dan_fromm2

Um, er, ah, I think the question was about Capaul & Weber medium format cameras, not about Pignons SA 35 mm cameras.

If you can live with manual nearly everything -- pardon my ignorance, I'm not sure what is possible with a T6 -- a decent process lens on bellows will do very well for you. A symmetrical lens is preferable, doesn't have to be reversed for working above 1:1. I've used 150/9 Apo Ronar and 210/9 Konica Hexanon GR II this way on Nikons (fully manual film cameras, not digital) but at 3:1 their front element-to-subject distances are shorter than you need. Consider 240/9 Apo-Ronar, 260/9 GR II, 300/9 Apo-Ronar or 305/9 Apo-Nikkor. c.p.m. is right about how hard it is to be steady enough shooting handheld, even at 1:1. My preferred solution is flash illumination. When ambient light is bright this requires low ISO or an ND filter.

Dustin, the OP's camera has a 135/4.7 Schneider. This was standard issue for later top rangefinder 4x5 Crown Graphics. 100 mm +/- is normal, not wide angle, on 2x3. Cowboy wrote "Anything wider, or more fancy, like a 75mm SA is just going to be extremely difficult or impossible to fit and focus on a Crown Graphic." Stuff and nonsense. In post #3 above I pointed out that the 4x5 Crown's minimum extension is 52.5 mm. I didn't mention -- thought it wasn't necessary, people who know the camera know this -- that Pacemaker Graphics have linked inner and outer bed rails and are therefore very friendly to short lenses. It is true that some focal lengths make infinity with the standard centered on the hinge. The solution is to give up a little close focusing distance and position the standard as far forward as it will go on the inner rail. JDMvW's list is, like all such, incomplete. Worse, none of the 4x5 lenses in it are now inexpensive. Thinking of inexpensive and incomplete, in post #3 above I didn't mention the 90/6.8 Geronar-WA or 90/6.8 Leitmeyr because both are scarce. I just took a look on ebay.com, found a set of 90 Geronar cells, not cheap, and a $60 Leitmeyr in working shutter described as hazy.

As Dustin said, in general a 105/4.5 enlarging lens won't cover 4x5 at distance. To be more specific, the Hellor is a tessar type, will cover at most 60 degrees stopped down. A 105 that covers 150 mm has to cover 71 degrees. There are good reasons why people who shoot 4x5 don't use 100 mm +/- enlarging lenses as w/a lenses. Taking lenses from 2x3/6x9 folders, as Dustin suggested, aren't wide angle lenses and won't cover 4x5. Again, there are good reasons why they're not used as w/a lenses on 4x5. I take it that you have a 4x5 Crown Graphic. Inexpensive and relatively easily found w/a lenses for 4x5 include 90/6.8 Optar/Raptar and 90/6.3 Angulon. Different designs, both cover 4x5 with little room for movements. More expensive more modern lenses with greater coverage include 90/8 Ilex, 90/8 Fujinon SW, 90/6.8 Grandagon, 90/8 Nikkor SW and 90/8 Super Angulon. All of these will work on your camera. There are many less common lenses that will do for you. Re the shortest lens that will work on a 4x5 Crown, the camera's minimum extension is 52.5 mm. The 47/5.6 Super Angulon XL will focus to infinity on your camera and covers 166 mm @ f/22. You can't afford one and is probably much wider than you'll be able to use well at Yellowstone.

The two on the right are metal boards for Pacemaker Graphic cameras. Measure them, boards for 4x5 Pacemakers are 3 23/32" x 3 21/32", for 3x4 Pacemakers are 3 3/16" x 3 19/64". The 4"x4" (I b'lieve you measured it and assumed the others were identical, they aren't) wooden board is original issue for 4x5 Pre-Anniversary or Anniversary Speed Graphics. The original owner was an accumulator or had an Anny (or Pre-Anny) Speed and a Pacemaker (Speed or Crown). That's why two 90/6.8s on incompatible boards. Re the 210, you made a typo in y'r original post, it is a CZJ lens, not a "Wollensack." Ain't no "c" in Wollensak. Values? Go see what 4x5 Pacemaker Graphic boards have sold for on eBay. If you're going to sell, sell the lenses and boards separately.

I must be missing something. On the one hand, I can see the attractions of shooting panoramas (negatives longer than 36 mm) on 35 mm film. On the other, I don't see how precise framing is possible with a viewfinder camera like the Cameradactyls. Since the proposed 35 mm Cameradactyl accepts the same lenses as the roll film ones, wouldn't shooting on 120 and cropping be preferable?

Ben, Orsetto is right. You're going to have to change your requirements or get extremely lucky. Re lucky, Elcan made a 1.5"/2.8 lens, their type C-280, for the Vinten F.95 aerial camera, which shoots 6x6 on 70 mm film. Longer than you say you need, possibly fast enough, and very scarce. Can be recognized by serial number 280-xxxx. Re not quite so lucky, Elcan made a 1.75"/2.8 lens, their type C-88, also for the F.95. Much too long for you. I have one, don't love it. They show up from time to time. Wander over to mflenses.com and ask about focal length reducers that also increase maximum aperture.

For directions see: www.ihagee.org/Lenzen/HMG3-1938E-PlasmatLenses.pdf

Oh, dear. Photography was invented in France. The original process produced direct positives that could not be reproduced. The negative-positive process that is the basis of film based photography as is still practiced was invented in England. The UK had a host of lens, camera and film manufacturers, most long gone.

There were two versions of the Veriwide. The original Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide 100 has an integral roll holder and shoots 56 x 100 mm. The later Brooks Veriwide accepts Mamiya Press roll holders and shoots 56 x 82 mm. Both have a fixed 47/8 Super Angulon. One trick ponies, but it is a good trick. You can get much the same effect with much greater flexibility at the cost of more bulk and weight with a Century Graphic or 2x3 Crown Graphic. I have both, use lenses from a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon ($$$$$) through a 47/5.6 SA ($$$) to much longer lenses. The longest lens of normal construction that will focus on a Century/2x3 Crown is around 200 mm but 250 mm teles were offered for the cameras. Roll holders that fit are nominal 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 (56 by as much as 82, gate width depends on make and vintage).

It depends on the object's size. If you look at Mamiya's documentation on lenses for the RB/RZ you'll see that they report coverage. This is not coverage in the usual sense -- diameter of the lens' image circle at infinity -- but is the size of the subject at the lens' close focusing distance. Close focusing distance on its own mount, that is. Go look at the documentation on, I think, butkus.org

Chuck, there was a kit for attaching a roll holder to a Miniature Speed Graphic. The focusing panel can't be removed from a Mini with the original issue spring back. That's why I suggested an insertion type roll holder.

When Graflex introduced the Graflok back they offered Graflok backs to be retrofitted to older Graphics, including the Miniature Speed Graphic. The Mini's retrofit backs have a flash terminal at the upper left rear corner. If you look long enough, you'll find a Mini with one. New old stock Mini retrofit Grafloks are very scarce. But and however, Graflok backs for 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics (Crown, Speed) fit Miniature Speed Graphics. Also very scarce. There are three ways you can proceed. Sell your Mini and buy a Mini with retrofitted Graflok (proper Mini or later Pacemaker). Use an insertion type roll holder, e.g., the Adapt-A-Roll 620. Buy a busted or somehow inexpensive Pacemaker with Graflok and swap the back over. Ages ago I bought a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic with a spring back, later found a Mini with a Pacemaker Graflok, swapped the backs and sold the Mini. The swap is easy. Unscrew the screws (four, two on the upper edge, two on the lower edge) that hold the back to the body, carefully pry the back off the body, replace on the target camera. Do not buy a Graflok back without a focusing panel.

Don't forget Fujinons. Busch Pressman cameras usually have Kalart rangefinders. If yours does and you replace the lens, even with one engraved with the same focal length as your old lens, the RF will have to be recalibrated. I don't agree with AJG about aged shutters. In my experience, used lenses are all in shutters that need to be overhauled. So if you replace your present lens -- if you want a different lens, by all means buy a different lens -- the replacement will be in a shutter that also needs a CLA. You might be better off financially simply having your present lens overhauled. Another caution. Original issue lenses for the Pressmen are in shutters that don't match the Compur/Prontor/Copal standard. If you get a lens in a Copal you may (great stress MAY) have to get a new board for it or have the old lens rebored, if that's possible.

Please see post #19 above.

Cowboy, I have an SC. Set up properly and with the tripod mounting block not between the standards it will focus lenses much shorter than 90 mm. If you knew the camera you'd know that relocating the tripod mounting block is easy. Heroic measures aren't needed. Bag bellows not needed with a 90, either.

Your camera may be assembled incorrectly. The right way is shown here: https://static.cambo.com/Files/SC2_Manual.pdf If it is assembled correctly, the tripod mounting block is between the standards. Remove it, roll the front standard back from the front of the rail, reattach the tripod mounting block at the front of the rail, move the front standard forward until it contacts the block. You should then be able to focus y'r 90/6.8 to infinity and beyond by moving the rear standard.

Mamiya Press cameras accept lenses in Mamiya Press mount. Putting foul alien unclean other lenses in Press mount and making the RF coupling work isn't trivial. End of discussion. If you want to use nearly any lens your best bet is a 2x3 view or press camera. I've used a wide range of lenses on my 2x3 Cambo SC and on 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics. Neither will fit in a pocket. You earlier remarked that you don't want to use uncoated lenses. If that's what you don't want to do, fine. But and however, I've got excellent results with uncoated Tessar types, in particular with echt f/6.3 CZJ Tessars, f/6.3 B&Ls and a 101/4.5 Ektar as supplied with some US-made 2x3 press cameras, and with uncoated dagor types, in particular f/14 Ser. VIa Perigraphes.

As Steve almost said, the normal focal length for 24x36 is 43 mm. The normal focal length for 56 x 82 (that's what nominal 6x9 really is, it is a poor metric approximation to 2.25 x 3.25 inches) is 100 mm. I don't agree with Steve about the Selfix 820's 105/3.8. It is a jes' plain Tessar type, two singlets in front of the diaphragm and a cemented doublet behind it, and it isn't very sharp. Although it is collimated properly I've never got a satisfactorily sharp shot from it. The 101/4.5 Ektar on my 2x3 (short for 2.25 x 3.25) Graphics (Century, Pacemaker Speed) is much better.

OP, appending the lenses' names would have been helpful. Guesses? Looks more like a cut and paste job from Kowa Super 66 Technical Bulletin instruction manual, user manual, PDF manual, free manuals

Don't forget igorcamera.com

Oh, dear. C90. Oh, dear. I've had two. Bought the first one in '78. It had severe astigmatism and a terrible central hotspot. Completely unusable. When I realized that it had been shipped without the little extension tube that's supposed to be necessary I returned it on warranty. My second was the replacement, which came (hooray!) with the tube the first one lacked. The central hotspot wasn't as bad, was still too much. And the astigmatism was still there.

Since no one has mentioned the 700/8 Questar, I will. Its a great lens, more-or-less the best mirror lens of its time. Like all long lenses it is difficult to use, punishes instability severely. I once shot mine at 1:4, its close focusing limit, against a 55/2.8 MicroNikkor AIS and a 105/2.8 MicroNikkor AIS, both at f/8 and the same magnification. I used flash illumination for all three shots and my FM2n's highest sync speed. Kodachrome 25, processed in Fair Lawn. The Questar shot couldn't be told from the two MicroNikkor shots.

I can't answer your question, can respond to the discussion's subject. The best response is a question. Why would you want to use a lens with that much coverage on 6x8 or even 6x9 (actually approximately 58 mm x 82 mm)? There are smaller lighter less expensive lenses around that focal length with coverage more than adequate for 6x9. I own a few, including two 58s. 58/5.6 Grandagon/Technikon in #00, 58/5.6 Konica Hexanon in #0. 60/5.6 Konica Hexanon in #0. All have to be reshuttered because their native shutters are, um, special versions that make sense only on the cameras the lenses were made for. If you can live with 65 mm, there are fine f/8 and f/5.6 65s from the major manufacturers. Shorter than 58 mm, longer than 47 mm is a bit more difficult.

Hmm. Y'r Miniature Speed Graphic takes boards 2 1/2" x 2 1/2". So do my 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics. Larger Graphics have larger boards. I never found my 2x3 Graphics' boards limiting, or even their tiny 48 mm square lens throat. See http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf Few of my lenses have rear cells too large to pass through the front standard's lens throat. I put them on the camera by removing the focusing panel (easy to do with a Graflok back), unscrewing the lens' rear cell from its shutter, mounting shutter and front cell, and then reattaching the rear cell. The last step can be a little fiddly. Graflex introduced the Graflok back in 1949, three years after the last Mini was made. They offered Graflok backs to be retrofitted to Minis. These have the flash terminal in the right position. Graflok backs for 2x3 Pacemakers will fit Minis. I scavenged my 2x3 Pacemaker Speed's Graflok (correct one for that camera) from a Mini.