, Nikkor...) or with an 80mm (Hasselblad, Mamiya, Bronica, Fujinon...). Would either approach necessarily give me better sharpness and contrast? Or would it likely come down to the specific specs of each lens? I'm vaguely remembering something about lenses for smaller formats requiring more resolving capability because of the greater magnification in printing.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Enlarging lens would be great and cheap, formulated for close-up work. You really want a macro lens for this sort of operation. Lots of manufacturers made 100mm and longer macro lenses for 35mm cameras. Ideally a short-mount one.</p>

[tjfuss]

<p>Good point John - a short conjugate lens would make sense. Hmmm, maybe a copy or process lens? Just for giggles, I mounted a 75mm El-Omegar this afternoon and it showed a lot less color fringing than the 90mm Angulon (not Super) but the resolution and contrast weren't so hot.</p>

<p>The next experiment might be the 80mm Zenzanon from my SQ-Ai. I've gotta fabricate some kind of mount for it though.</p>

<p>I suppose I could just spring for the 90mm TS-E from Canon but where's the fun in that? I'm a mechanical engineer by training (24 years at Kodak)... old habits die hard.</p>

[dave_s]

<p>Hi, Timothy, if I read you correctly you've adapted the Canon 5Dii to be the 'film back' for the view camera, correct? This setup has been called a 'tandem camera', and it's good for the purposes you describe. Look for Alfred Blaker's book 'Field Photography' (W H Freeman, about 1977)-- he was a fan of tandem cameras. I've used this system to a limited degree, for taking photos with classic lenses (old Tessars etc) on 35mm film.</p>

<p>For close-up photos around the 1:1 range, an 80 - 100mm enlarging or process lens would be where it's at, like you say. In barrel mount, you should be able to find an excellent lens like an enlarging Nikkor, Componon-S, or Claron for $40 - 100. I wouldn't horse around with adapting the Zenzanon, because it's easier just to screw an enlarger lens on with a 39mm retaining ring, and life is short. </p>

[tjfuss]

<p>That's it Dave, I didn't realize there was a name for it! I do anticipate using this rig with interesting older lenses as well but the close work is my more immediate requirement. Now I just need to get past lusting over the "cool factor" of a nice 90mm 4x5 lens ;-)</p>

[paul_ong1]

<p>Timothy,<br>

I too have built a hybrid using a Toyo 45G and a Nikon D70, which has a much smaller sensor than you Canon. So far, I have tried Schneider LF lenses and a couple of enlarger lenses (including a Schneider) on the hybrid. I have just started mounting Mamiya RB67 lenses, mainly because of the lenses are retro focus and the distance between the focal plan and lens is among the longest. This allows me to use much shorter focal length lenses. Mainly have used a non-C 90mm. I just started experimenting with a reverse mounted Mamiya non-C 180mm today, but still have to do some adjustments. I am hoping to find a broken Mamiya or Bronica 50mm to adapt.<br>

While not a scientific comparison, my sense is that the LF lenses have the least amount of resolution for the DSLR, and a mixed bag for enlarger lenses. The MF lenses seem to have an edge, but I am still refining and testing. I have started with the lowest grade Mamiya, and they do not seem bad. I am trying to modify a much better KL lens. Hopefully, in a few weeks I will have some examples to compare.<br>

For now, you can see some examples for the different types of lenses at the following two sites.<br>

With LF Schneider and enlarger lenses:<br>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/9476880@N02/sets/72157621949266496/<br>

With MF Mamiya RB67 non-C 90mm lens, including some 100% crops:<br>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/9476880@N02/sets/72157623319405313/<br>

I would be very interested in how well you do wit a FF DSLR. So far, I am not willing to risk a D3 on the experiment.</p>

 

[tjfuss]

<p>Nice set-up, Paul. I may have come across your photostream when I was researching the project initially.<br>

In my case, there's no risk to the camera. I removed the rear standard (except for the base) and mounted the camera with a Manfrotto quick release plate. I fabricated a bag bellows to join the front standard to the Canon, making the rear opening of the bellows small and sandwiched it between a Canon/M42 mount adapter and a junked M42 male thread taken from a junked lens.<br>

I'll try to get some images of my hybrid / tandem in the next day or two. I have a comparision of parallel vs tilt but it was done with a Mamiya 65mm that's is pretty poor condition (scratches caused a significant loss on contrast). Fortunately, it does show the portential of the lens tilt.</p>

<p>I like the notion of using the smaller sensor camera as well - it should enable the use of some shift. I'll have to try it out with the 20D (or just crop the 5DII).</p>

[david_mcniven]

<p>Hi Timothy, I'd love to hear how much of an issue mirror box shading of the FF sensor is - with off-axis shots for stitching that is.<br>

Wondered also about possible reflection & flare from the lens mount & the box?<br>

These are just a few of the reasons I haven't got off my lazy ass to do the same thing...yet.<br>

A couple of years from now..."Yes young man, it's a very nice care home - where's the shed?"<br>

Maybe when Kodak update my old DCS Pro's software for Vista :-)</p>

 

[tjfuss]

<p>I haven't pushed the limits of the shift just yet. Maybe I'll have some time over the weekend.<br>

Here's a quick link to some images of (and from) the camera:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tjfuss/sets/72157623388358145/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/tjfuss/sets/72157623388358145/</a></p>

 

[paul_ong1]

<p>Timothy,<br>

I really like how you mounted the Canon. I think I will see if I can do the same. A questions if you don't mind. Were you able to dismantle the rear standard in a non-destructive way? (That is, it can still be reassemble easily to its original state.) How hard was it to construct the custom bellows? What materials, design and assembly method did you use? Do you still have any movements in the rear?<br>

Using a Mamiya 90mm lens, I am able to shift the camera about 3+ frames along the shorter sensor length, and 2+ along the longer sensor frame length. Probably more, but there is some serious light fall off and lost of sharpness.<br>

Tilt/swing is fun, but not that easy for me. It is easy to get the "toy" look, although I need to learn how use it more creatively. Getting things in greater focus is much harder work.<br>

Please keep posting your work. Thanks.</p>

[tjfuss]

<p>Paul, the modifications to the Calumet were entirely reversible. I simply removed the screws securing the uprights on each side of the rear standard and the screws holding in the front of the bellows to remove them from the front standard. The rear standard still has side-to-side shift and swing but the rear tilt function is gone.<br>

The bag bellows were made from some shutter curtain material I had that was scavenged somewhere along the way in my years at Kodak. The junk bins in the engineering and research departments were a lot of fun. I just guessed at some dimensions and made four trapezoids for each of the front and back (and then duplicated it for double layers). My wife did the stitching on her sewing machine to avoid bloodshed on my part. I made a frame out of masonite and just sandwiched the bellows between the frame and the front standard with screws. Version 2 will have a bigger bellows to improve the extension.<br>

This afternoon, I dug out some enlarging lenses I had laying around and most were in dismal condition. I think they'll get tossed out (some fungus issues anyway). One stood out though, a D.O. Industries 90mm looked really good - better than the El-Omegar 75mm I had. Fortunately, I have some resolution targets (remember those scrap bins?) and they makes comparisions really easy.</p>

[randall_van__straten]

<p>Hello... Randy here. There is a german company using view cameras to do something similar to your hybrid set up. I believe it is called ' just together'? Have to google it. Maybe this might give another idea? I believe they have done some analysis and are using Mamyia RZ lens. My german language education was 40 years ago! Sorry ... Randy</p>

[paul_ong1]

<p>Randy,<br>

Thanks. Here is the URL for English version of "Just Together"<br>

http://www.just-together.net/index_en.htm</p>

<p>Four comments: (1) most of the plates are for Sinar, although they seem to be able to do custom orders for Toyo; (2) the lens adapters are Hasselblad, Mamiya RZ (which I think can also take RBs with an adapter from another party), enlarger lenses, and Schneider Digitar; (3) the prices are rather high (e.g., 480 Euros for the Nikon DSLR adapter plate, and 545 Euros for the Mamiya lens adapter plate); and (4) not sure if the DSLR plate allows the camera to rotate.</p>

<p>So, a good option if one has the funds and the right equipment. The quality seems top rate. If DYI, the site has some useful information.</p>

[michael_young3]

<p>I'm curious just who is Just Together's target market. Is it that LF cameras are flooding the market, but the lenses are still too expensive? So, given a camera with no lenses, they'll connect his Hasselblad or Mamiya lenses to his DSLR? Canon sells extremely good, f/2.8 tilt-shift lenses for under $2000. If they already have "real" lenses, Timothy's approach would seem to be more reasonable. Myself personally, I've been meaning to find a way to lock a T-mount to a spare lensboard.</p>

[tjfuss]

<p>Michael, you might try finding a tele-converter or junker body that accepts the T-Mount adapter of your choice and transplant the mounting ring to the lensboard.</p>

<p>I'd guess that Just Together is figuring that the medium format lenses will provide the best combination of coverage requirements and resolution. When using the full frame 35mm format digital, a 4x5 lens has loads more coverage than necessary. It's a nice solution but a bit spendy for me. I'd probably go for the TS-E lenses if I was in that ballpark!</p>

[paul_ong1]

<p>Michael and Timothy, you can also get a cheap set of extension tubes from China or Hong Kong to mount the DSLR on a lens board. Advantage is that you can use any combination of the tubes for the right length. Some just use poxy glue to fix the tube onto the lens board. Just do a quick search on ebay, e.g. "Nikon extension tube" or "Canon extension tube". I have been refining the way I lock the extension tube to the lens board. I do not glue it on because I want flexibility, including the ability to rotate at any angle. I now have a UV filter attached to the adapter to keep out dust, and now have a system to keep the camera tightly in alignment on the adapter. Hopefully, I can post some photos of these refinements in a couple of weeks.</p>

<p>The Canon TS-E is much more flexible than the Nikon PC-E. I have one of the latter. The advantage of the hybrid or tandem camera is that you have a wider range of lenses that you can use at a much lower cost. Also, you have both front and rear standard technical adjustments, depending on how you do the construction.</p>

<p> </p>

[tjfuss]

<p>UPDATE: I've gone through the various lenses I have around here and the current leader is a 90mm Omicron-El enlarging lens. Using the test target and setting the camera at about 60 degrees off perpendicular, I was able to set the tilt to achieve good focus from front to back. The Omicron showed good resolution, contrast and the least amount of color fringing.</p>

<p>Tested: Omicron-El 90mm, Angulon 90mm, Mamiya 65mm (from TLR), D.O. Industries 90mm and a few even less noteworthy (Velostigmat, Raptar, Componar - most with fungus issues!).</p>

<p>It will do until I get a chance to acquire something with the potential to be even better.</p>

[w_t1]

<p>Great post and ideas, I'd looked at this concept a few years ago(after seeing the price of Calumet's "full meal deal" for the 1ds view cam), but I'd always thought of the back plate connecting to dslr/slr as a hard connection, the bag bellows is a great idea.</p>

<p>I am wondering if it would work to even go simpler, make the bag bellows connection at the camera more of a "bra strap" concept, I think it might work especially if you used an angle finder on the eyepiece, you could cinch down the bag bellows with a rubber band. I might try that, of course with a darker room & tabletop studio photography it might work easily.</p>

<p>Tom</p>

[tjfuss]

<p>Anything that keeps stray light out of the image path should work just fine. I needed mine to be fairly presentable since customers will likely see it in use.</p>