View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Gammanine
Joined: 11 Aug 2001 Posts: 46 Location: Brooklyn NY
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've only used normal and the odd telephoto on 4x5's. this is my first venture with a 3x4 and I'm thinking maybe a wide angle will be nice to have along. I found a 65mm grandagon 4.5. Not tooo big and fast enough. Now I'm doing the math and I spot the front standard just inside the box. Which means no movements without radical surgery to the standard. Anyone here know if my calculations are correct? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Les
Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's about right. I use a 65mm SAngulon and a 58 Grandagon on my Crown 45. They all go inside and unless you want to remove the wire finder there's no moving. I"ve heard at least one person using a 47mm Super angulong on a crown 45 with a roll back and being able to focus at Inf. !
And don't forget to drop the bed!
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2148 Location: New Jersey
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
On 2004-10-04 08:25, Les wrote:
That's about right. I use a 65mm SAngulon and a 58 Grandagon on my Crown 45. They all go inside and unless you want to remove the wire finder there's no moving. I"ve heard at least one person using a 47mm Super angulong on a crown 45 with a roll back and being able to focus at Inf. !
And don't forget to drop the bed!
| Not directly relevant, but my 47/5.6 SA makes infinity on my Century, but not on my 2x3 Pacemaker Speed. My 65/8 Ilex Acugon (very similar to the 65/8 SA) makes infinity on both.
And, as Les said, drop the bed or else.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gammanine
Joined: 11 Aug 2001 Posts: 46 Location: Brooklyn NY
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, thanks for the confirmation.
I like the idea of using the 65 but not without movements.
I had figured the bed had to be dropped of be in all the shots.. lol.
So now I'm thinking about a 3x4 field. Ala Zone V(. I could pull the back off a graflex and make a back for the 4x5.
Why?
Well the 65 has a small circle with serious fall off. The smaller format will give me more movements and the falloff will be less to deal with.
Just a thought.
I'm convinced this is a disease, akin to bipolar disorder. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Henry
Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 1648 Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My 65 Optar has very limited coverage beyond straight-ahead 6x7, as used on my Century Graphic. I had removed the frame finder to get a tad more rise (as others have stated, at infinity the front standard is "in the box"), but noted that the added rise came with the penalty of darkened upper corners. I've recently replaced the frame finder as occasionally I like to shoot hand-held with the camera. On my Century I never have to lower the bed with the 65 Optar.
I'm wondering how the 65 Grandagon is going to work with movements on a 3x4 camera if my 65 Optar vignettes on the smaller-format Century?
[ This Message was edited by: Henry on 2004-10-05 07:13 ] |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gammanine
Joined: 11 Aug 2001 Posts: 46 Location: Brooklyn NY
|
Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
The image circle of the 65mm grandagon is somewhat larger than the circle of your 65mm optar.
The Grandagon shows a circle of 170mm at f/22.
Diagonal of 3x4 format is 125mm. 45mm to spare.
If the coverage of your optar is similar to a 65mm f/6,8 angulon the circle is approx 109mm at F/16. Diagonal of a 6x7 is 92mm.
Huge difference in available room to move.
[ This Message was edited by: Gammanine on 2004-10-08 22:23 ] |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|