LF lens on a MF body??

[stefan_johansson1]

Hello,

 

I'm looking for a really wide angle lens (116deg. or something,

because I'm inspired by Clyde Butchers images). I have a Pentax 6x7,

and a 45/4 (89deg.), and thinking about moving up to LF, but first I

got this (crazy?) idea of putting a LF lens on my Pentax-body.

 

The goal I want to reach by doing this is to get the wide angle and

also the great depth of field.

 

First of all: is this really possible? I mean the LF-lenses doesn't

look like "ordinary" lenses. But if so, is the depth of field

possible to reach when attaching a LF lens on my MF body?

Second: how to do this? I'm thinking of place a kind of plate on the

front of the camera, like there is on real LF-bodys. Of course the

meter will not work, but I can live with that.

 

OK, maybe this is a totally impossible thing to do. I haven't tried

it yet (only in my head :) ), but I got the idea when eating my

breakfast this morning and had to make inquiries about it here at

photo.net.

 

Please give me some response

/Stefan

[stefan_johansson1]

Hmm...thought about it a little more and remembered that LF-lenses doesn't have focusing rings....How stupid I am! The solution then has to be some kind of bellow at the front.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Stefan,

 

What LF lens were you thinking of?

 

Have you considered using a LF camera? There are small ones that take rollfilm backs with formats upto 6x9.

 

Depth of field depends on magnification (on film) and f-number. Not on lens type or lens design.

[stefan_johansson1]

Q.G.

 

I am on a low budget and was thinking of buying a LF for about $200 to see if I even like to do LF at all. And then the idea came up.

 

What LF-camera were you thinking of?

 

Is it possible to put another medium format lens to my P67? For example Mamiya? Are there adaptors to buy?

[dan_fromm1]

Um, Stefan, there are no retrofocus lenses for LF cameras. "So what?", you ask. Well, that means there are no w/a lenses for LF that will make infinity on y'r 67 AND clear the 67's mirror.

 

As for 116 degree lenses, if you find any that will cover 6x7 or even 4x5 and can be bought for $200 or less, please tell us about them. No fisheyes, please.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

[david_goldfarb]

Dan's answer is the answer. For wideangle this is not possible, however, for lenses a bit beyond "normal" for the format and longer, many LF lenses can be adapted to focal plane MF cameras with a focusing mechanism that is separate from the lens (like the Bronica S-series, Rollei SL66, RB 67, and others). On my Bronica S2A, for instance, I sometimes use a 21cm/f:4.5 Heliar or a 500mm/f:5.5 Tele-Xenar, both designed for 4x5" cameras.

[guytal]

Horsman makes a view camera adapter that fits the Pentax and Mamiya 645 (not P67 though). See:

<br>

<a href="http://horsemanusa.com/vcc_SpAc.html">http://horsemanusa.com/vcc_SpAc.html</a>

<br><br>

As others said - this is not your solution for extreme wideangle. If you want the "Clyde Butcher Look" you should get yourself an inexpensive LF camera (e.g. ShenHao can be bought brand new for just over $600).

<br><br>

Guy<br>

<a href="http://scenicwild.com">Scenic Wild</a>

[ilkka]

How about Horseman SW612? The widest lens for that system is 35mm covering the full 6x12cm. Alternatively, a 6x9 or 6x7 back can be fitted.

[steve_teale]

Stefan,

 

I'm posting a reply I got from George Hager because it addressed the DOF issue in LF - I had assumed that there was more - and certainly more when camera movements are used...

 

"Steven,

 

Actually you get a lot less depth with a 4x5. The normal lens for 4x5 is around 180 mm. It has the same depth of field as a 180 on a 35 mm. It doesn't matter which format camera it is on, the depth on a given focal length is the same. Yes, the tilts and swings help, but many times you can't use them. The bottom line is you need all of the ajustments just to get back to where you started with 35 mm.

 

There are distinct advantages to 4x5 (which I shoot 90% of the time) but most folks don't understand the depth of field problems. It's a real problem when I use a 360 mm lens (equivalent to a 105 mm on your 35 mm system). The depth of field is the same as a 360 on the 35 mm system and the coverage of the lens is minimal so I can't use the tilts and swings much.

 

Another problem you can run into that is interesting is because of the matematics of depth of field. You can lay a piece of newspaper flat on a table, focus on the paper, have the foreground and background in focus and still have the middle of the page out of focus. Sometimes on large format scenics you will see this same thing.

 

Stuff like that drives us 4x5 users nuts."

[guytal]

To address the previously quoted response about 4x5: yes, DOF is dependent on focal length, not coverage, but having the ability to reposition the focal plain in relation to the film plane (aka "movements") mitigates many of the related problems. To say that using movements brings you back to where you were with 35mm is a little strange to me - your image may have the same depth but you now have it on a sheet of film 13 times larger, capturing a lot more detail and much better color and tone transitions, and having the ability to correct and adjust perspective etc. Do these not play into your decision? If so - why do you bother with 4x5 in the first place?<br>

Most LF lenses also stop down much farther than 35mm or medium format lenses. When DOF is such that even movements don't bring you where you want to be, you can always stop all the way to f/64 and even smaller in some cases. Yes, diffraction will come into play and you will have fewer lines-per-mm, but a heck of a lot more mm's to make up for it.<br>

Last - the poster mentioned a 360mm lens with small coverage. I'm assuming that's a telephoto design. Those are notorious for their small coverage and are a compromise for not having enough bellows. A standard design 360mm will give you enough coverage even for 8x10 with ample movements.<br>

<br>

This is not to say the poster was wrong, but there are a lot more factors to consider with each system and quoting a few random bits of information is a sure way to confuse the uninformed and give them wrong ideas.

<br><br>

Guy<br>

<a href="http://scenicwild.com">Scenic Wild</a>

[stefan_johansson1]

Hello again,

 

Thanks for your respons.

 

The more I thought about this idea the more I too realized that this was not possible.

 

OK, I'm very inspired about Clyde so let's talk a little about him... I've read about him in the book "Seeing the light" and the text says as follow: "But Clyde's favourite wide-angle lens and large format camera produced a focal point of 116 degrees - more than twice as wide as a standard setup - a panorama too sweeping to absorb in a single glance, but flawless in its detail." Further down the text also tell us that he close the lens down to a pinhole, and then he can leave it open for minutes.

And because he close the lens, it also must mean that he gets a really great DOP, doesn't it?? These two things understand I are the secret behind his images: A really wide lens and a really really great DOP to get sharpness from absolute "front" to absolute "back". Have I undestood it all right?

 

But which lens has an angle of 116deg.? I know he use a 120mm for his 8x10 and if I am right that sould be approximately the same as an 18-19mm for 35mm? 116 deg.?? My 45mm (appr. 20mm for 35mm)to my P67 has an angle of 89deg.

 

/Stefan

[dan_fromm1]

Stefan asked, not unreasonably, "But which lens has an angle of 116deg.?"

 

Well, if you can find an Aviogon or Super Aviogon you're there/more than there. Also with quite a lot less cash on hand.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

[david_goldfarb]

<img src="http://www.echonyc.com/~goldfarb/photo/79bb.jpg"><p>

 

My widest lens for 8x10" is a 120mm/f:14 Berthiot Perigraphe which is about a 100-year-old design, probably made between the two World Wars sometime. This shot was made at f:44 (yes, that's how it's marked on the wheel stop) on TMX 8x10".<P>

 

The Schneider 110mm Super-Symmar XL will just cover 8x10".<P>

 

The rare Goerz Hypergon will cover around 130 degrees, so in theory a 75mm Hypergon will cover 8x10".<P>

[dick roadnight cotswolds]

If you want an Ultra-wide angle of view, get a Schneider Super Angulon 47XL, which will give you about 116 degrees horizontal on a (Canham) 6 *17 cm roll film back, on a 5*7 inch view camera with sunken lens board and bag bellows.

 

This is a useful combination, but I think that the minimum cost of this new would be about £3,000!

 

Mounting an LF lens on a MF body is �no� problem:

 

I have attached my Hasselblad 555ELD to one end of My Sinar p, and a 600mm lens to the other, and got a picture:

 

this is not wide angle,

 

you need a shutter (or an MF SLR with a focal plane shutter)

 

LF lenses do not have good enough resolution to be of much use on 66, unless you need the coverage for movements.

 

This is, of course one way of getting the some LF type movements with an SLR viewfinder and motor-drive � great for waders on a shore, or pedestrians on a long pavement.

 

This system is also expensive.

 

You can, of course put the Magazine straight on the back of the Sinar, (with the adaptor) but you do not get the SLR viewfinder or the MD, or the TTL flash metering.

 

Because of the lack of resolution of the LF lenses, I am thinking of mounting my Novoflex 35mm lenses (640mm f9, and 400 f5.6) on my Sinar p with a 24 x36 mm CCD digiback and electronic shutter. This is possible, as the aperture diaphragm is behind the rear element, and the lens comes apart in several places � this would give hi-res pics (42Mpixels in 16-shot) with a narrow angle of view, and movements.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Dick,<br><br>You haven't mounted a LF lens to a MF body, you have mounted a complete (!!!) LF camera to a complete MF body.<br>I still don't understand why people do that instead of just attaching a rollfilm back. ;-)<br><br>Stefan,<br><br>The cameras i was thinking of were the thingies produced by Arca Swiss, Cambo, Rollei, Linhof, Sinar, and no doubt other manufacturers too.

[douglas_green1]

A basic but serviceable LF camera (without lens) such as a Calumet or Toyo 4x5 can be gotten for under $200 on ebay in excellent shape. This is probably the way to go. I've even seen Sinar P outfits sell for under $600. Pros who have switched their studios to digital are practically giving this stuff away now, as it is a buyer's market. Then get a rollfilm Graflock back and whatever lens you want and you are all set.