I can't focus the subject (Canon EOS 5D Mark II) on my Chamonix 4x5"

[gianluca_faletti]

<p>Hi to all, I've bought this adapter <a href="http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=633">http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=633</a> for my Chamonix 4x5" (I use the universal bellow), but I can't focus the subject when I use the Canon.<br>

Why ?</p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>You have to move the front standard about 75mm closer to the rear one, and you may need to replace the standard bellows with a bag bellows to make it work.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>What lens do you have on the 4x5?</p>

[bob_salomon]

<p>Every lens has a published flange focal length distance noted in its specification from the large format lens manufacturer. For instance:<br>

The Rodenstock 90mm Grandagon-N 4.5 has a FFL in Copal 1 shutter of 98mm and the 90mm 6.8 has a FFL in Copal 0 of 94mm. That is the distance from the lens to the image plane when the lens is focused at infinity. If you have one of these lenses on your camera then the distance from the back of the lens to the focal plane mark on your camera body must be at that distance for that lens to be in focus at infinity.<br>

You have the depth of the 45 camera + the depth of the adapter + the depth of your Canon to the image plane that has to add up at infinity to the FFL.<br>

In addition you may want to do camera or lens adjustment for Scheimplug or for controlling image shape or placement on your Canon. In theory this is great but in practice it is very difficult since as you do the camera movement the adapter + the mirror box in your Canon will easily cut off the image. Plus you may find the finder blacking out as your eye goes off the optical axis when you do the movements.<br>

Lastly, if you have not invested in digital view camera lenses, you will find that the quality a view camera lens delivers on digital will not be what you may have expected since the light rays passing through a film lens strike the pixels at the wrong angle and a film lens is not as highly corrected as a lens made for digital.</p>

[gianluca_faletti]

<p>Now I use a Copal 0 Nikon 90 mm f 4,5<br>

I'll buy a wide angle bellows for my Chamonix and I'll try with it.<br>

The problem of the lens (for film) on digital is a big problem. I can't change all the lens, I haven't the money to make it.<br>

Thank you to all</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Gianluca, if I were you I'd consider returning that rather expensive adapter and asking for my money back. IMHO the information given by the company is inadequate, and makes using the adapter seem free of any issue, which it plainly isn't.</p>

<p>The sellers of the adapter should make it clear that it effectively adds about 70mm of bellows extension, and that the whole field of a wideangle lens might not be usable due to shading of the light-path by the camera body and adapter. This adapter is obviously only really suitable for use with normal (~150mm) to long focus lenses, since the light path needs to be almost perpendicular to the digital camera body. With shorter lenses partial shading of the digital sensor is almost certain to occur when the camera is slid to the sides and corners of the image field.</p>

[gianluca_faletti]

<p>Thank you to all.<br>

Perhaps the best solution to avod to waste money is to buy the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II Tilt-Shift Lens, but it's very very expensive.</p>

[bob_salomon]

<p>No, the best way to do view camera movements to control image shapes as well as Scheimpflug with digital is with a digital view camera with a digital back and digital lenses. You just might want those controls with a focal length different then 24mm and that 24mm does not give you back movements that allow you to control image shape.</p>

[gianluca_faletti]

<p>Every digital large format system has a cost without any sense, I can't spend money for it.<br>

Also, e.g. the Horseman LD or Cambo X2 PRO are very expensive.<br>

Thank you </p>

 

[bob_salomon]

<p>Check a Linhof Techno. That lens though is not inexpensive, especially if you expect it do do what a Techno can do.</p>

[bob_salomon]

<p>Sorry, had to go to work. You already spent $300.00 + shipping or other fees on something that doesn't work and your view camera is no where near precise enough for the movements used for digital work. Why not just get the proper tools for what you want to do. That would be less expensive then patching it together like you are now and let you perform the job you want to do.</p>

[gianluca_faletti]

<p>Bob, here <a href="http://www.lemoyenformat.com/Neuf/MFnu.htm">http://www.lemoyenformat.com/Neuf/MFnu.htm</a> (please press the button Scheimpflug down below) you can see some digital large format system.<br>

There is also the Linhof Techno that you speak above; is a very good camera but the cost for a person like me (I'm not a professionist) is without sense.<br>

Another solution is a betterlight scanning back, used !</p>

<p> </p>

[bob_salomon]

<p>You can control Scheimpflug by using either front or rear tilts and swings. But if you want to control the shape of the subject that can only be controlled with back swings and tilts (if you can not level the camera and get the subject where you need it on the ground glass by using whatever rise or shift in the front. So back movements are also very important.</p>

[urs_bernhard1]

<p>Hi Gianluca, why bother with digital? keep shooting film, it's more fun anyway and save the money for life... </p>

[bob_salomon]

<p>"keep shooting film, it's more fun anyway and save the money for life..."<br>

How does that save money over time?<br>

Buy the film, process the film, etc., etc.</p>

[urs_bernhard1]

<p>Bob, I'm pretty much sure that you know how huge the amount of film can be to meet the figures one has to spend for a high end digital solution. I doubt to find many non-professionals ever meeting that amount...</p>

[bob_salomon]

<p>Ever watch what consumers shoot on vacations, ball games, parties, etc. with digital today? It far exceeds the number of shots they took on film.<br>

One card can be 1000s of images alone.<br>

Film has a limit, take however many you can on film and take no more till you buy more.<br>

If one only has one memory card, download the files and shoot 1000s more using the same card. Or buy additional cards for the price of or less then the cost of film.<br>

And then we have the cost of processing film vs digital. First, the proofs on digital cost nothing, just view them on your camera or computer. To get just to that point you have processing cost and time with film.<br>

Remember that story about the guy that bought $15,000.00 of Kodachrome processing before the last lab closed last month? Had to get a loan from his father to pay that bill, not counting the cost of buying 1500 rolls of film in the first place.<br>

Could of done all that with a couple of cards and saved the cost of the trip to get to the lab as well.<br>

Film is not cheaper then digital, image for image. We sell Linhof view camera for film which are as much or more then Linhof view cameras for digital. Same with the Rodenstock lenses that we sell. Digital and film lenses are about the same price.<br>

So now the difference is the cost of holders, film and processing against the cosst of a back and memory. Compare the price per image for 1,000, 2,000, 5,000 and 10,000 shots. What is cheaper and by how much? And after you reach the break even price the cost of more files goes to 0. The cost for more film images keeps climbing.<br>

Don't forget what it costs in time and space to archive all those film shots compared to storing a memory card or a DVD.</p>