| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 8:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| There was a mention of cheap #1 shutters. I thought the Polaroids had different threads? I'd love a spare shutter for the Claron that is coming my way. Or should I look out for some other cheap lens mounted in a #1? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-03 13:28, Nick wrote:
There was a mention of cheap #1 shutters. I thought the Polaroids had different threads? I'd love a spare shutter for the Claron that is coming my way. Or should I look out for some other cheap lens mounted in a #1?
|
Since you need a shutter with a diaphgragm, DO NOT get an MP-4 #1 Copal Press. They're intended for front mounting lenses in barrel, don't have diaphragms.
Look for a 127/4.7 Tominon, probably ex-CU-5, in Copal #1 Press. The lens isn't a throwaway, but the shutter will do you just fine. This is the shutter that Jim Galli, eBay id tpahjim, puts his remounted G-Clarons in.
Jim has reported that the shutters that 75/4.5 Tominons, also ex-CU-5, come in have restricted diaphragms. Don't open as wide as you'll want.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-03 15:11, Dan Fromm wrote:
[Since you need a shutter with a diaphgragm, DO NOT get an MP-4 #1 Copal Press. They're intended for front mounting lenses in barrel, don't have diaphragms.
|
Thanks. If I can get a #1 then the Xenar can stay in it's shutter. But now that you've brought these up-) How big is the opening? I've got a few barrel lenses that are too big for the front mount shutter I have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-03 15:28, Nick wrote:
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-03 15:11, Dan Fromm wrote:
[Since you need a shutter with a diaphgragm, DO NOT get an MP-4 #1 Copal Press. They're intended for front mounting lenses in barrel, don't have diaphragms.
|
Thanks. If I can get a #1 then the Xenar can stay in it's shutter. But now that you've brought these up-) How big is the opening? I've got a few barrel lenses that are too big for the front mount shutter I have.
|
The front is 40 mm. That's the #1 standard.
I don't trust my memory about the rear, I keep remembering 36 AND 34. The dimensions are given on http://www.skgrimes.com , look under buy a new shutter.
What are you thinking of front-mounting and how what are their rear threads' ods? As I think you know, I have a small pile of lenses that I hang of the front of a #1, but not all of them will cover 4x5 so mounted. No problem for my 2x3s, but ...
And no, I haven't had an adapter for my 260/10 Process Nikkor made yet. Have to sell my 250/5.6 TeleRaptar first so I can pay for it.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's too small. I was hoping for something big enough for the JML 209mm. It just looks like such a nice piece of glass but it's also relatively huge. I've got two Agfa lenses that I can use with a front mounted shutter but next to the JML the things are tiny. The Agfa must cover 80degrees but other then front mounting a shutter it doesn't make $$$ sense to put them into a shutter.
Oh well the JML works fine stopped down-)
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-03 19:49, Nick wrote:
That's too small. I was hoping for something big enough for the JML 209mm. It just looks like such a nice piece of glass but it's also relatively huge. I've got two Agfa lenses that I can use with a front mounted shutter but next to the JML the things are tiny. The Agfa must cover 80degrees but other then front mounting a shutter it doesn't make $$$ sense to put them into a shutter.
Oh well the JML works fine stopped down-)
Thanks
|
Um, how big is the JML? I ask because Ilex #3s aren't that expensive and are bigger. IIRC, the front opening is around 44 mm. If you go that way, remember that ex-Tektronix oscillocope camera Ilex Universals are NOT threaded externally at the rear, so can't be mounted on board very easily. And there are Ilex #5s and large Alphaxes too.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I just measured. Almost 70mm. It's pretty big for a lens that wide open is F/8. I saw some discussion that mounted in a shutter it's more like F/5.6. You can see the aperture limiting the lens in the barrel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2144
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-04 06:59, Nick wrote:
I just measured. Almost 70mm. It's pretty big for a lens that wide open is F/8. I saw some discussion that mounted in a shutter it's more like F/5.6. You can see the aperture limiting the lens in the barrel.
|
A #5 Alphax or Betax or Ilex should do for longish timed exposures, but you'll have to get a shutter and have an adapter made. Use the lens on a Speed Graphic to get short timed exposures.
No idea on costs of getting a shutter and making it work properly. The last time I asked SKGrimes about making an adapter for my 260/10 they quoted $125. This is why I have to sell my 250/5.6 first. Another machinist might charge less.
Cheap process lenses in barrel can be, um, poisoned gifts. There are good reasons why G-Clarons and Repro Clarons in barrel sell for more than, say, comparable ApoGerogons or Apo Raptars or ...
So far I haven't got into bad trouble, i.e., ended up with a usable lens that cost more than the equivalent bought in shutter, but I also haven't gambled wildly on lenses or gone to great lengths to make any of my lenses usable. I have a couple that will probably sit unused forever because I'm not sure, now that I have 'em, whether having adapters made for them is worth the cost.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2004-07-04 07:48, Dan Fromm wrote:
but I also haven't gambled wildly on lenses or gone to great lengths to make any of my lenses usable.
|
Hi,
Me either. The two Agfa lenses set me back just over $30. The idea was to use the 105mm on the enlarger so any camera use was a bonus. The JML was I think less then $30 and the main reason for buying it was how nice the thing looked.
I've seen people pay big bucks for the Clarons. Once you add the cost of a cheap shutter you're often looking at more then just buying a brand new lens. I just take my time. If the price stays reasonable then I'll take a risk. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
