Related Local Links:
Fun Telescopes for Under $10 (lens hacking)
Homebrew Medium Format Lens Conversions
Lens Mount Adapter FAQ
Postcard Panoramic Cameras (Kodak #3A..)

Related Links:
3-D Stereo Camera Hacker's Page
6x12/4x5 Ultrawide for a Little Less Money by Bob Hutchinson
Archives of the Camera Makers Mailing List
Bender Corp (4x5..)
Bender 8x10" Homebrew Camera
Build LF Cameras by Mungoczar [11/2000]
Cambo Wide Style Homemade Camera by Monte Collard [8/2001]
Camera Makers Mailing List [01/2001]
Digital Scanner Camera by Andrew Davidhazy (RIT) [1/2001]
DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Links [8/2002]
Don Feinberg's Homebrew 4x5" Camera [8/2002]
Fisheye66 180 deg on 120 rollfilm by Greg Erker
Full Circle 8x10 Camera
Handbuilt Cameras by Gene F. Rhodes
Handbuilt Panoramic Cameras Pages [01/00]
Hand Made Precision Cameras (Arturo Rebora - 6x9, 6x12, 6x17..) [11/99]
Homemade 4x5 by Jim Read [04/00]
Homemade 5x4" Superwide Camera by John Staffod (47mm..) [2/2004]
Homemade 6x9cm Camera by Doug Bardell (Agfa Isolette lens...)
Homemade 6x11cm Panoramic Camera (Italy)
Homemade 8x10" LF camera [4/2002]
Homemade Cameras (MF ultrawides, 4x5" wides..) by Monte Collard [7/2001]
Homemade Large Format (18x24) (Rudolf Mittelmann)
Homemade Medium Format Cameras (Camogli 69/47 69/58 612/58 617/90)
Homemade Panoramics (D.K. Fletcher) [04/00]
Handheld Scanner to Digital Back or Camera (RIT)
Homebrew Scanning digital camera (1000X, hand scanner CCD board)
Homemade Trail and Wildlife Cameras and Adapters [3/2001]
Large Format Home Brew Camera page (Dave Payne)
Large Format on a Shoestring by David Stein (e.g., 90mm) [7/2001]
Larscan Panoramic Medium Format/35mm Camera (homebrew motorized) [01/00]
Linux Scanner Parallel Port Drivers
Lookaround Panoramic Homemade Camera
Mamiya 4x5/6x12 Ultrawide Homemade Camera by Bob Hutchinson
Mamiya Universal Ultrawide (Bob Hutchinson) [02/00]
Kurt Mottweiler Studio Pages (fine crafted cameras) [1/2003]
Nimslo 3D Camera hacking by Andrew Davidhazy (1:3 ratio etc.)
Phil's 8x10" camera [1/2001]
Ron Baker's 120 Viewcamera [11/2000]
Sam's Stereoscopic Camera Pages (3-D Hacker!) [02/00]
Society of Handmade Cameras (pinholes..)
Panoptik Homemade 360 degree Camera by Doug Bardell
Panoramic Homemade Cameras
Plungercam Hasselblad (Loupe for a lens)
View Camera Construction FAQ
Wide Angle Mount Homemade Camera

Are you looking for ideas for your own homemade cameras? You will find hundreds of Do-It-Yourself camera making links at Markus Keinaths pages - Recommended! You should also join the camera makers mailing list to learn and share ideas on making cameras with other enthusiasts.

Our links and postings here give some ideas of nifty project cameras, many to professional standards, which have been built by amateur camera makers. So feel encouraged that others have tried and succeeded, and you can too!

My special interest lies in camera and lens modifications - the simpler, the better. My postcard panoramic camera is a good example. Starting with a cheap Kodak #3A (but with a 4 element cellor lens), make a simple adapter to use 120 rollfilm from a stack of coins glued together. Okay, laugh if you want, but where else can you shoot 6x12cm panoramic shots for the price of a few pizzas?

Similarly, my Lens Hacking pages provide many ideas and examples of modifying medium format and LF lenses to work on different cameras. Given the high cost of a 500mm f/8 telephoto lens on most MF cameras, it may be useful to learn that many low cost T-mount lenses for 35mm SLRs also cover 6x6cm. Surprise! These $129 multicoated lenses scored all "excellents", both center and edge, in resolution tests. One tip like this can add a lot of capability to your photographic kit for very low dollars. There are lots of similar lens swaps and modifications you can do too!

So I leave the hard work of precision lens design and manufacture to others. It is much easier and more fun to recycle the aspheric lens on a $1 garage sale Kodak disc camera for use as a macro lens. Or using an old 8mm glass movie camera lens as a $2 bellows lens or as an eyepiece for a homemade telescope. How about a large format lens with electronic shutter and auto-exposure metering for $5? Surprised again? Simply use a Polaroid camera with positive/negative film (#665..) to produce a negative for darkroom use along with the polaroid print.

Once you start out with some simple successes in modifying and reusing cameras and optics, you are ready for the next stage - designing and building your own "ideal" camera projects. The postings below will hopefully supply you some ideas and tips you can use in those projects.

Good luck - and Enjoy!

Related Note: See Think Big by Bernard Koenig in British Journal of Photography of March 19, 2003, pp.15-6, describing his 8x10" polaroid back Single Lens Reflex camera (!) sporting either an 800mm f/3.5 or 600mm f/3.5 lens. A mirror is used to flip the image forty-five degrees and up to a screen where it is imaged by a CCD camera, and then onto a full sized image on a monitor screen. See www.beautyphoto.de (or email koenig@beautyphoto.de) for more details on this unique image polaroid homebrew camera.

Related Postings

From: "Gene F. Rhodes" GFRhodes@mail.direcpc.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: My HOMEMADE Cameras
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998

In 1952 my first camera project was an extension tube fabrication and reducing my lens diaphragm to f 64 for macro photography. My camera was a Mercury II half frame rotary disk focal-plane shutter 35mm that I bought from an army buddy in 1948. With this setup I took extreme close-ups with remarkable depth of field for its day.

Later I found an identical camera at a used camera store for $20. When I taped them together (but to but) I had my first stereo camera. Later I bought a new Kodak Stereo and then a used Stereo Realist for $40. I have two boxes of stereo slides that I am now scanning into my computer.

Last year I decided that I hated vertical format stereo slides and decided to modify my Stereo Realist. I enlarged the frames to European width and rebuilt the film advance gearing. The horizontal format was much better even though the corners were a little fuzzy. When I took the lenses apart to see if I could increase the lens opening I cracked one of them. End of project. Now I use a "new" Russian FED Stereo camera and am very satisfied with it. I didn't know it was available before the modification. I normally won't build anything that I can afford to buy.

This year I decided to build a 35mm wide angle pinhole camera. I used one of my Mercury II camera bodies and removed all interior components. I chose a curved focal surface frame so it would have a constant focal distance of 30mm. I made dozens of pinholes before I selected an f-stop of 180. I found that anything smaller or larger would reduce sharpness. I tried several methods of reducing diffraction then gave up in frustration. The only thing that seemed to help a little was lamp blacking the pinhole with a candle flame. The resulting frame size is 24 x 79mm and the view angle is approx. 150 deg. An all metal camera that weighs approx 13 oz.

My first panoramic photo (180 deg) was made with my Pentax ZX-5N and required 20 exposures taken in panorama mode and vertical format. Stitching 20 scans together in Picture Publisher was quite a project but turned out very well. I printed it on a single sheet of 8.5x44 in. paper with my Epson Stylus Photo printer and mounted it on foam board. Then I was hooked and went looking for a panorama camera.

My first two panorama camera were homebuilt Panoptic rotary cameras and both were extreme disappointments. I wanted quality photos so I bought a Russian Horizon swing-lens 35mm camera and was amazed with the quality of the camera and the resulting photos. Then I could take four exposures and have a 360 degree panorama. The Horizon is a fine camera but is limited by a fixed focus lens and can't be used with flash.

I wanted to take wide frame photos up close and with flash so I modified a Yashica-C TLR to use 35mm film. The format was 24 x 58mm vertical. The pictures were good but for horizontal shots I had to turn the camera on its side which was unacceptably awkward.

To overcome this problem I created a wide frame (24 x 71mm) 35mm twin lens reflex camera with an eye-level prism viewfinder. I notched the back of a Yashica-635 TLR and inserted a modified Mercury II 35mm camera body. The Mercury is a long camera and its frame can be enlarged to 71mm. The focusing rails protruded into the image area so had to be shortened and covered to eliminate leakage. The prism and its lens came from a Ricoh 35mm SLR and were epoxied directly to the ground glass. The viewer cover was raised .5 inch to accommodate the prism assy. Because of the 80mm lenses this camera works best with Yashica Wideangle aux lenses. This camera I am proud of.

I have JPG photo files showing samples and details of the pinhole and the 35mm TLR cameras for anyone who might want them. They are approx 220k bytes each.

From Medium Format Digest:
From: Bob Atkins bobatkins@hotmail.com
Subject: Looking for a lens (MF, LS, scale focus, 50mm?)
Date: 1998-11-12

I have a project in mind for which I'd need a lens with about a 75mm circle of coverage (so a 6x6 or 6x7 or even a 645 lens would be OK). It must have it's own leaf shutter and a focusing scale. I intend to mount it on a "home made" camera, so the mount doesn't matter much (though it would be nice if "the other half" were easily available - maybe just a modified rear lens cap would be OK). The ideal focal length would be short, 50mm or less. Price is an issue too of course. Ideally under $500 (as far as possible under!) for a used lens.

Does such a thing exist, or am I looking at LF lenses as the only option (where short fl is hard to come by).

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Gene F. Rhodes" GFRhodes@intcon.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
[1] First Home Page
Date: Mon Nov 23 1998

My web page shows my two 35mm hand built cameras.

This year I decided to build a 35mm wide angle pinhole camera. I used one of my Mercury II camera bodies and removed all interior components. I chose a curved focal surface frame so it would have a constant focal distance of 30mm. I made dozens of pinholes before I selected an f-stop of 180. I found that anything smaller or larger would reduce sharpness. I tried several methods of reducing diffraction then gave up in frustration. The only thing that seemed to help a little was lamp blacking the pinhole with a candle flame. The resulting frame size is 24 x 74mm and the view angle is approx. 150 deg. An all metal camera that weighs approx 13 oz.

Later I created a wide frame (24 x 71mm) 35mm twin lens reflex camera with an eye-level prism viewfinder. I notched the back of a Yashica-635 TLR and inserted a modified Mercury II 35mm camera body. The Mercury is a long camera and its frame can be enlarged to 71mm. The focusing rails protruded into the image area so had to be shortened and covered to eliminate leakage. The prism and its lens came from a Ricoh 35mm SLR and were epoxied directly to the ground glass. The viewer cover was raised .5 inch to accommodate the prism assy. Because of the 80mm lenses this camera works best with Yashica Wideangle aux lenses. This camera I am proud of.

http://linux.cottagesoft.com/~gfrhodes

--
II*

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998
From: YDegroot@aol.com
Reply to: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Which stereo camera is best to convert to 35x100 or so panoramic?

Some years ago, I converted a stereo camera to a panoramic by adding a 47mm SA with focusing mount. It worked really well, until the winding mechanism totally gave up and tore my film to shreds.

Has anyone done this, and which stereo body is best? You have to keep in mind that all insides have to be gutted, without affecting the film winding mechanism, etc.

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 199
From: britt leckman bleckman@gmu.edu
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Which stereo camera is best to convert to 35x100 or so panoramic?

I am in the process of converting a Nimslo 3d camera to Panoramic. They are selling on EBAY for about $50.00. You might also consider a Nishika, but the all plastic body might present some problems when mounting your new lens mount. I am also using a 47mm angulon, but I am forgoing the focusing mount, and setting the lens to focus a little before infinity (f8 will focus to infinity with depth of field). The nice thing about these cameras is that once you rip out the guts, (preserving the winding mechanism of course) the frame counter is accurate. These are nice compact modern cameras, well made and fairly easy to rip apart (I used a dremel with a cut off tool to detach the four lenses).

Best of luck,

Britt Leckman
George Mason University

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998
From: YDegroot@aol.com
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Which stereo camera is best to convert to 35x100 or so panoramic?

Thansk for all the suggestions.

I think I will do better to keep running 35mm film through my Brooks Plaubel Veriwide with 47mm S-Angulon: I already get 24x90mm exposures. I'll make a special mask to go inside the camera, and I'll just have to rewind the film in the dark to get it back into the 35mm cassette. I'll get 7 exp. on 24-exp. roll, without wasting too much film.

Or, I can go out and buy the new X-pan, but darn, only 65mm wide! That kinda bugs me! I really wish someone makes something wider than that.

How about the new Rodenstock Grandagon 35mm lens with focusing tube on a 35mm body, and see how wide you can get? Wow, wouldn't that be something. Anybody done that?????

from rec.photo.equipment.large-format
From: kroppe@mich.com
[1] How does a ball head work? (Home brew tripods)
Date: Mon Jan 11 1999

How does the friction lock work in a ball head?

Does the locking mechanism work via radial (side) pressure on the ball, or axial (vertical) pressure? I am trying to conjure up a home brew ball head (for real!) and not sure how the mechanism works.

Any tips greatly appreciated.

Regards,

B.J. Kroppe

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999
From: Clint O'Connor clint@argonauta.com
To: rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Pinhole posting

I don't see how to post a reply to this particular topic but thought you'd be interested. I recently made one myself using a set of pinholes I bought for $31 and model aircraft plywood and basswood, using 120 film and a semicircular back. Finished it up with veneer and a brass T-crank to make it look nicer. Total cost was about $60 plus one pinhole out of the $31 set. I took it to the Pacific Northwest and got spectacular transparencies using Velvia and Provia 100 & 400 and B&W; with HP5 400 and Pan F 50. I should have the prints ($200 worth!) back next week and can scan them if you're interested in posting them.

Camera
0.0126" pinhole in .001" monel
3" focal length
effective f-stop of 238
120 roll film
images are 54mm x 160mm (about 6" long)
field of view is approximately 120 degrees
uniform exposure, edge to edge (no apparent falloff)

The one thing I never anticipated in building this was whether anyone in town could print 6" negatives. They have to go to Dallas; no one in Austin has a 5"x7 enlarger.

Clint O'Connor

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Gene F. Rhodes" GFRhodes@intcon.net
[1] New project
Date: Sun Feb 07 1999

My new project is hand building a fixed lens 35mm panoramic camera that will give me a 8 x 32 inch photo quality print on my Epson photo printer. For details and progress reports (including failures) see my home page.

http://linux.cottagesoft.com/~gfrhodes

--
II*

From: ldaneman@aol.com (LDaneman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Plans for Build Your Own Vac Easel (up to 20x24) url link
Date: 26 Jan 1999

Go to easel photo url for small photo and description. Plans, tool list, parts list, source list and sku's, and detailed building description available for $15. Make it yourself, . . . easy to make masks for any paper/photo aspect ratio and size up to 20x24. Especially designed for double weight fiber based paper. Main Website business URL link included in this page.

Thanks, L.A. Daneman

Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999
From: "Gary A. Braun" gbraun@mitre.org
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: 'Cherry Blossom' Conference

Richard,

I'm interested in attending the Cherry Blossom Conference to be held in Washington. I live in Leesburg, so I don't need a hotel. Please let me know where to send the registration fee.

I have built two "LarScan" type cameras and would be willing to demonstrate them for the participants. Also, I have experience with QTVR development, so I could "walk through" the process of putting together a QTVR movie from a scanned panoramic image. Are you interested?

Cheers,
Gary

From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Building and |Modifying MF cameras
Date: 5 Jan 1999

Lyndon Fletcher wrote:

> I've been on the lookout for a cheap lightmeter for use with a 35mm
> system I own. At a junkmart I found one but the guy would only sell it
> with a camera --- an Agfa Isolette 1.
>
> I've played with the Issolette  and came to the conclusion that I love
> these folding cameras! What an increadibly neat idea! Medium format
> you can put in your pocket!
>
> Anyway, I have browsed the group, read the archives and now have a
> question.   
>
> Has anyone had any experience in building or modfying these folding
> cameras? I mean things like replacing 3 speed Proto shutters with
> Compurs or 3 element lenses with tessars? Does anyone know what can be
> swapped with what?
>
> The reason that I ask is that here there seems to be a fair number of
> incomplete or poor condition folders available as well as cameras that
> are set up for the now defunct 620 filmstock. I was wondering if, for
> example, it was possible fitting a Compur shutter and lense combo from
> a Kodak 620 in the frame of a Zeis Netta and thus getting a 120 based
> camera with a rigid frame and a better shutter/lens (this is a
> hypothetical not an real example).
>
> I am not interested in collecting cameras and do not have access to
> the money that an Ikona or a Bessa II seems to go for. It just seems a
> pity that these bit's and pieces can't be used to make one decent 
> camera.
>
> Can anyone suggest any compatability issues, what can work and what
> can't or anything about hybrid or retrofit cameras?
>
> Thanks
>
> Lyndon

Lyndon:

I have been modifying cameras for years - primarily Polaroids. The simple answer to your question is yes. Find a MF folding camera that gives you a comfortable "feel", pull the lens/shutter, replace it with the one you would prefer - making the necessary mechanical modifications - (be sure you can close the camera before you lock everything down)- tape a thin ground glass to the film plane and with a magnifier or jeweler's loupe, sight in the lens. Lock down the lens and try some film. For rangefinder equipped cameras, this process is a bit more complex - but mostly do-able. Don't be afraid of making mistakes (we all do) and remember, the folding camera body is expendible - keep trying until you get exactly what you want. Its a great feeling seeing sharp clear photos from a camera you built yourself! E-mail me if you get into serious trouble.

Good luck!

Regards,
Marv Soloff

From: "Robert Behr" robertbehr@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Homemade rollback?
Date: 5 Jan 1999

Mike McDonald wrote

>  Has anyone ever attempted to make a rollfilm back? Any wild ideas? Pointers
>to other people's attempts? I'm thinking of building a 2x5 camera that'd use
>120/220 film. I'm more of a wide angle type of guy and thought a 2x5 might be
>fun to play with.

I saw a homemade 120 camera that took double 6x6 frames (~56x116mm). The body was an old bellows camera that was bnought for a few bucks. A 65 mm super angulon mounted in a Nikon 50mm 1.8-E lens focus mount. It was a neat arrangement.

From: "S. Gareth Ingram" sgingram@venus.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Building and |Modifying MF cameras
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999

You may find soul mates at the Society of Handmade Cameras:

http://www.cnsp.com/mdesign/handbuil.htm

GI

Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999
From: julian clothier clothier@pop.ihug.co.nz
Subject: Re: An other reason to join the PPC + Pano lens focusing.

you wrote:

>The PPC now has a brand new on line photo gallery!

Hi there! I just joined the "Club" and thanks for the invite and info. I've been subscribed to this list for quite a while now but not had any real reason to have a say. Now, however I have a question that someone may be able to help with.

I currently use a Russian "Horozont" version 1970 etc. Also in completion stage of a 120 pinhole pano with 6x 20 cm neg. using curved film plane similar to Mottweiler concept, but with ability to use small focusing screen on the film plane to check picture etc prior to exposure.

I have just scored a schneider 90mm super angulon F8 in mint condition and will soon build a 6x17 or similar around it. So, I want to know if I curve the film plane to allow for light fall-off to the edges of the neg will those outer edges still be in focus as say the centre of the image directly opposite the back of the lens??? Or do the angles built into the super angulon grind patterns only allow for a flat film plane to stay in focus?? In which case I will have to fork out big bucks for a graduated ND filter eh? Look forward to hearing from you down here in New Zealand.

Yours in photography etc ..Julian

Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999
From: "Gene F. Rhodes" GFRhodes@intcon.net
Subject: Center Filter

I have finished converting a Stereo Realist into a ultra wide panoramic camera by adding a 47mm super angulon lens and have confirmed that I do indeed need a light balancing center filter. I thought I could create a Picture Publisher macro to do it for me but the light unbalance is too severe for software to fix. Anyone know where I can buy one ?

Gene

Want to see it ?

http://linux.cottagesoft.com/~gfrhodes

--
II*

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999
From: "Gene F. Rhodes" GFRhodes@intcon.net
Subject: New Project Complete

My 35 mm equivalent of a 6 x 25 cm wide angle / wide image panoramic camera is complete, I think. It can shoot from f32 to f11 with virtually no light fall-off because of an internal 1x neutral density center filter (thanks Sir Simon) and a software center filter mask in Picture Publisher 6.0. The 102 mm negative requires three scans to load, is stitched in PP6, and then edited for light balance. Details are available on my home page.

http://linux.cottagesoft.com/~$

From: uablyfl@uab.ericsson.se (Lyndon Fletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Building and |Modifying MF cameras
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999

I've been on the lookout for a cheap lightmeter for use with a 35mm system I own. At a junkmart I found one but the guy would only sell it with a camera --- an Agfa Isolette 1.

I've played with the Issolette and came to the conclusion that I love these folding cameras! What an increadibly neat idea! Medium format you can put in your pocket!

Anyway, I have browsed the group, read the archives and now have a question.

Has anyone had any experience in building or modfying these folding cameras? I mean things like replacing 3 speed Proto shutters with Compurs or 3 element lenses with tessars? Does anyone know what can be swapped with what?

The reason that I ask is that here there seems to be a fair number of incomplete or poor condition folders available as well as cameras that are set up for the now defunct 620 filmstock. I was wondering if, for example, it was possible fitting a Compur shutter and lense combo from a Kodak 620 in the frame of a Zeis Netta and thus getting a 120 based camera with a rigid frame and a better shutter/lens (this is a hypothetical not an real example).

I am not interested in collecting cameras and do not have access to the money that an Ikona or a Bessa II seems to go for. It just seems a pity that these bit's and pieces can't be used to make one decent camera.

Can anyone suggest any compatability issues, what can work and what can't or anything about hybrid or retrofit cameras?

Thanks

Lyndon

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999
From: Craig Woods cwoods@iafrica.com
Subject: Re: Rotating lens camera

Steve,

You've built a 360 pan camera around a Hassy Magazine and a 50mm lens...please could you provide details. Also I have been thinking of copying your ideas and building a 360 around a SWC, by driving the film take-up spool a la Larsen or Larscan cameras. Is this feasible?

Craig Woods (ex QCR owner)

photo@photographers.co.za

From: reynolds@panix.com (Brian Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: OT: Large format lenses
Date: 2 Feb 1999

Jim Barclay cosmos@big.net.au wrote:

>A bit OFF TOPIC: I am going to build two 4x5 astro cameras using a
>300/3 and a 450/4 lens. The question is: Is it wise to construct a
>4x5 back, or can one hack to death so to speak, an old Speedgraphic
>45 and use that back?

You might want to check over in sci.astro and sci.astro.amateur. A couple of people there have built 4x5 adapters and/or cameras for doing astroimaging. You should also do a web search for "astrograph and camera". That should hit at least one of these cameras.

Jack Schmidling URL: http://user.mc.net/arf/index.htm sells a 4x5 astrocamera system that includes an adapter to a 2 inch focuser (4 inch adapter optional), an adapter for the Astro Physics 4 inch field flattener, focusing plate, vacuum film holder, and vacuum pump.

--
Brian Reynolds
reynolds@panix.com
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds

From: carboni@bologna.enea.it (Labyrinth)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format,rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Panoramic Pictures with a Home-made camera
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999

Here you may see some panoramic pictures taken with a home-made camera:

http://www.funsci.com/

Ciaoooooo! Labyrinth

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999
From: Mike Sinclair sinclair@microsoft.com
Subject: FW: Motorized Pan Head

If you're into the do-it-yourself mode, you can buy a geared stepper motor (360:1) from Herbach and Rademan (www.herbach.com) and one of their adjustable controllers. Get a universal camera clamp mount and clamp your camera to the output shaft. I get beautiful pans - 720 x 5400 pixels, even stereo with only one pan. You can also rig a tilting ((horizontal) axis about the nodal point and make multiple pans to realize a complete spherical coverage - more resolution than IPIX or the fisheye-based pans.

-Mike-

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: rmonagha@news.smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
[1] Re: Building a camera
Date: Fri Apr 02 1999

see homebrew camera posts page at:

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/homebrew.html and mf/links.html and mf/cameras.html (sundry homebrew and pinhole links etc).

I do quite a bit of lens hacking, which can be quite beneficial and profitable, see posts at:

http://medfmt.8k.com/bronhb.html

there are lots of other homebrew articles (from homebrew loupes on up) at http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/index.html

the latest low-tech homebrew camera project is to take a low cost 100mm f/x.x Polaroid pack film camera, remove the lens, take a lens with flash synch from a low cost folder - typically 105 mm f/x.5, and epoxy lens to camera after testing proper distance (add shims as needed). Result is a super low cost polaroid test camera - uses regular film, but quality folder lens with f/stops and shutter speeds (leaf shutter). cost circa $15 up ;-0)

regards bobm

From: Maurizio mfrizzi@tin.it
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Hand made medium format cameras - New additions
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999

The new page (Camogli Cameras by Arturo Rebora) is at the following address

http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/3244/rebora/reb1.html

The last two GOLD cameras made are at the following addresses

http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/3244/rebora/reb6x9.html
http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/3244/rebora/reb6x12.html
If you wish information feel free to write

Maurizio Frizziero

Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999
From: Willem-Jan Markerink w.j.markerink@a1.nl
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Nice pan shots/homemade 120 camera/Italy

Found a nice Italian site with panoramic shots, with a homemade 120 camera....especially the curved canal picture has a lovely composition, definately a inspiring shot:

http://www.funsci.com/fun3_en/panoram/panoramic.htm

--
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999
From: dusariez dusariez.pano.optic@skynet.be
Cc: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: cylindrical diopter.

Request from Michel DUSARIEZ

A IAPP Memnber from Paris, Mr. Jacques MONTEIL visit me in Brussels and ask me the following question, is anybody having some experience in that field to help us.

The project is to put an HORIZON 202 in a cylindrical underwater housing in order to take of course underwater panoramic pictures.

The HORIZON is model 202 with 28mm lens. The cylinder is in plexiglass with a interior diametre of 147mm and 163 exterior.

As you know I have personnally made an 360 degrees and more in underwater some years ago, but with a flat diopter water/air.

Hereunder at the end of this message is the part of the report with the focal lenght problem I have encounter.

I have no experience with cylindrical diopter WATER/AIR.

If anybody in the list have some experience with a similar problem, please will them contact me.

I have a 155K jepg image of the cylindrical underwater housing ready to be send on request.

Thanks in advance for any comments.

Michel DUSARIEZ

Start

I have since 1987 built several types of rotating panoptical cameras to cover 360o and more horizontically in one single continuous take, which are simpler and perform better than systems commercially available.

First an interchangeable back which transforms a normal SLR camera into a panoptical 360o CAMERA. Then - according to the principle invented by the Dane Lars R. Larsen, a panoptical camera covering 360o horizontically and 104o vertically on 120 film, two panoptical 360o pocket cameras, and finally two 360o panoptical, stereo 3D cameras, one for 35 mm film, the other for 120 film. All these cameras have been described in a book of 138 pages, thoroughly illustrated, written in English and still available.

In 1992, I managed a 'World's First' by taking a 360o aerial photograph sending the camera aloft by kite.

Towards the end of 1994, I got the idea of taking panoptical 360o under-water photographs,which to the best of my knowledge would be another 'first'.

After some weeks with systems design and construction of the underwater body which is of the diving bell type, and after a few dry runs, the first test was made on the 12th of January 1995 in my old diving club.

The camera is a small format panoptical which on dry land covers 360o on 78,5 mm 35 mm film.The underwater body which turns with the camera during the take is in plexi and ballasted to give zero gravity when submerged. It is provided with a porthole of mineral glass in front of the lens. The underwater body is about twice the height of the camera which sits in the uppermost part. The lower part is totally open to allow for the use of a tripod.

As the underwater body descends vertically, water will enter from beneath through theopen lower part. This is not important during my experiments in the swimming-pool, at limited depths since the underwater body is so tall that the camera stays dry in its upper part of the body. According to the law of pressure, however, at 10 meters depth there is a pressure of two atmospheres. which will compress the air and make the water rise to fill the body exactly by half. This is still within the limits of the acceptable as the body has been designed to take this into account. In any case, external and internal pressure are equal, so there are no problems for the underwater body. It is easy to compensate for the rise of water and lower the level by injecting air at the pressure of the working depth. Injection takes place at the bottom of the body through a small tube. No working depth limit with this system.

On the way up towards re-surfacing, the air injected in the body expands and leaves the body under the lower rim.

A system for automatic compensation for increased pressure and rise of water in the body has left the drawing board and is being built.

As we are dealing with an 'open body' system, it is of course necessary to keep the body in a vertical position at all times during submersion.

The first test carried out on the 12th January 1995 proved that the system works perfectly apart from image sharpness.

Since, of course, I have had similar problems during other experiments, this did not discourage me, and I started looking for the reasons for these problems.

After an in depth examination of the problem it turned out that whereas on dry land, sharpness is the same whether you shoot with the naked camera or through the porthole of the underwater body, the submersion of the camera system alters the relative focal length of the lens by a factor of 4/3, something which seriously upset the very functioning of the process.

I had simply forgotten to take this rather evident peculiarity into consideration.

The panoptical camera works according to a process where the film travels simultaneously with the rotation of the camera at a rate of 2 times focal length multiplied by 3.1416. Since the submersion in water transforms the relative focal length of the camera by the factor 4/3, the length of film per revolution no longer corresponds to the focal length.

It would have been possible to correct this problem in several ways - build a new camera, specifically designed for underwater use, - construct a supplementary cylindric lens to compensate for the different refraction index of the water, or attach an external mechanical system which makes the camera turn once every time an amount of film corresponding to 4/3 of a normal take travels through the camera. The size ratio of the picture originaly1/5.40 becomes 1/7.60.

It was this latter solution which was adopted for our successful test carried out on the 16of February 1995. A black and white film and a colour film were exposed for 10 complete rotation each per 4 and 12 feet deep.

The results of these first experiments were not of a very great photographic quality, but that was not our objective, we simply wanted, at this stage, to demonstrate the process.The size of the negative is only 113mm x 15 mm. Easy improvements will be made in order to increase the quality. Changing to 120 format would be a big improvement. A future extension of our sub-marine experiment will be 360o panoptic photography in 3-D stereo.

END OF THE REPORT

--------------------------------------------------------------------
DUSARIEZ Michel
14, avenue Capitaine Piret, B-1150 BRUSSELS - BELGIUM
Tel : 32 2 513 21 46 - Fax 32 2 512 68 29
dusariez.pano.optic@skynet.be
http://users.skynet.be/dusariez/

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: "John J. Stafford" stafford@WIND.WINONA.MSUS.EDU
Subject: [KOML] Home Made?

Just curious - are there any home-made camera or camera accessory mavens on this list? For example, I've been making my own handgrips for some time in order to accommodate my preference for left-handedness. Anyone else? Other ideas? (I used to work in steel and aluminum, but now everything is Cherry or Oak.)

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 99
From: Clive Warren Clive.Warren@src.bae.co.uk
Subject: Re: [KOML] Home Made?

John J. Stafford wrote:

>Just curious - are there any home-made camera or camera accessory mavens on
>this list? For example, I've been making my own handgrips for some time in
>order to accommodate my preference for left-handedness. Anyone else? Other
>ideas? (I used to work in steel and aluminum, but now everything is Cherry
>or Oak.)

John,

Yep, count me in. Last thing constructed on the old 1941 South Bend was a set of clamping/adjustment knobs for an 8x10 camera. Current project is mounting a Laborator Head 1000 on a Durst desktop 4x5 enlarger. Lovely pieces of kit but never intended to fit together and more of cahallenge than it sounds....

I work mainly with stainless steel and alloy.

On hold is a 6x17 RFH for a 5x7 back. Now have all the parts and a little more metal work to complete for the prototype. On hold as I have started a small business to try and fund a photo trip back to the USA this year. Hopefully am over the high workload of setup now and will now broaden the product range.

Intend to place the promised web pages on the KOs at the shop site also.

All the best,

Clive http://www.cocam.co.uk

[Ed. note: low cost panoramic adapter for 35mm format]
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999
From: Robert Erickson cirkut8@yahoo.com
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: camera info

IMHO- the SpinShot is a childs toy, not to be considered by any serious photographer! I have seen some spectacular images taken with Lookaround cameras, but I wonder how reliable it is due to the human drive.

LarScan homebuilts are a proven award winning design, if you are handy in the workshop. They can be built for under $100 worth of easy to find parts. Why everyone doesn't build one is beyond me. The only special tool needed to build one is a drill press, available under $100. I have made dozens of LarScans for others and can build one start to finish in about 16 hours. (My first one took three months. Most of the time was spent worrying about what could go wrong)

If you want to be a serious 360 photographer, I would recomend, still the state of the art Cirkut cameras, that are available in working condition in the $1,200 range. A new fine Swiss built Roundshot 35/35 for $1750 has got to be a "BEST BUY". If you don't want to build a LarScan, then spend the bucks and buy one!

Just one person's opinion.

Bob Erickson

....

From Koni Omega List:
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000
From: stafford stafford@wind.winona.msus.edu
Subject: Re: [KOML] KO items on eBay items

From: Carl Wegerer, III

> [...]
> I am now off to try to a Rolleiflex 2.8C (if anyone has insight to  using a
> Rolleiflex, I would appreciate the help).  [...]

Rolleiflex! It's a CULT, I telly ya! A cult! I can recommend some self-help groups for recovering Rolleiflexers. :) Oh, but what fun. Buy a Rollei viewing prism and pistol-grip soon. They are somewhat undervalued right now, but as people buy up vintage Rolleis, accessories will go through the roof.

But Carl, are you sure you don't want something with a real portrait-length lens rather than another medium format with a normal lens? How about a Mamiya C(330,220?) with a couple lenses?

BTW, I'm making cameras again now that winter is in full force. (I'm such a wimp). Here is one of them, a 5x4 with 47mm Super Angulon with integral helical focusing mount. The project now in progress will use a Swiss Arca back, optical finder (thanks to Omega!) and 75mm lens. Wood: Rosewood. Pics to come.

http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~pico/IMAGE1.JPG

(browse the directory for other images using:
http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~pico/

[Ed. note: great looking superwide homebrew camera!]
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000
From: Molly McGuire molly@riverwise.com
To: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Re: Interesting Camera

>Bender makes a kit you can build; but the cost of an old press camera,
>with lens and shutter, is so cheap that you have to want to build your
>own ;-)

My latest homemade:
http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~pico/IMAGE1.JPG

The directory is open, so browse it for other pics if you like. Just ignore the outdoor photo - I was messing with a digital camera. I am NOT ready for digital.

(John Stafford using Molly McGuire's account.)

From Panoramic Mailing List:
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999
From: Robert Erickson cirkut8@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Larscan Hm Pg

Start build your own 360 degree panorama camera today. Check out...

http://www.panoramic.net/wwworld/larscan.htm
http://www.panoramic.net/wwworld/HandBuilt.htm

Bob

From: Jon Grepstad grepstad@sprakrad.no
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Handmade cameras?
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999

John Stafford a ,crit:

> I'm interested in listservs, etc regarding handmade photo equipment
> (cameras, tripods, etc.) Any directions from the Netwisdom would be
> appreciated.

http://www.mail-archive.com/cameramakers@ilist.net/
http://www.cnsp.com/mdesign/handbuil.htm
http://home.sol.no/~gjon/lffaq.htm

Jon Grepstad
http://home.sol.no/~gjon

From: "Tom Micklin" tlmicklin@uswest.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Handmade cameras?
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999

Handmade tripod:

http://www.skgrimes.com/tpod/index.htm

Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000
From: Jon Grepstad gjon@online.no
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.large-format
Subject: Plans for building a large format camera

I have recently updated and revised my book "Building a Large format Camera", which has instructions and plans for building a 4 x 5 incg monorail camera with friction focusing:

http://home.sol.no/~gjon/jgcam.htm

Jon Grepstad

From Panoramic Mailing LIst:
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000
From: le lostec scantech.pano@wanadoo.fr
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: [Fwd: seitz roundshot 220 vr]

....

I used a 220 vr two years ago and I decided to build my own camera . (have a look at http://perso.wanadoo.fr/panorama)

Pictures are very good (exept with exposure variation :speed is controled by lightmeter)

22O vr is (very) heavy , (very) expensive and you can't bring it everywere without a car (and a insurance...) (However it is like a Rolls Royce : if you've got the money for the car , you can pay a chauffeur with the car...)

G. Le Lostec

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999
From: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: low cost medium format 1:2 panos Re: Panorama cameras

quote:
Anyone tried converting old camera into panorama one? I am considering those old Polaroid or Kodak cameras, they are plenty and under-utilized.
end-quote:

see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/panoramic.html
see http://medfmt.8k.com/bronfilms.html and
see http://medfmt.8k.com/bronfilms.html#panoramic

Basically, lots of low end 116 film format (2 1/2 x 4 1/4") cameras for low dollars out there, due to difficulty in getting film. The above pages discuss a film adapter available or easily made to enable using these cameras with 120 rollfilm for an ultralow cost medium format camera with 1:2 format - prices under $50 and even $25 even on EBAY.

Lots cheaper than a 4x5 with a rollfilm back; naturally, you can substitute wider coverage lenses in shutters with the appropriate coverage and lens registration distances (or hack away a custom solution); the bellows should make it easy to precisely position the lens, though you might lose the ability to close up the camera fully with different lenses in place, so dismounting options might be handy...

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/lflenses.html Large format lens notes...

I would be very interested in any experiences or recommendations for 116 film or similar old cameras for use as panoramic cameras, or other 120 rollfilm adaptable cameras, as a very low cost way to do medium format panoramic photography. While I can locate 116 cameras and general info, there is very little on lenses and coverage (degrees) of these beasties...

Since a 125mm circle of coverage would work for 116 film cameras, it should be possible to readily swap out say a 65mm to 90mm lens with 100+ degrees of coverage and simply modify the lens mount position (using ground glass back to test..) for full bellows extension, yielding a low cost folding camera with 2 1/2 x 4 1/4" format.

Anybody have any experiences to share, info on 116 cameras with wider coverage, and similar potential lens swapout suggestions and info?

The polaroid cameras are also interesting, as many have small, low cost large format coverage lenses at surplus prices, see my pages at:

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/polaroid.html and
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/homebrew.html Homebrew cameras pages and
http://medfmt.8k.com/bronhb.html Homebrew lenses pages

Ed Romney has suggested putting a flash synched folder camera lens onto a polaroid camera (103-105mm lens registration distance folder to match polaroids) to create a nearly no cost polaroid test camera. The reverse idea, to take a polaroid lens and modify onto older style film (116?) folder camera might also have potential, given the large size of most polaroid film sizes and quality of some of their lenses (rodenstocks etc).

considering the cost of most medium format rollfilm panoramic cameras, I think it might well be possible to 1:2 format camera out of a cheapy kodak autograph (116 film converted to use 120 rollfilm) or similar for low bucks (circa $50), and then add a low end wide angle in shutter for $300 or so (Angulon?) to achieve circa 100 degrees of coverage in an oversized folder with removable lens? Much cheaper than a rollfilm back and smaller than a 4x5 with minimal hacking required...

Marty Megid also provides film adapters (116/616 film to 120) email:

Marty Magid
702 Satterlee Road
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304
USA
MMagid3005@aol.com

Thanks! bobm

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999
From: Dave Balfour balfour@bushnell.net
To: rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Re: low cost medium format 1:2 panos Re: Panorama cameras

Bob, I am in the process of building a panoramic camera from an Ansco #3A junior. It originally had a roll film 3.5x5.5 The leather was gone. It has wooden sides and an aluminum back and bellows. The bellows is gone and I will make a fixed snout.

The final format will be 53x140 mm. I plan on putting a 65 to 90 mm lens on it. I haven`t found a lens worth the money yet. If you see one cheap let me know. I may first test it with a pinhole. At this point I have narrowed the chassis down and am working on sawing the back narrower.

I still get hits on the Yashica-D manual page. Keep up the work on your big Medium format web page.

I also got a Kiev 60 camera with the 30 mm fisheye. It makes great panoramas. I live on the plains and as long as there isnt much in the peripheral areas extending vertically you cant appreciate the distortion.

I will set up a web page when I get further along with the panoramic conversion.

David Balfour
www.angelfire.com/journal/pinhole

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999
From: "Kah Heng, Tan" kahheng@pacific.net.sg
To: rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Re: low cost medium format 1:2 panos Re: Panorama cameras

Bob

This sounds exciting. Imagine what you can do with 35mm film on a 2 1/2 by 4 1/4 camera. 4 1/4 is a lot of width! I can't imagine that it would be too difficult to make a 35mm adapter with a little creativity.

Regards
Tan

Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999
From: dearmond@arn.net (doitnow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Camera Parts Made!

We make all sorts of close tolerance parts from many differnt materials. Drop us a note with your needs. CNC Digitizing & Milling! Tolerance within .0012!!!! Affordable work!!! Thanks!

[Ed.note: somewhat different approach to aerial photos...]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000
From: "Simon H" sim@harb85.freeserve.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Kite Aerial Photography - UK

Hi all,
I've had this site up and running for a couple of years, it contains all sorts of stuff on aerial photography from kites.

Any comments gratefully accepted. ( I know the home page table takes a while to load - I'm working on that, as the site expanded, the table got bigger)

heres the link:

http://www.harb85.freeserve.co.uk

enjoy
Simon Harbord

Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000
From: madjid mboukri@sympatico.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Using a telescope (repost with Subject...sorry)

....

The links below are all about Telescope building.

Madjid

http://www.atmpage.com/index.html
http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~mbartels/kolli/kolli.html
http://www.stellafane.com/links/atm_links.html
http://www.mtnbrook.k12.al.us/MBJH/student/ari/links.htm
http://www.explorespace.com/links/Telescopes/Building/
http://ca.yahoo.com/Science/Astronomy/Telescopes/Amateur/Telescope_Making/

[Ed.note: Mr. Davidhazy's site is a inspirational site for camera and lens hackers, esp. for slit and related unusual camera hacking projects!...]
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999
From: ADavidhazy ANDPPH@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
To: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Re: nifty - thanks! Re: Pano modifications

Bob,

Thanks for the note ... while you are in the mood to loom for homebrew "stuff" maybe you want to check out the other homebrew things I've been working on. The articles are at: http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/articles.html

the latest escapade has been in the direction of improvisd digital pan and peripheral (or rollout) cameras.

thanks again,

Andy

[Ed. note: Andrew Davidhazy is an expert in many camera modifications...]
From Panoramic Mailing List;
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999
From: Andrew Davidhazy ANDPPH@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Cc: ANDPPH@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Correct address for Beyond Infinity

Infinite apologies to all! The correct address for the Beyond Infinity photograph done with the linear array from a hand scanner attached to the back of a Minolta camera ... etc., etc. is:

http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-infinity-pan.html

and just to make sure I had it right this time I copied the address from the Netscape address bar as I was looking at the page.

Andy  o o  0 0 o . o  Davidhazy, Imaging and Photo Tech
       \/\/\/\/\/\/          http://www.rit.edu/~andpph
________|        |_____________________________________

Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000
From: Claudio Bottari xxbot@tin.it
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: Updated home page

Hi Robert

I have updated my home page. Here you may see the new homebrew shift camera Pro ST P, next (this week, I hope) the walnut wood version, and a special section called Mamiya Press/Universal photo file (under construction). There is another home page about a Tachihara 4x5" enlarger.

I hope you enjoy them. :-)

Claudio

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/cloisters/1028/xxbot/index.htm

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/cloisters/1028/xxbot/prost/index.htm

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/cloisters/1028/xxbot/mamiya/

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/cloisters/1028/xxbot/tachi/

From: Jean Marc Becker jeanmarc.becker@free.fr
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Subject: Re: Medium format - telescope recommendation
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000

> I am upgrading from 35mm to medium format for Solar Eclipse photography. I
> am looking for a telescope that can fill a 6cm X 6cm negative at prime
> focus. I need a focal lenght of 1800 - 2000mm and a Cassegrain type design
>  for portability - there's not a total eclipse in my back yard untill
> 2099 ). I tried contacting Meade but they claim to have no information on
> image circle size ( I was thinking their 125mm ETX or the 7" LX200 ). I have
> my camera and shutter but now need some advice on the optics. Any
> recomendations or comments would be more than welcome

I made excellent solar eclipse pictures with a simple spherical 150mm mirror. Its focal length was 1580mm for a 4.5x6 format. And the mounting was simply hershellian. Portability was good. I made two boxes, one in the other for transport, and assembled in situ. In the boxes my photographic furniture were well protected.

JMB

From: bbarnibus@aol.com (BBarnibus)
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Subject: Re: Medium format - telescope recommendation
Date: 19 May 2000

>I am upgrading from 35mm to medium format for Solar Eclipse photography. I
>am looking for a telescope that can fill a 6cm X 6cm negative at prime
>focus. I need a focal lenght of 1800 - 2000mm and a Cassegrain type design
> for portability - there's not a total eclipse in my back yard until
>2099 ). I tried contacting Meade but they claim to have no information on
>image circle size ( I was thinking their 125mm ETX or the 7" LX200 ). I have
>my camera and shutter but now need some advice on the optics. Any
>recomendations or comments would be more than welcome>
>Thanks,
>dan hurley

Well you can forget about the 125mm and 7" scope, the focuser / baffle tube is way to small for even a 6 X 6 camera. I tried my 6 X 6 camera on my Celestron C8 and got a circle on the film that was only a couple of mm larger than a 35mm camera.

You have 3 choices. a 14" or 16" SCT, the baffle tube is large enough for a 6 X 6 camera or a refractor with a 2.7" or a 4" focuser

Both options can be very expensive, several thousand dollars. or you can build your own, as I did. Here is a link to some pictures of it.

http://hometown.aol.com/astralcom5/telescopes.html

Bernie in Denver

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000
From: Claudio Bottari xxbot@tin.it
To: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Cc: Ed Borbely borbely@umich.edu
Subject: Ciao

[Ed. note: just a note on another Longfellow panoramic builder - see Shutterbug or Brit. Jrnl Photogr. for details in Roger Hicks articles..]
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000
From: Stan Patz skp113@hotmail.com
To: Panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: levels

To the group,

I am building a 6x16 "longfellow" pan camera and am looking for a nice level. The plastic Stanley bullseye, available at any hardware store would do, but I would like something smaller - and "nicer".

Along the same lines, can anyone steer me to a teaspoon or so of 600 grit carborundum; I want to make a 3"x7" ground glass. The only easy source I have found is Edmund Scientific; $20 + S+H for more than I will ever need.

Stan Patz NYC

Superwide Cambo-Wide Homebrew Project
Photos Courtesy of Dirk Fletcher
c copyright 2000 Dirk Fletcher

[Ed. note: sorry to say the camera has been sold - but good hunting!! ;-)]
Date: 14 Jun 2000
From: dkfletcher@aol.com (DKFletcher)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Would anybody like to build a Cambo-Wide??

Several months ago I came across a Cambo Passport camera in my local camera store. After a closer look I realized the camera back and grip assembly was almost identical to the Cambo Wide. I bought the camera, took off the front housing (4 screws) and measured the distance and what do you know. Almost perfect for a 65mm Super Angulon I had and was not using. After a trip to the hobby store for sheet stock the camera works great. It has the hooks to accept a graflock ground glass back if you want to shoot 4x5 or the slide rails to hold a 405 Polaroid back or roll film back. I'm still working on a 6x12 back for it. After building the first one I thought about building one with a interchangeable lens, maybe a 150mm or 210mm and 65mm would be cool.

I got another camera, but with my first born due in 2 weeks I'm thinking now isn't the time to start a new camera project. If you are interested, I am selling the second camera. I have a complete Cambo Mini Passport without a back. I will also include the extra nose, which will be perfect for a longer lens and a second lens assembly. I would like $225.00 plus ship! If you are interested you can see both my camera and the one for sale at the following link:

http://members.aol.com/dkfletcher/cambo.jpg

Thanks for looking!

From Contax Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000
From: "Bob Shell" bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [CONTAX] decision, decision

I once made a pinhole camera and used an old Hasselblad film magazine on the back of it so I could use roll film. I made it very pretty painted in professional black finish. On the front I took a Hasselblad nameplate from a junk body and with a diamond saw cut the nameplate and took out the "l". I ended up with the world's only Hasselbad camera!!

For pinholes you need laser cut ones in metal foil. I think you can get them from Edmund Scientific. Here in the USA Beseler sells a pinhole camera kit which looks like fun. They sent me one but I haven't found the time to put it together yet. It even comes with a roll of black and white film.

Bob

From Koni Omega Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000
From: Clive Warren Clive.Warren@baesystems.com
Subject: Re: [KOML] 58mm image circle - coverage for movements

johnstafford wrote:

>From: Clive Warren Clive.Warren@baesystems.com
>
>> John, weren't you the chap with the optical bench who was going to test
>the
>> coverage about a year ago? :-)
>
>Yes, but I moved on to something else instead (building a 5x4 for a 47mm
>Super Angulon) and eventually sold the 'bench' (which was a modified
>scientific optical apparatus of some kind, but not strictly a bench.)
>
>Thanks for Kerry's info.  If you want a good, compact MF camera with
>rise/fall you might look at the Silvestri, and maybe an old Plaubel but the
>later is so hard to find.

The Silvestri cameras seem well made and probably objects of desire, however the Plaubels are probably just as expensive and IMO not as sturdy. For 6x7 the KO is the camera of choice - am simply looking for some movement for architectural shots. Guess one camera is never going to do everything :-)

Your 47mm 4x5 sounds interesting - is it finished yet?

Have been considering pano. photography for some time using a 5x7 camera and a homemade back for rollfilm to give 6x17 although it may be more sensible to go for 6x12 given the problems in keeping the film flat......

Certainly hope to have something put together for next Spring.

All the best,

Clive http://www.cocam.co.uk
Photographic Services, Filters and Equipment, Infrared FAQ

From Koni Omega Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000
From: johnstafford John@Stafford.net
Subject: Re: [KOML] 58mm image circle - coverage for movements

Clive Warren:

> Your 47mm 4x5 sounds interesting - is it finished yet?

Yes. See: http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~stafford/SANDWICH-4X5/SANDWICH.HTML

> Have been considering pano. photography for some time using a 5x7 camera
> and a homemade back for rollfilm to give 6x17 although it may be more
> sensible to go for 6x12 given the problems in keeping the film flat......

I have similar reservations regarding film flatness. Some people are experimenting with the US Navy surplus "Torpedo Camera" back, but it seems a hassle to adapt it to 220/120 spools.

Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000
From: Chieh Cheng gypsymoth@mindless.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.misc,rec.photo.mi sc
Subject: new camera hacker site

The original server crashed and won't be coming back anytime soon. So the old cryptic URL for the Camera Hacker site is gone. But the good news is that I managed to get a domain name for the site. You can now find Camera Hacker at http://www.CameraHacker.com/

I have also a few new articles last week. Enjoy.

CC
--
Chieh's Web - http://Chieh.CameraHacker.com/

From Panoramic Mailing List:
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000
From: ADavidhazy ANDPPH@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Re: Digital Cirkut Cam?

> A year or so ago I remember a fellow on this list was building a digital
> panoramic camera with, if memory serves me correctly, a Marstek hand held
> scanner. Are you still on this list? If not does anyone else have his email
> address?

Scott,

That would be me. I have described my experiments in this area at:

http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-better-scanner-cam.html

BETTER QUALITY SCANNING DIGITAL CAMERA

This is a work-in-progress and an offshoot of the article below. Work is based on the use of a linear CCD array removed from a cheap hand scanner and installed in a 35mm camera body for doing peripheral, panoramic and image plane scanning.

http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-demo-scanner-cam.html

DEMONSTRATION QUALITY SCANNING DIGITAL CAMERA This is a report on how a simple Kodak Snapshot scanner was "gutted" and the remains adapted to a traditional 35mm camera to demonstrate image plane scanning photography, as well as panoramic and peripheral photography.

adios,
andy

Andrew  o o  0 0 o . o  Davidhazy, Imaging and Photo Tech
         \/\/\/\/\/\/          http://www.rit.edu/~andpph
__________|        |_____________________________________

From Camera Makers Mailing List;
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001
From: Robert Mueller R.Mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: [Cameramakers] Scanners as digital film backs

I just saw some of the messages about attempts to use a scanner to convert images at the back of a camera or the output of an enlarger into digital form. This should work and I consider doing it as well, but there are problems which some messages hint at. The source of the problem is that a page scanner is much like a tiny camera in which only one line of the image is actually processed at a time (then this line is moved over the paper to be digitized.) Try to imagine the following (or do it!). Stand in front of a slide projector set up to show a 4 foot wide image on a screen. Look into the lens. All you see is a small circle of light of great intensity (perhaps 2 inches in diameter). You do not see much resembling the image being projected even when your head is about where the screen is.

As one person commented, a piece of ground glass would solve this, either at the place of the screen in my "model", or on top of the flat bed of the scanner if you placed it at the back of a large format camera. If you put in the ground glass you will be able to get some kind of an image but you can expect a "hot spot" at the center and massive light losses everywhere else.

Not a great solution. The problem is simple; the light needed to produce parts of the image 2 feet to your left or right is not headed toward your eye: There is nothing reaching the eye to produce any effect.

You can use the light much more efficiently in this configuration (with the scanner at the back of a 4x5 inch camera, for example) if you insert a so-called "field lens". This would serve to bend the light rays which are headed in the wrong direction back into the tiny scanner camera. There is only one problem; such a field lens would have to be highly corrected and would be both unwieldly and expensive.(Imagine the price of a lens with the quality of a camera lens but with a diameter equal to that of the diagonal of a 4x5 film. You could get the diameter down SOME by scanning the field lens, too.)

In fact, this is the wrong way to do it. I suggest giving up on large format as such and use smaller optics of high quality to throw the image directly onto the CCD ( which probably still should scan to get the "other dimension"). Probably either medium format or 35 mm optics projecting the image directly onto a CCD would give good service. This "mini-LF" camera could have all the swings and tilts you wanted, though operating it would not be trivial at first because it would be so small. However, with a well-thought out constuction this thing could probably compete well with a decent LF camera in performance and spare optics would be far cheaper. Using a 1200 dpi scanner as a basis, there would be nearly 10,000 pixels (1200 dpi x 8 inches paper width) across an image.

Compare this to a 4 inch wide image at 50 line pairs per millimeter (100 mm x 100 lines=10,000 points per line where 50 line pairs is crudely equal to 100 lines and 100 mm is just 4 inches in SI units) You find everything is just about right for saying the two are similar capability, assuming the large format lens is up to 50 line pairs per mm; resolution that good is called "excellent" over the tiny frame of a 35 mm photo and Schneider quotes the MTF for its lenses at 20 cycles per mm.

The CCD s typically have about the correct dimension for such a construction. What I have not yet determined is how to know what the size of the CCD in a given model of scanner is without opening the scanner, so I can buy the correct scanner at the start. In truth, the sizes do not vary all that much!

Dr. Robert Mueller
Institut f_r Festk"rperforschung, FZ-Juelich
D-52425 Juelich, Germany
phone: + 49 2461 61 4550   FAX: + 49 2461 61 2610
email: r.mueller@fz-juelich.de

From Kiev88 Mailing List;
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001
From: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.smu.edu
Subject: re: digital film backs setup, and turning one into 360 pancamera

I'm catching up on mail after vacation (= computer labs closed), but see http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-better-scanner-cam.html and http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-demo-scanner-cam.html

the ideal setup would put an existing cheapy motorized 3x5" or 4x6" color photo scanner (lens removed, lights disabled) so the scanner could be moved say side to side in a channel that scans the standard 6x6cm format; the trick is to get the sensors at the film plane, and set aperture so sufficient light for standard software used with scanner to portable PC etc. For many purposes, you could just move the scanner array by hand just as with a hand scanner, which works surprisingly well with photos in books etc. if you can't find a motorized scanner cheaply enough (takes a bit of practice).

You would really only need the kiev back backplate and mounting feet/hardware of the back; if the scanner could be flush against the backplate (or shimmed as needed to film plane position), then you are just dragging the handscanner down the back of the camera at the film plane. The lens is open (Bulb), aperture set for light needed for scanner (probably a range of acceptable values..), and you just drag the handscanner and check the resulting image. A deluxe version would use a motorized photoscanner and bellows cloth to create an automatic version, preferably a battery powered version for field use?

disadvantage? not good with moving subjects, really only slow subjects or still lifes and landscapes etc. - still a large range of effects for an under $50 digital homebrew back ;-)

another advantage is that you can setup the same back, with the sensor centered, and rotate the camera 360 degrees around the lens node (see finding lens node info at http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/nodal.html); with the single sensor width array acting as a "slit shutter", and using a voltage regulator and DC motor and gearing as needed to adjust speed (trial and error). The result would be a 360 degree panoramic digital camera (nearest equiv. about $2,700 US), assuming your software can handle such a long image scan.

From Camera Makers List:
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001
From: "Lyndon Fletcher (UAB)" Lyndon.Fletcher@uab.ericsson.se
Subject: RE: [Cameramakers] Scanner as film back -resouces

Telescope Camera

http://www.scancam.com/scancam.html

Theory

http://www.planetee.com/planetee/servlet/DisplayDocument?ArticleID=1620

Linear CCD datasheets

http://www.eureca.de/english/ccdsensor/sony/

http://www.ic.nec.co.jp/english/pdf/S14374EJ1V0DS00.pdf

http://www.ic.nec.co.jp/english/pdf/IC-3390.pdf

http://www.ic.nec.co.jp/english/pdf/S14374EJ1V0DS00.pdf

Useful circuits

http://www.exar.com/products/xrd4417_1_.html

http://www.ednmag.com/ednmag/reg/1998/070298/14di.htm

http://www.pjrc.com/tech/ccd/index.html

http://www.wolfson.co.uk/imagingfr.htm

http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/quick_view2.cfm?pdf_num=1686

Single chip solution?

http://www.netchip.com/products/scan_USB_p1.htm

From Camera Makers Mailing List:
From: DKFletcher@aol.com
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Re: adapting helical mounts

Focusing by estimate, works OK.

As long as the lens is in the proper distance from the film back you can pick rangefinders from old folders and such. I got one for about $20.00 on ebay for my 4x5/6x12 (Horseman) homebuilt that uses a 65mm SA in a Schneider focusing mount.

Dirk

Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001
From: "Sneebo T. Waltham" abelsonscopeworks@yahoo.com
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: New site

Robert,

I have been working on a website that I'm hoping you might be able to add to the Homebrew Cameras page:

http://www.abelsonscopeworks.com

The site has information about some cameras I've built and a few that I'm in the process of working on.

Thank you,
Matt Abelson

From Panoramic Mailing List;
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001
From: DKFletcher@aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Great Panoramic Parts Camera

Hey Glenn,

I'm using am old 65mm f/8 in a focusing mount. Its a truly wonderful lens on 4x5. Here is a link to see a pic of the camera:

http://members.aol.com/dkfletcher/widecamera.jpg

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Dirk

[Ed. note: resource for medium format back/wide angle camera fans, 4x5" wide camera (bag bellows..) and other camera homebrewers projects pages!]
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001
From: Monte Collard monte68@atlantic.net
To: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Re: Dallas Area Photo Developing

Hello again,

I am currently building a page for my homebrew/handbuilt camera's that I have made. I finally got it going a now all I need to do is scan some pictures of them and post them. I was wondering if you could add my link to your page. I would like to get some traffic going to my site. I am also working on a bellows page for my homemade custom bag bellows that I have learned to make with my wife's help and some basic sewing skills she has tought me. Tell me what you think, and if you could help me out by posting my link I would appreciate it.

Here's the link:

http://www.geocities.com/mpc1968us/Homebrew_Cameras_by_Monte_P_Collard.html?

Thanks for your help and for your great site!

Monte

From Panoramic Mailing List:
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001
From: Glenn Barry glenn@acay.com.au
Subject: Re: Great Panoramic Parts Camera

Hi Dirk,

How did you go getting a ground glass for your camera?

Glenn

DKFletcher@aol.com wrote:

> Hey Yall
> I have no connection with this auction whatsoever but thought someone
might be interested.  The auction is for a Cambo Passport camera.  This
particular camera is built from the same mold the Cambo-Wide is made.  I
made a 4x5/6x12 wide camera with a 65mm SA from the same camera with great
results.  Its really an affordable way to start a camera.  Here is the
link:
> http://cgi.ebay.aol.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1254668797
>
> Dirk

--
Infinity and Beyond!!
Buzz Lightyear
Glenn Barry Photography

[Ed. note: ad states "polaroid miniportrait camera model 251 made in holland..."]

From Panoramic Mailing List;
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001
From: DKFletcher@aol.com
Subject: Re: Re: Great Panoramic Parts Camera

It will accept the ground glass back and accessories from the Calumet/Cambo Cadet. I got the GG back for $75.00 I think from Calumet. It is a grafalok back though so it will accept all kinds roll film backs as well.

Dirk

From Camera Makers Mailing List;
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
From: Robert Mueller R.Mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Oscilloscope camera shutters:

It is no great surprise you find little support in the manuals. However, there is hope if you can get some help with the electronics or you are already pretty good at this sort of thing.

If you can use the existing electronics, I suggest doing so, though maybe with the shutter remote from the circuits for the sake of space.

If you cannot use the electronics (dead or not able to support your desired range of speeds, etc.), try using a variable voltage power supply to find how much voltage will just open the shutter. Do not go up too slowly in an effort to get an exact value; raise the voltage in 5 seconds or so. The shutter solenoid might not be intended for long-time operation at full power (who knows!) You can just look to find the correct wires.

I then suggest a circuit which dumps the charge of a capacitor into the solenoid at maybe double the voltage needed to just open the shutter, choosing a capacitor with enough capacity to do the job but not a lot more (a factor of two error should not be too bad.) After this initial burst to open the shutter, cut back the voltage to a bit more than enough to just HOLD the shutter open. This voltage most likely will not open the shutter.

Maintain this voltage for variable times according to the range you wish, of course, not trying to force the thing open too fast in order to reach unrealistically fast speeds. (If you have a lot to spare, you can push one to the limit and make the circuit for the next one to stay BELOW the limit!!!! Please tell us what you find so we can avoid repeating the experiment.) Typically large format shutters do not offer very short exposure times and so you should not be disappointed by not reaching 1/500 sec, or even 1/250.

The electronics I describe is not very complex to make so please do not be frightened by the sound of it. Someday I hope to do this with a Metrogon, but that has a special problem. The shutter must be very thin over quite a large diameter to fit between the lens cells. Steve Grimes describes his method of dealing with this with a mechanical shutter. The original camera makers used a special, thin shutter and no variable diaphragm in those aerial cameras having a between the lens shutter. So my project waits for me to make or adapt a shutter to fit this special case.

If the camera still works you can measure what the manufacturer used; I recommend an oscilloscope. This will enable you to see any initial high voltage burst. There may or may not be one.

You can find cameras with purely mechanical shutters. I sold a lens from one some time ago and know others are offered at ebay. In the past they were common and I expect they still are frequently offered, with or without the glass. Often only cleaning will be required to use one, plus the machining to mount your lens.

Bob

you wrote:

>   Some of the better '70s - '80s oscilloscope cameras  had fairly wide
>mouthed shutter assemblies (from which I've stripped the macro  lenses).
>     Thanks! Joe Meyerson

Dr. Robert Mueller
Institut f_r Festk"rperforschung, FZ-Juelich
D-52425 Juelich, Germany
phone: + 49 2461 61 4550   FAX: + 49 2461 61 2610
email: r.mueller@fz-juelich.de

From Panoramic Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001
From: IAPPChairmaam@aol.com
Subject: Re: Which lenses for a 617 format camera ?

Dear Tim,

If you want full coverage of the film plane, you need to find lenses that throw an image circle of 200mm. The widest lens you can use is about 90mm, but some people use a 67mm lens and crop to a 6 x 12 image. The wider lenses vignette, so you should use either a 2 stop center Neutral Density filter, or use a polarizer at 90 degrees to the sun, etc. At smaller apertures these lenses have more even dispersal of light across the film plane, so the need for center weighted ND filters is diminished. A 90 mm lens definitely needs this, but at small apertures the 105 can frequently be used without the ND. Beyond that, I don't use an ND.

On the V-Pan, I use a 90, 210, 300, and the Nikon 360, 500, 720 lens set (one front element, choice of 3 back units). Nikon also makes a 600, 800, 1200 mm lens set, but I find there's too much haze to get much good use out of those.

With the 720 I've been able to get views from 30 to 100 or more miles away. That's enough.

Liz Hymans

timothy_harvey@hotmail.com writes:

I am new to panoramic photography, and in the process of trying to build a 6x17 format camera.

Could anyone advise me as to what I should look for when choosing a lens and/or suggest a few possible lenses (preferably ones which can be obtained second hand).

From panoramic mailing list;
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001
From: ralph fuerbringer rof@mac.com
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Which lenses for a 617 format camera ?

there are wider lenses for 6x17 than mentioned in the last post. linhof offeres a 72xl superangulon that covers 4x10. i myself use a 47xl super angulon on 6x17, though you have to use at least f22 for satisfactory definition on the edges. this optic is inferior in every respect except enough more of a circle to make it useful on 617. how the apo grandagon performs spectaculary at f8 on my vistashift 612 can be seen here

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/vista612.html

ralph

From Panoramic mailing list;
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001
From: Stan Patz skp113@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Which lenses for a 617 format camera ?

>I am new to panoramic photography, and in the process of trying to build  a
>6x17 format camera.
>
>Could anyone advise me as to what I should look for when choosing a lens
>and/or suggest a few possible lenses (preferably ones which can be  obtained
>second hand).
>
>Also, if anyone else has ever successfully built their own panporamic
>cameras, any advise ??

Dear Tim,

I recently completed a similar project after one year of spare time work. The film gate on my camera measures 160.5x54.5mm, so I called it a "616".

I had planned to use a 90mm Angulon, but tests showed that it had to be stopped to it's minimum aperture, f32, and the film edges were still a little soft. I found a 90mm f8 Ilex Acugon on eBay (which tested just slightly better than my 90mm f8 Super Angulon) and it covers the frame nicely, including a 12mm rise at infinity. The lens shows an angle of view of about 90 degrees.

My camera will take other lenses, and I am carrying a 127mm f4.7 Ysaron as a "long" lens.

Maybe next week you can see pictures of my camera at:

http://www.PatzImaging.com/Patz616.html

My webhost CoolWeb just went under and took my website down, so I have to find a new host.

Stan Patz NYC
www.patzImaging.com

From: "John Stafford" <john@stafford.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Info needed for DIY
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001

"Stefano" <S.Ferri@maths.hull.ac.uk> wrote

You mentioned Silvestri, so let me assume you are willing to try 5x4 rather
than stick to 10x8. Personally, I think it's a shame to go through all that
work and not have a focusing system. There are various focusing devices
available for wide lenses. For example, here's a Super-Angulon 47mm in a
focusing mount on a 5x4:

http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~stafford/SANDWICH-4X5/SANDWICH.HTML

Another version of that camera (not posted) has 15mm of rise and fall (30mm
total), similar to the Silvestri. It's a mere day's project to make,
providing you already have the back. The back is the hard part, and I simply
used one of Jay Bender's. 

From: "John Stafford" <john@stafford.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Info needed for DIY
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 

Another thought regarding a focusing device for your fixed camera. The
focusing devices available are expensive, and because a super-wide lens has
very little travel, a bellows added onto the frame (of the type you
envision) is hugely problematic, so consider making a few (perhaps three)
lens boards of different base thickness. You don't have to plane them as I
did. Perhaps use simple composite, or even gasket-material to make each
board thicker. Have one focus at infinity, then two more with various
hyperfocal ideals to suit most of your work.

From: David Littlewood <david@demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: HELP. Is using a medium format camera the same as a shift lens on
35mm if you use the top half of the image?
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001

eMeL
<badbatz99@hotmail.com> writes
>
>To tell you the truth, THE ideal camera in my book would be a 6x9 Fuji GSW
>(w/65mm lens) with a 14-20 mm of shift if only in the vertical orientation,
>although in horizontal and vertical would be even better. The viewfinder
>doesn't even have to compensate for the shift - a simple triangulation
>equation solves the problem "what exactly is in the frame."
>I often tell my GSW that if it'd loved me, it would have transformed itself
>into a nice GSW with shift capabilities :-)
>
My solution:

1 Linhof Technika Mk IV plus 150 mm Super Symmar (cost o400 in 1992,
which was quite a bargain, but they are out there).

2 A Calumet/Cambo 6x9 rollfilm back (cost about o276 in 1995). 

3 A 56 x 85 (IIRC) rectangle printed out from a laser printer on a sheet
of transparency film and stuck to the ground glass screen (cost
negligible, could draw by hand if necessary).

4 Additional lenses to taste (note the Technika IV does not have the
roof cut-out so front rise with short lenses is limited. A hacksaw can
cure this, but 75 mm is about the practical limit for this model).

This gives every combination of tilts, swings and shifts you are ever
likely to need. Plus, for free, 5x4 quality on demand! Now see if a Fuji
GSW can do *that*. :-)
--
David Littlewood 

Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
From: Michel Dusariez <dusariez@pano360.org>
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Rack and pinion
Reply-To: cameramakers@rmp.opusis.com

Hello,

HPC have a 700 pages gears - every sizes every pitch - catalogue in
UK, they sell everywhere in the world.

Go to

www.hpc-gears.co.uk

or write to

sales@hpc -gears.co.uk 

Have a nice construction !

Michel DUSARIEZ -

>Does anyone know here I can buy rack nd pinion online- I hve tried to
>find someone in Australia but to no avail - everyone I speak to says
>they will makke it for me at a high pric
>David

new e-mail address < dusariez@pano360.org >
Michel DUSARIEZ
UNLIMITED FIELDS RESEARCH PANOPTIC IMAGING asbl
KITE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WORLDWIDE ASSOCIATION - FOUNDATION
14, Avenue Capitaine PIRET
B-1150 BRUXELLES - BELGIUM 

From: "Jim Read" jrbham@btinternet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Make your own medium format view camera
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 

The winter approaches for those in the nortern hemisphere, a nice project
would be making your own camera.

Some ideas and pointers to making one from locally and inexpensively sourced
materials are on this site;
http://www.btinternet.com/~jrbham/6X6/

Cheers - Jim Read



From: "Jim Read" jrbham@btinternet.com>
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu>
Subject: Make your own
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 

Dear Robert,

I have made a 6 X  6 view camera from odds and ends and have put up a =
site about its construction.

I would be most grateful for a link to the site.
The URL is;
http://www.btinternet.com/~jrbham/6X6/index.html

I have put up a link to your MF page;
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/cameras.html

Your links are fascinating, I bought a Walzflex and was amazed to find 
links to sites about it!

Cheers

Jim Read



From: "Markus Keinath" Keinath@gmx.de>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Building Your Own Camera 
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 

Hello,

so, yesterday I worked on my homepage. I think it is now a very usefull
starting site to do some searches on DIY / Homebrew / Repair. Up to now
I do not know a better ressource for that. Oh, sorry! It's not true. My
german site is bigger - but the difference are mainly the german links.

Hope you don't mind this kind of selfpraise.
Markus Keinath

http://keinaths-fotohomepage.gmxhome.de/



From: willisd@medicine.wustl.edu (Dave Willis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Building Your Own Camera
Date: 17 Jan 2002 

If you look at 

http://www.cyberbeach.net/~dbardell/

You'll see an incredible list of DIY photo equipment.


From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Ultra Cheap 6 x 9 Camera
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 

Mark Anderson wrote:
> 
> Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> 
> > Please remember that these Tourist cameras are available on the
> > used/garage sale market for $1.00 - 3.00USD each and can provide an
> > interesting starting point for a good 6 x 9.
> 
> Well, with the amount of work you're putting into it to get it usable,
> the cost, in labor just went up quite a bit.  Might I suggest instead a
> folder designed for 120 film and not needing a lens replacement.
> Preferably with a rangefinder, but perhaps without.  E.g. I got a
> perfectly functional non-RF Voigtlander with 105mm f/4.5 Skopar for
> about $30.  Saved a bunch on labor.
> --
>      Mark Anderson - DBA Riparia Resources    www.riparia.org
> Medical info for cruisers and woodworkers.  Boatbuilding plans.
> Artistic photography
>       Landscapes - Nautical and marine - Abstracts, extracts and themes.

I had the camera and the time.  First negatives (last night) are very
crisp and sharp. I'll use it as a knockabout camera, but it will take
pride of place alongside my Zeiss Ikonta 532/16 and my Kodak Medalist II
(converted for 120 film).

There is something compelling about building your own hardware. I
suppose it is because I was exposed to Joe Lippencott's writings many
years ago: "...hold the Leica IIIF in your left hand and, with a small
cutoff disk in the Dremel, cut along ....."

There is the old adage "if you built it and it breaks, you can fix it".
Camera hacking (for me) is great fun.  I have had to relearn the
fundamentals of camera construction, optics, mechanical engineering,
finishes, etc. The cost of entry is so low, if you really screw up the
camera, you just get another one.

There are a batch of fine cameras out there designed for 620 film - and
they are going for little money. I find it very satisfying to return
some of them to service.

Regards,

Marv


From: "Jim Read" jrbham@btinternet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Have a go !!
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 

The Christmas break is coming, you may have some time to spare for an
interesting project, making your own medium format view/field camera.

Please take a look at;
http://www.btinternet.com/~jrbham/6X6/

Thanks - Jim Read


Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 
From: Steven Morton steven.morton@sci.monash.edu.au>
Subject: Build your own digital camera
To: panorama-L panorama-L@sci.monash.edu.au>

Hi All,

This may be of interest (mentioned on Helmut's Imaging list)

http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/tech/scanner.html

Mike Sinclair should like this one...

Cya
Steve



Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 
From: Damian damo1@bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: Build your own digital camera
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au

G'day all,
	   For more info on building your own Digital Camera and other
interesting photo stuff check out this link.

http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/articles.html

catch  ya
Damo

Steven Morton wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> This may be of interest (mentioned on Helmut's Imaging list)
> 
> http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/tech/scanner.html
> 
> Mike Sinclair should like this one...
> 
> Cya
> Steve


From: "Joe Lacy" jmlacy1@attbi.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: more surprises for Joe - re: galvin was Re: Well, ok
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 

Is the limitations in the bellows or how wide the standards are? If it's a
matter of the bellows being too stiff when collapsed...then why not make a
bag bellows like this?

http://www.geocities.com/mpc1968us/MontesHackingandHomebrewProjects.html

Joe

"Robert Monaghan" rmonagha@smu.edu> wrote 
>
> see galvin review at:
>
http://www.ai.sri.com/~luong/photography/lf/cameras/toyo/toyo-galvin-2x3.html
>
> quote:
> Unfortunately, the rear standard has no direct rise/fall or shift
> available and while you can always work around this, it does make the
> camera slightly less easy to use for architectural work or for that
> matter, any situation that requries a perspective shift...
> The Galvin will accommodate most 65mm lenses on the standard flat board
> but a recessed board is preferred, as the stiffness of the bellows will
> limit the range of movements available otherwise...
> end-quote
>
> re: using 56-60mm lenses on galvin
>
> my impression is the typical galvin 2x3" was limited to 65mm-210mm lenses,
> so Joe, this should pretty much determine or limit your need for sub 65mm
> optics ;-) This may vary with different boards and bellows, but it also
> appears that the specs and the actual camera shifts etc. vary per the
> reviewer? So you will have to check this on your model, but I'd be
> surprised if you can get standard setup to use less than 65mm lenses? Let
> us know if it does! In any case, decent 65mm MF/LF lenses aren't cheap
> either...
>
> re: defense of the oldie 47mm SA ;-)
>
> The 47mm f/8 SA is not a great lens by modern standards, but it can
> deliver very good results at its optimal stops (circa f/16 on mine) on
> 6x9cm. The modern ultrawides do better, and provide a wider range of
> usable f/stops, but the costs are far higher and the lens larger too. Most
> of the older LF lenses also do very well over a range of stops, but less
> movement or contrast than the latest and pricier lenses.
>
> wish I hadn't seen this on ebay ;-)
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item;=1324591770
>
> grins bobm



From: "Jim Read" jrbham@btinternet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Paramender - Make your own
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 

See;
http://www.btinternet.com/~jrbham/paramender/index.html

Regards

Jim Read



From: "Gordon Couger" gcouger@provalue.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: homebrew 47mm 4x5" example... was Re: Let's Approch this
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 

"Stephe" ms_stephe@excite.com> wrote...
> Robert Monaghan wrote:
>
> >
> > see http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~stafford/SANDWICH-4X5/SANDWICH.HTML
> >
> > John Stafford's stunning 47mm XL f/5.6 in 4x5" mount using bender kit
> >
> That's exactly what I'm taliing about. Making a 6X9 version of something
> like this, even with a touch of down tilt built in wouldn't be very hard to
> do. If he uses a slip behind the glass roll film back, he could probably
> get someone to give him a spring back off a baby graphic to make it with.
> Make it at the "correct" focus, shoot at f22 and enjoy!
> --

I think a HP oscilloscope camera has a short bellows that might adapt its
self to something like this. You might also use spring loaded screws on the
4 corners of the lens board and a short bag bellows to get your tilts.

If it was me doing it I would buy a 4X5 wrecked speed or crown graphic on
ebay for $30 or 40 bucks for the Graflock back and the tilt and rise lens
board. I don't think you need to worry about focus unless you get real close
or try to use that  F1 lens I have in the garage. You will need the ground
glass for composition. I might consider putting some movement on the back.

Good luck
--
Gordon

Gordon Couger
Stillwater, OK
www.couger.com/gcouger



From: john@stafford.net (John Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: homebrew 47mm 4x5" example... was Re: Let's Approach this
Date: 23 Jan 2002 

Stephe ms_stephe@excite.com> wrote ...

> That's exactly what I'm taliing about. Making a 6X9 version of something 
> like this, even with a touch of down tilt built in wouldn't be very hard to 
> do. If he uses a slip behind the glass roll film back, he could probably 
> get someone to give him a spring back off a baby graphic to make it with. 
> Make it at the "correct" focus, shoot at f22 and enjoy!

IMHO at F22, the quality of the old 47mm F*8 (and F5.6) standard SA is
completely unimpressive. One would really want to shoot at F11 for
even modest performance.


From: "Philippe Tempel" ptempel@home.com>
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Subject: RE: [Rollei] A pre-exposure device
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 

Jim, I was thinking of one like this:

http://www.zonesystem.com/toolkit/

click on the "building the diffuser" link.  It has
the following part list:

2 - 4 1/2"x 4 7/8" (11.5 cm x 12.5 cm)
pieces of white translucent plastic, about 1/8" (3 mm) thick 
3/8"x1/8" (9mmx3mm) acrylic rod cut into three pieces: 
2 pieces 4.5" (11.5 cm) long 
1 piece 4 1/8" (10.5 cm) long 
super glue or Plaststruct T 
masking tape 

So he seems to like a thicker (3mm) plastic.  The
thickness is probably not a big deal.  It was actually
from this site that I learned about this and that AA
had a similar device in his book.  I must have forgotten
about it because I have had AA books for at least ten
years.  Proving that they need to be revisited every
so often.  Or maybe that older age and/or selective
memory is kicking in? :-)

> I can get some of the plastic you require here in the north of Boston
> area.  I used some recently to make a large "viewer" for my 11x15
> chromes.
> 
> Let me know how much you want and the approximate thickness.
> 
> You might also want to try using the bottom(s) of a large plastic yogurt
> container.
> 
> 
> Jim
> 
> http://www.hemenway.com
>
> Philippe Tempel wrote:
> > 
> > Anyone build one of these?  Its two pieces of
> > white plastic that's translucent enough to let
> > some light through.  You cut two small sheets
> > of them and three strips.  Then you bond the
> > sheets to the strips on three sides leaving a
> > pocket for ND gels.  Ansel Adams describes using
> > this in the pre-exposure section of "The
> > Negative."  I could also use this thing for
> > film testing.  I just haven't found a place in
> > the NYC area for the plastic.


From camera makers mailing list:
From: "Ron Baker" rbaker3@kscable.com>
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] re: crackpot medievalists or creative endeavors?
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001

I Have a Rotation camera that is made mostly of plastic. The outer shell
is sheets welded together with a chemical weld and many of the parts are
machined on a lathe or end mill. If you would like to see it go to :
www.ronbakerphotography.com . Ron Baker


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 
From: Robert Mueller r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [[Cameramakers] Stepper motor]

I seemed to have missed the original posting on sources of stepping motors
but there are a couple I have not seen mentioned (I do not know the purpose
so I cannot judge whether these following give the right kind of motor.)

Floppy drives often have stepping motors to move the heads.  The ones in 5
1/4 drives are moderate in size and could make some torque.  Those in 3.5
drives are quite small.  The more modern ones seem to drive a screw and
the shaft of the motor is also the screw itself.  Probably not all, but in
most cases you will need extra work to provide a back bearing for the
motor because the screw gets the support.  Can be done but may not be
worth the effort.  Still, the motors are tiny and thus they may be justify
the work.  I have on example of a 3.5 floppy which had a linear stepping
motor; quite cute construction.


Some of the older hard drives also had steppers to position the heads
(modern ones almost always use voice coil head drives)  These stepper
motors are not in the sealed part of the drive so you can see them before
investing a couple bucks to buy this old stuff.  Typically these motors
had 200 or more steps per revolution (some floppy motors do not offer this
much resolution, which may be either an advantage or a disadvantage,
depending on your purpose.)


Bob


From camera makers mailing list:
From: Mandoblast@aol.com
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 
Subject: [Cameramakers] motors and drivers, solenoids

Tried to send this yesterday in a fresh Document to avoid the clutter of
repeated text, but it didn't work.

Try Marlin P Jones & Assoc (www.mpja.com) for stepper motors and driver
circuits.  they even have a kit for $18 that includes a small motor and
driver together..  Also servo motors and a driver board, lots of 
solenoids.
Even some optical stuff.  I don't think you'll be able to make a stepper
motor work for you without an appropriate driver circuit.

Roger Stevens

Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 
From: Gene Johnson genej2@home.com
To: Camera Makers Mailing List:
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] ROTATING CAMERA PROJECT IDEAS

There is a nice low voltage solenoid inside the plastic pyramid shaped
Polaroid cameras.  Also a nice little motor, some rollers and gears and
a great first surface mirror.  I buy them at thrift stores all the time
for 1-3 dollars.

Gene




From: "Edward  Shelton" eshelton@mon-cre.net
To: 

Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 
From: john frost johnfrost@sprintmail.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: dead photocopiers fof process lenses (Edward Shelton]

I got a plastic lens, 300mm f4 for $12 about 8 years ago. Then I found
an old shutter for $15. I mounted the shutter in front of the lens,
built an 8x10 box camera to fit, and get quite good images. I had to
recalibrate the shutter, of course, but that was easy enough. have not
tried color film, though -- not at $7 a sheet! That would cost more than
the whole camera (not including the film holders - woulda skipped the
project if I priced the film holders first!!

It's a Good Thing!
john (:>)


From: "M P Brennan" mpbrennan@hotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Home made equipment
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001


http://www.aljacobs.com/



"MelM2" melm2@aol.com wrote 
> Greetings everyone. Does anybody know of any links for making your own
> equipment.  What I'm talking about is tripods, studio flash systems that sort
> of thing.  I'm not wanting to build my own camera just some to the accessories.
> Thanks.
>
>
> Melver C. Minton III  PM, 32





Tom Trottier's Olympus 24mm f/3.5 Shift Lens on Homebrew Body and Mamiya 6x7cm Back

Thanks to Tom Trottier for sharing this project and photos linked above and below with us!



Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 
From: Tom Trottier Tom@Abacurial.com
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: MF_Wide_angle


RE: http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/wide.html

I just bought an Olympus Zuiko 24/3.5 shift lens along with an adapted 6x7
"body" that probably exceeds almost any other MF WA lens (100 degrees) -
but it vignettes severely in the corners.

The "Body" is hand-made with a Mamiya 6x7 roll back, and a T, B, 1 - 1/100
leaf shutter.

The lens has been adapted by cutting off the scalloped top and bottom
shades and removing the arm which signals the chosen f/stop to an Olympus
35mm SLR. But it  is still usable on my Olympuses as a shift lens with auto
or stopped-down metering.


See the attached files. [Links below:]


Sample Photo (750+ kb)


lens (shows silicon sealant site)


Zuiko shift lens


Tom

------- Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur -----------------
   ,__@ Tom A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115
 _-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
(*)/'(*)        ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes from Lens Info Sheet (note 100 degree coverage..)!


Zuiko shift 24mm f/3.5 lens:
84 degree angle of view (100 deg. at max shift)
maximum shift of 10 mm
image circle 57 mm
12 elements in 10 groups (multicoated)
preset diaphragm
f/3.5 to f/22 aperture range
minimum focus 13.8" (35cm)
minimum field size 9.4" x 14.2" (24x36cm)
focusing by rotating cam (inner focus)
weight 18 oz. (510 gm)
length 3" (75mm)
maximum diameter 3.3" (84mm)
filter system built-in





From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 
From: William Nettles nettles@wgn.net
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Shooting the Stars with Soviet Surplus

Kiev 30mm--4" image circle! Sounds like a pretty neat lens. I've always
heard that the Soviets were par or better than the US in optics and
metalurgy. Great cheap binocs and you need a Stinger missile to put a hole
in a Hind Attack copter.

To shoot 4x5 with that lens all you need to do is to cut a box out of black
mat board.  When I make a cardboad box camera I make two interlocking
boxes.( a film box might even work.)

Mount the lens on the front & cut out a 4x5 inch hole on the back and tape
on a frosted sleeve. Move the box together and apart until you get something
across the street focused and tape them. You're now effectively focused at
infinity.

Now all you have to do is rubberband on a 4x5 holder and point it at the stars.
Of course you'll want to compensate for holder to film depth. And you
probably want to add some sort of ridge to keep light from leaking into the
crack between the holder and the box. And of course some way to mount it or
prop it up.

And of course you're shutter will be the lens cap or the holder slide.

Will
---William Nettles
nettles@wgn.net
Nettles Photo / Imaging Site  http://www.wgn.net/~nettles

> From: cameramakers-request@rosebud.opusis.com
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 
> To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
> Subject: Cameramakers digest, Vol 1 #317 - 6 msgs
>
> For my meteor images, I used a Kiev 88 camera with the incredible 30mm.
> lens. For those of you in this group, Lars got me this lens while visiting
> Germany. I think the cost was something like $200 and it is the main reason
> I keep putting up with the Kiev 88 body which in general is a piece of crap.
> I have seen some efforts to mount this lens on a 4X5 camera. The images are
> interesting and almost reach 4" round on the film plane.  I'm looking for
> another rear lens cap so that I can mount this lens on a lens board and try
> this for myself. This would, in my opinion, make a very cheap and effective
> camera for still or guided astronomical images.


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 
From: Ron Levandoski rlevand@earthlink.net
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Cameramakers digest, Vol 1 #317 - 6 msgs

Good idea, but the 30mm Kiev lens is pretty heavy and is a bayonet type of
mount. If you cut the center of the rear lens cap out, you can leave a ring
maybe 5-6mm around the outside and put some screws through this into the
lens board and you've got a perfect mount that should be in reasonable
alignment. Plus, if you want to use any of the other Kiev 88 lenses, you can
easily mount them...  too many ideas and no time to do them!

R


From camera makers mailing list:

Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 
From: Juan  pepe-kubrick@terra.es
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Tri-Color one shot camera

Hello again

After Making a very loooooong search and battling through digital and
CCD three-color pages
I've found the following very interesting links:

http://www.infocam.co.kr/E1-Onesh/onesh.htm
this one is in korean but the camera names and lenses are understandable
a search for the camera named "Bermpohl" gave me the following links:
http://www.breker.com/new_highlights/2001_04/628.htm
http://home.t-online.de/home/tigintoo/c1.jpg
http://members.tripod.de/geya/Vorstufe/vorpic08.htm
[right now I'm drooling... just what I was looking for   :-) ]


And a search for the 8 kilo!! Jos-Pe:
http://www.geh.org/fm/mees/htmlsrc/mJ83000001_ful.html
http://nzcp.wellington.net.nz/nzcpexpo/ff98cams/ff98c01.htm

http://www.f32.com/articles/article.asp?artID=128

pellicles
http://www.nationalphotocolor.com/

an older 3-color camera
http://www.breker.com/new_highlights/2001_10/33.htm

But nothing on the Curtis Color Master or the Devin Colorgraph
[http://perso.club-internet.fr/nosek/Guides/CAMERA/DIRCAM.HTM]
Lost of names but no photos


And according to this article I've being doing things wrong:
http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues95/feb95/contd_feb95.html

So many pages, so little info...

Juan


from camera makers mailing list:
From: "Edward  Shelton" eshelton@mon-cre.net
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re:DIY lens design

Here is a link to an Amateur Telescopr Makers site on eyepiece 
construction. Basically just a short focal lenght lens. Edmund 
Scientific Co used to publish pamplets on lens design using simple lens. 
Hope this is some help. Thanks Ed Shelton      
   
http://earth.vol.com/~lifedata/eibasic.htmon



From: John Stafford john@stafford.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: What is the brand and model roll film holder that willdeliver
        the best on-film resolution (due to relative film flatness) fromthe
        Schneider 47mm f8.0 SuperAngulon lens mounted on a Graflex XLSW body?
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002

 Graphic at graphic99@mindspring.com wrote:
> I stand corrected on my statement from memory ...actually I had shot the 47
> SuperAngulon one stop down from the max aperture, so it was f11....the newer
> (better)  47mm Schneider SA's are f5.6 hence my confusion over the actual
> aperture that I shot at.

Actually, there was a f5.6 47mm SA. I have one on my Brooks Veriwide, and
also made this camera to fit it:

http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/sandwich-4x5/


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 
From: fontpro fontpro@usa.net
Subject: [Cameramakers] PRIMATIVE PHOTOGRAPHY BOOK and building your own lenes

Hello!

I bought the book "Primitive Photography : A Guide to Making Cameras,
Lenses, and Calotypes"
by Alan Greene


Very nice book going into detail on building a large format camera for
Calotype and wet plate photography. i'm building an 8x10 film holder
right now.

I'm mainly interested in making my own lens for this camera, which this
book discusses. Unfortunately, I'm not clear on what lenses (elements) I
need to buy to build this lens?

My intent is for "Landscape" photography. I'm guessing 300mm. The
objective is not to get laser sharp pictures. I'm going for that ols look
"holga" like.

Anyone with this book understand how I should purchase the lenses?

The book has nice pictures showing how to cut PVC pipe to mke the barrel
and settings for the lenses.

Thanks!

Mac



[Ed. note: a handy tip for those wanting to homebrew their own glass plates...]
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 
From: mmagid3005@aol.com
Subject: Making glass negatives

I can't remember which list it was on, but a few days ago someone was asking
about making their own glass plate negatives.  The Arno Press "Encyclopedia
of Photography," published in 1911 and reprinted by Arno in 1974 has several
relevant entries, especially at "coating," "dry plates" and "emulsion."

Marty


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 
From: Michael Hendrickson mhh@pacbell.net
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Film holder/gr glass measurements

Hi,

In reply to those asking about dimensions for film holders, here's a
link that has data:

http://home.online.no/~gjon/lffaq.htm

And here's some data from that page (from Jon Grepstad's large format
camera construction site):

What are the most critical measurements in a view camera design?
The positioning of the ground glass is the most critical detail in
the design. The focusing surface of the ground glass has to
     be in the same position as the emulsion of the film when a film
holder is inserted. The critical measurement (the distance
     from film emulsion to the surface of the film holder) is 4.8 mm or
0.190".

     The ANSI standard for the depth of a standard 4 x 5 inch film
holder is 0.197" plus minus 0.007". Most film has a base
     of 0.007" . When film is loaded in the film holder, the depth is
0.190". This is the measurement used by Sinar cameras.
     Wisner cameras use a compromise of 0.192" to allow for wear on the
wood and because Tech Pan film, used by some
     photographers to achieve ultra-sharp images, has a base of 0.004".

     The ANSI standard for 5 x 7 and 8 x 10 inch film holders are as
follows (film thickness has not been deducted):
 5 x 7"
     0.228" + - 0.010

     8 x 10"
     0.260" + - 0.016

     These measurements may be checked with a Vernier calliper gauge or
a micrometer (available in some hardware stores).
     Vernier callipers take measurements to 0.1 mm or less.

[End of quoted segment]

I don't know what the dimensions might be for 11x14 and larger cameras.
This of course, then, would depend on what film holders you're using. If
you construct your own, then you can do what you want with the ground
glass back! I would think, though, that for anything larger than 11x14
you may want to make this dimension larger, for the sake of long-term
dimensional stability (non-warpage) of the wood in the holder; thicker
wood might be more stable. If you're making your holders from metal, of
course this won't be so much of a problem.

Regarding constructing film holders, there's data about one man's
technique in the book, "Primitive Phography: A Guide to Making Cameras,
Lenses, and Calotypes" by Alan Greene (Focal Press, 2002, 224 pages,
ISBN 0-240-80461-9). I don't remember what I paid for it, but it's
probably around $35.

Mr. Greene glue laminates thin wood for the frame of the holder and uses
luan ("Philippine mahogany") plywood (also known as "door skin") for the
large flat pieces, including dark slide. Seems workable although I
haven't tried it yet so I can't report results.

Hope this helps.

'Bye for now,

--Michael
mhh@pacbell.net



From contax mailing list:
From: Jimkeller@aol.com
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 
To: contax@photo.cis.to
Subject: [Contax] How video chips deal with wells/ and the real issue re:falloff

A video producer friend of mine once described a sort of lenticular screen
(not the projection type) which is laid over the chip.  Each sensor has it's
own tiny lens to concentrate the area surrounding the well aperture into it.
Obviously alignment is an critical with this sort of thing.

Incidentally, the ratio of diameter to depth of the well is the real isue
with regard to sensitivity falloff with angle.  The high resolution chip from
Kodak may have such a steep falloff only because of the size of the openings.

 With a large diameter sensor, a greater percentage of the 'floor' will be
exposed at a given angle (assuming the depth is the same).  I am just
speculating here.


As an aside, a friend of mine in Texas has designed a rotating digital
panoramic camera (e-pan which you can see at sealestudios.com).  I think it
uses a 1" in line sensor (one row each of RGB) with a 14mm Sigma wide angle
lens (nikon mount).  It seems to have no problem with falloff at the ends of
the sensor (corresponding with the top and bottom of the resultant image).

- Jim


From camera makers mailing list:
From: SOEL96@aol.com
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Opaque Projector

regarding the first surface mirror-- american science and surplus usually
have a decent supply of these, usually around 10-15 dollars, and they ship.

http://www.sciplus.com/

joel


From camera makers mailing list:
From: "ZoneV" ZoneV@web.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Scanner now camera
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 

Hello!

I do also experiments how to use a flatbed scanner as a camera.

Two good ways are seen by me (Sorry for my bad english):
You use a normal CCD Scanner. These Scanners have a ~ 30 mm long CCD with
RGB Filters on it. It would be a perfect 35mm Camera Scan Bag.
I talked some time ago with a person who have (commercial) adaptet the CCD
from a Flatbed Scanner to Medium Format Cameras. Should have been one of the
earliest scanning backs. He also offerd a infrared Version.

The biggest Problem should be the mechanics. You have to build a stable CCD
Movement base.

The other way is very interesting and new: Take a scanning device from a
CMOS CIS (Contact Image Sensor) apart. The sensor is ~ 210 mm long. But it
is - as far as I now - only monochromatic.

But the mechanical adaption is easier.

Ok, it's risky. You have to open the sensor! In the Sensor used in my Mustek
1200 CP is the CMOS a ceramic plate ~ 1*8*220 mm. It may break! In front of
the CMOS is the "lens" - a approximatley 2 * 7 * 220 mm long plexiglas ( is
that english?).

A very big problem in both cases is the calibration process before the scan
starts. Not every scanner software is easy to cheat.

I have a littel of this on my german site(
http://home.arcor.de/keinath/Selbstbau/scannerumbau.htm ), on my english
site are only some DIY links.

Here are the ones to Scanner as a camera:

http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/tech/scanner.html in German from Mathias Wandel

http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-better-scanner-cam.html Well known Andrew Davidhazy

Hope this helps
Markus
--
Keinaths Fotohomepage
Repair, Modification and DIY of Photographic Equipment
www.keinaths-fotohomepage.gmxhome.de



From: "Greg Nuspel" nuspel@telusplanet.net
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Stepping motors / was making a panoramic  camera
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 

I know from my own experimenting with stepper motors that if they are not
loaded up properly they will not run properly. They need a load to dampen
their motion. There are good tutorials on stepper on the web. At work I have
seen smaller and smaller steppers with reduction gear units and all.

There are small stepper motors with drivers attached like
http://www.imshome.com/Product%20Datasheets/MDrive14_datasheet.pdf  A good
source of info can be found at http://www.motioncontrol.com/
--Greg Nuspel


from camera makers mailing list:
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
From: Robert Mueller r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Stepping motors / was making a panoramic camera

Please look at the old floppy drives.  The motors are typically almost
cubes 40 to 50 mm on a side.  (There are exceptions of various kinds so try
again if the first one you look at is not suitable.)

I have a few nice steppers which are flat disks less than 20 mm thick, if
my memory is failing me, but maybe 60 or a bit more in diameter.  However,
these have lots of steps (400 to 500) and need only two phases to drive
them. (I would offer you one except the postage is terrible from here!)
Unfortunately, many 500 step motors are 5 phase models; good stuff but not
convenient for this application.

The steppers in 3.5 inch floppies are tiny but I would not bet on their
ability to drive what you have in mind at the speed you want so I would
avoid them unless you are quite adventurous!  How fast does one of these
cameras complete a sweep?

Besides steppers, normal motors run at pretty constant speed if the load
stays constant.  You must just keep the voltage constant.  There are some
tiny motors with gears in dead CD drives.  The voltages are low so battery
power is little problem.

Bob



from camera makers mailing list:
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 
From: david hajjab siggyblue@yahoo.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Helical Mount

I am making a 6x12 Medium formar camera and I would
like to use an old 47 f.8 super angulon that I have.
I would prefer a helical mount over a bellows.  Does
anyone know where I could find one?

David



From: "John Yeo" jonnieo@thegrid.net
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Helical Mount
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 

The Kodak Duex camera has a helical device to extend the lens.  On that
particular camera, it is not used for focusing, just to extend the lens to a
hyperfocal distance, and bring the lens into the body for storage.  The tube
that has helical threads is about 30mm long, and about 40mm in diameter on
the inside.

Because your lens is so short and has a small aperture wide open, I would
place it at a hyperfocal distance, and not worry about focusing.  Also,
because the lens is so wide, I think that the helical barrel would impede
with the lens's coverage, unless you got a really wide helical focusing
device or cut down the Duex one.

John


From: DaiNaka@aol.com
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 
Subject: Re:  [Cameramakers] Helical Mount
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com

Hi David,

Maybe you can canibalize the helical focus mount from a Mamiya Universal
Press or other similar MF camera?  I have seen Mamiya press stuff on eBay
for cheap...

Good luck,
Dai.


Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 
From: Alan Zinn azinn@netbox.com
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Homemade film holder for a Noblex 120?

 you wrote:
>Has anyone built a homemade film holder for the Epson 2450 for a Noblex 120
>negative.
>
>I have been laying the neg flat with good results.
>
>Tried making a mask with magnet paper that hold the negative flat that worked
>well.
>Looking for a better solution or material.
>
>Any ideas?

Anti-newton ring glass - 3 x 10in.: http://www.fpointinc.com/index3.htm

AZ


From: John Stafford jstafford@winona.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Experimental 4x5 "SWC"
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003

Here is the lens I am working with and some notes.
Can post pics of working (rough) prototype of camera.

http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/proto1/ 


Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 
From: DKFletcher@aol.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] WTB: Hasselblad Ground Glass adapter

I got my hands on a SWC without a lens, I'm going to put a 45mm Rodenstock on
a rise mechanism.

It can be the GG adapter for a non SWC as this one will have the mounting
plate flush.

Dirk



From: john@stafford.net (J Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Enlarging limitations
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003


My turn, Hemi. Can you ID the lens I'm using in my latest LF camera?
This one: http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/proto1

BTW, it specs out mathematically to F3.7, and is wider than 3" with the
shutter removed. Maybe this one has an honest aperture rating, including
optical loss. Civie lens max can be 1/4 stop on either side. The Canon .95
lens - sometimes I think it's really 1.1 hacked.


From: hemi4268@aol.com (Hemi4268)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 12 Feb 2003 
Subject: Re: Enlarging limitations


>My turn, Hemi. Can you ID the lens I'm using in my latest LF camera?
>This one: http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/proto1

Yes it is a Wild brand Wide Angle lens used for survey work for future
construction.  It is not used for aerial recon work.  Image size is 9x9 inch.
Would make one hell of a 8x10 camera but only for long range scenes.

Larry


From Manual SLR mailing list:
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 
From: "Don Tuleja" durocshark@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [SLRMan] MF digicam


Took a cheap Veo 1.3mp digicam, ripped out the stock focus free lens. Took
an old generic MD mount 2x TC and stripped out the lens elements and the
rear mount. So it became a ring with a Min body mount on it. :) I lucked out
that the register is within 1mm of a film body. So it focuses a bit past
infinity.

Here are some pics of it:
http://renjewelry.com/veo/

I've actually listed it for sale on a computer forum. I s'pose I could list
it in the minman swap list...

Don
...


From Manual SLR mailing list:
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 
From: "Don Tuleja" durocshark@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [SLRMan] MF digicam


No measurements were taken, but it seems to be about 4x magnification...
(The ccd looks a bit smaller than 1/4 a 35mm frame).

Glue and screws.

:)
...


From: DKFletcher@aol.com
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] cambo passport to cambo wide
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com

Here is a pic of the camera

http://members.aol.com/dkfletcher/widecamera.jpg

I just started tinkering and out it came a couple of months later.  I don't
take note just tinker.

Dirk


From: john@stafford.net (J Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Pics of Fast Proto Up (was Re: using a big simple gravity...)
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003



Some quick pictures of the fast proto are now online:
http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/proto1

What does not show is the fact that the lens slides forward and back to
focus. The board on the side has a slot and fastening knob on the other
side.

It's hard to judge the scale. What can I say.


From: K11005298@compuserve.de (Markus Keinath)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: HOMEBREWING (and I am not talking about beer either!)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 

Ryan wrote:

>I was discussing this topic with a friend and was wondering what you may
>have made for your photography hobby (or career) instead of possibly
>purchasing it? Homebrewing is typically a term used in ham radio as "making
>it yourself" instead of buying whatever merchandise.

Hi,
I have also made several small items by myself. First because of the
costs, latter also for the fun of making such things myself.

-For my Plaubel largeformat camera I have made:
-- A wide angle bellow (inclusive the adapter plates)
- -A back for the 6*9 cm film back
--Some lens adaptors
--Ground Glasses
--Polaroid back
--Protecting shield for my ground glass
--Adaptable enlarger back - canceld due to major problems

-For 35mm cameras a small and light tripod - i need it for a cycling
tour

-An Adaptor for my Contax Lenses to adapt they on my M42 bellow

-Small Items:
--LED Darkroom Handheld Light for controlling the f-Stop, writing
notices, searching something missing
--An Adaptor to power my two Metz Mecablitz CT 45 with a 9 V Source

-Paused projects:
-- Largeformat Hoizontal Enlarger with chanceable lightsource (hard /
soft)
--Flatbed Scanner as high resolution camera

Many DIY links can be found on my homepage.

Markus
--
Keinaths Photohomepage:
Modification, Repair and DIY of Photographic Equipment:
www.keinaths-fotohomepage.gmxhome.de



From: hickster711@aol.com (Hickster711)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: 05 Mar 2003 
Subject: Re: HOMEBREWING (and I am not talking about beer either!)

Small flourescent panels from Home Depot make excellent diffusion boards. The
ones they call "ice" are 2'x2' and work well for table top. About $3. 
Bob Hickey


Subject: Re: How to shot LF handheld?
From: Jon vze249jf@verizon.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 

Truth is stranger than fiction:
http://www.bostick-sullivan.com/Hobo/welcome.htm

Jon

> This probably won't help the original poster, but I once saw some
> photos, and the camera that took them, an "8X10 point & shoot" as the
> owner called it. He had taken the back off an old Burke & James and
> fixed it to a wooden "bellows" (non flexible) and lensboard on which
> was mounted a 135mm lens. He had a couple of leather handles on the
> sides, a cable release where his right thumb fell, and a range finder
> on the top that approximated the 135mm field of view. The lens didn't
> quite cover the format so his images were round "porthole" shots. He
> carried the whole thing in a canvas shopping bag with a film holder
> already mounted in the back. When he found a shot, camera came out of
> the bag (without darkslide, of course), up to eye level, click!, back
> in the bag. It was an interesting novelty.
...


Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 
From: Don Stauffer stauffer@usfamily.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: HOMEBREWING (and I am not talking about beer either!)


I bought an old polaroid camera at a garage sale for a couple of bucks.
It was a large format, about 3.5 x 5 or so, and had a good bellows. I
used the bellows, bellows track and focusing mechanism, and the lens, to
make a 4 x 5 view camera. I bought some Cherry wood for the body, made
some brass fittings and springs out of brass stock from hobby shop. It
works fine, but I don't use it much, film holders cost too much (I only
have two) and I don't like darkroom work that much anymore.

--
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
stauffer@usfamily.net
webpage- http://www.usfamily.net/web/stauffer



Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: *Really* large camera for give-away
From: Thomas Rauers usenetspam@yahoo.de
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 

Hallo,

have a look at this one:



The camera will be scrapped; people are now searching for some
institute or museum that might save it...

Some details: film format is about 1m x 1m, the normal focal lenght
is 90cm, and the monorail is 8-10m long. It was used as a repro
camera for maps and aerial photographs.

Anyone interested...? Shipping might be a little bit expensive ;-)

Regards,

Thom@s

--
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst."



From: rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: why no scanning backs in LF/MF?
Date: 17 Mar 2003 

yes, ROFL ;-) It is disconcerting to see $6,495 as the base cost, and $25k
at the top end for a scanning back that takes from 21-300+ seconds ;-)
Yikes! And I agree with your explanation.

here is a sample $45 handscanner into camera article:
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-better-scanner-cam.html

or http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-demo-scanner-cam.html - this one is $50
but scans a 4 inch wide format, perfect for 4x5" cameras...

or http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/8296/tech/scanner.html
a flatbed scanner into digital camera conversion

These suggest to me too that it should be possible to convert an existing
4x5" sized film scanner to scan an image projected by a LF camera (or MF
camera), for a lot less than $6,495 ;-)

another dang project ;-)

grins bobm



From: Paul Butzi butzi@nwlink.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: why no scanning backs in LF/MF? Re: Dream or nightmare camera
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 

Paul Butzi butzi@nwlink.com wrote:
>rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan) wrote:
>
>>Such a scanning back would have the benefits of a digital camera using an
>>array, but much lower cost, except for action shots. For many landscape or
>>architecture or document shooters, the scanning backs would seem a natural
>>and low cost option.
>>
>>So why don't we see more about such linear sensor scanning backs?
>
>Scanning backs have been around for, well, for ages.
>
>See www.betterlight.com
>
>They are not the only ones, just the first that popped into my head
>when I read your post. Leaf also makes a scanning back, or at least
>I think they once did.
>
>-Paul

Of course, right now, Robert is wondering "Why doesn't that dimwit
Butzi actually read what I wrote." I don't know why I so badly
misinterpreted Robert's post to be asking why there were no
scanning backs, period. Some sort of neural spasm, I guess.

To actually address the question Robert raises, I suspect the reason
there are no relatively inexpensive linear scanning backs is that the
price is set mostly by the need to amortize the development cost over
a very small number of units. I can buy a flatbed scanner for almost
nothing, but flatbed scanners are sold by the tens of thousands. In
comparison, a 4x5 scanning back is going to sell perhaps tens of units

The market is just not very big. But it would make a really
interesting home brew project, wouldn't it?

-Paul
--
http://www.butzi.net


From: Paul Butzi butzi@nwlink.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: why no scanning backs in LF/MF? Re: Dream or nightmare camera
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 

rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan) wrote:

>Such a scanning back would have the benefits of a digital camera using an
>array, but much lower cost, except for action shots. For many landscape or
>architecture or document shooters, the scanning backs would seem a natural
>and low cost option.
>
>So why don't we see more about such linear sensor scanning backs?

Scanning backs have been around for, well, for ages.

See www.betterlight.com

They are not the only ones, just the first that popped into my head
when I read your post. Leaf also makes a scanning back, or at least
I think they once did.

-Paul
--
http://www.butzi.net



From: john@stafford.net (J Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: LF SWC (teaser)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 

Done and rejected, but for a hand-held it seemed promising.
In most respects, a 76mm F4.5 200% scaled-up Biogon 38mm.

wind.winona.edu/~stafford/teaser.jpg

Next-generation will have a skeleton frame.



Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 
From: John Stafford john@stafford.net
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Gerald's Photos


Those who could not view Gerald Newlands' photos of his 47mm 4x5 can see
them here: wind.winona.edu/~stafford/cm/gn1



Subject: Re: LF paradox Re: why so expensive? (homebrew panoramic)
From: Jon vze249jf@verizon.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 

Also: take a look at Stan Patz's 616:

http://www.PatzImaging.com/Patz616.html

I've seen this camera in person, and he did a beautiful job joining the two
bodies and put a great finish on it.

Jon

> there is a longfellow camera design by Roger Hicks see Medium and Large
> Format Handbook he and frances schultz recently authored and produced;
> they basically take two metal frame cameras and machine them to make a
> long 6x18cm+ panoramic camera, using a modestly priced 90mm angulon (not
> super angulon), a nifty camera for LF and pano fans...


From camera makers mailing list:
From: "Retzlaff, Richard" rretzlaff@ingr.com
To: "'cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com'" cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: RE: [Cameramakers] Re: Film Holder Specs for sizes over 14x17
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 


My solution for ULF is to go the "roll" route. I shoot 12X18 inch for alt
process. I built a camera (centered around an Ilex Acutar 14-3/4") with a
roll back. It is removable to replace with a ground glass similar to a
Hasselblad back (but much hackier). The rolls have locking levers and knobs
at the top. There is a red lens in the back to position the film. I tape
up about 4 sheets at a time (end to end with narrow scotch tape) and then
install on the rollers. It takes about the same time as loading four
holders. In the field it works well - focus, switch back, shoot, wind,
repeat. See www.radical-i.com http://www.radical-i.com/ -- "Bertha"

Rick Retzlaff


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 
From: "J. Wayde Allen" wallen@its.bldrdoc.gov
To: "List: cameramakers" cameramakers@opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Finished project! (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 
From: Metod Kolla metodkolla@sympatico.ca

It's my first contribution to the Cameramaker's list. My name is Metod and I
live in Montreal. I have some happy news to share with you. Just recently I
have finished my first project - 8X10 Field camera:

http://rmp.opusis.com/misc/frontcloseup.jpg
http://rmp.opusis.com/misc/sideview.jpg

Doing it for the first time was a big challenge but needless to say, a
very rewarding experience. I tested it and it works great! The camera is
based on one of the Doug's Bardell projects and is very simple. The
movements are quite modest, but enough for my landscape photography. I can
proudly say that I made everything except rack and pinion, but I was able
to use local machine shop. That helped a lot. The most I struggled with
were bellows, they were very stubborn and I had hard time folding them.
But now I am glad that they are this way since they don't sink. As my test
film, I chose Ilford HP5 Plus rated at 800 and I am really impressed with
the results. There are two pictures of the camera attached.
If anybody were hesitating if to start such a project, I would say "go for
it!" How could you fail if such a great help as Cameramakers digest is
around?

Cheers, Metod

PS A little note if I may. If there is a large format photographer in
Montreal area who wouldn't mind a company for one of the outings, let me
know. Thank you



From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 
From: Philip willarney pwillarney@yahoo.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] scanner kludge camera

Re: the question about building a scanner from a
camera (oops, other way 'round) I saw this a while
ago, and put it on my list of
I-could-do-that-someday-I-will projects..

http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/tech/scanner.html


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 
From: Samuel Tang samueltang@austarmetro.com.au
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Source for accessory shoe/cold shoe?

Hi John,

John Stafford wrote:

> Jonathan King at jking_nh@charter.net wrote:
>
> > The subject says it all.
> >
> > I'm building a 6x12 pinhole/zoneplate camera and am looking for a metal
> > accessory shoe/ cold shoe that I could put on the camera for a finder or
> > level. Other that stripping an old camera that has one just attached,
> > and not built into the body, is there a source for these things?
>
> If you can build an optical finder for a 6x12, then sign me up. But a frame
> finder will almost certainly suffice. Frame finders aren't crude. They can
> be quite accurate. Levels? You can buy flatbottomed levels from many
> sources. That obviates the need for a shoe. Cement it to the camera body or
> countersink it into the body.

One of the cardboard "Film-In" cameras Konica used to produce had a 17mm
panoramic lens, and its viewfinder is suitable for 6X18 with a 90mm lens. I
think you can strip the finder assembly and use that with suitable
modifications. I used to get shoes and other parts from the service department
of a camera manufacturer, perhaps a camera repairer with lots of parts cameras
would be able to sell you one for a very modest sum.

Best,

Sam.


From: "Ken Watson" watsok@frii.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 
Subject: [Cameramakers] Scanning back camera from a scanner



Bob,

This has been gone over before, but as you mentioned with relatively old ( 3
years ago ) low res. CCD's.

I will assume you are aware that one just cannot load a scanner into the
back of a camera and get it to work very well. You end up with a round
image in the middle.

You have a few misconceptions:

"1) Speed control equivalent to shutter speed is unlikely to be available
so you have only aperture, ND filters and the imagination of the scanner
designers to deal with exposure."

Not true. One actually has control over exposure in a CCD. It is just the
time one allows the CCD to "charge up" before shifting the charge out to be
read. This may not be documented in the info from the scanner maker (
guaranteed). You also may have to worry about blooming / overexposure

The other problem you will encounter are artifacts from reflections. The
inside of the CCD is not black and the glass covering the CCD is...well just
plain old glass. The sun is a lot more intense than the tube used in the
scanner. The tube is also balanced with a lot more blue than the sun is
radiating to compensate for the sensitivity of the CCD.


Surprisingly, you will most likely find that 600DPI, 1200 DPI and even 2400
DPI sensors are about he same size. The sensor sites have been shrinking.
So an old 600 DPI sensor might be larger than a modern 1200 DPI sensor. Just
depends on which generations you compare.

One of the things that photographers miss is relationships of sensors to
format size. In CCD's this is almost a complete disconnect because we are
talking of resolution, which is controlled by the sensor, not the film or
film size. There will never be an area CCD that is 6cm X 6cm , nor will
there be a linear CCD that is 6cm long. No market demand for anything this
expensive in the first instance or that slow in the second.

"Another place where the imtractor would be handy is special applications
for which available zoom lens would be more useful if there were a way to
match them to a small format (1/4 inch) CMOS or CCD sensors."

CMOS sensor's have lost out for the time being. CCD's still take better
images and they are cheaper, even though they are more complicated .

Thanks in advance to anybody knowing a source of "imtractors".

The actual lens you will find inside a scanner is very small. Once you start
to disassemble the carriage you will not be able to put it back together in
alignment. Have fun, there should be a lot of scanners at garage sales.

Bob


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Slim Rise Fall Mechanism?

Try William Berg on Long Island (NY). They sell rack and pinion parts.

Regards,

Marv

DKFletcher@aol.com wrote:

>I need a rise fall gear assemble for a camera I'm building but it needs to be
>less than 1/2 an inch. I only need a couple of inches at the most. Any
>suggestions???
>
>Thanks for any thoughts!
>
>Dirk
>
>(PS) I wan kinda thinking the focusing bed from a Busch Pressman might
>work....



From: DOrnsteen@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] RE:slim rise fall mechanism

That's WINFRED M. BERG--499 OCEAN AVE.,EAST ROCKAWAY,N.Y. 11518
Free catalog-----call: 516-599-5010

Also take a look @ :
WWW.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/crafts/metalworking/miscellaneous/catalog



Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 
From: Philip willarney pwillarney@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Polaroid Roll Film Conversion
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com

--- Jeff Wewers jwewers@hotmail.com wrote:
> I'm in the process of converting a Polaroid 800 to
> 120 negative roll film.

.. snip ..

Check out
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/Polaroid/polaroid.html
This guy did/does a nifty looking polaroid/120
conversion.

-- pw


From: rabbitbert@aol.com (Rabbitbert)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 25 Jun 2003 
Subject: Re: better bokeh search tips Re: polaroid & Max HQ

Bob M. told us, with snippage:
>re: Polaroid 250 lens swapout
>You may have a hard time finding a much better lens than the one on the
>Polaroid 250. IIRC, Shutterbug had an article on the P250 as a low cost
>B&W; camera for LF sized negatives using the P/N #665 (IIRC) which provides
>both a positive print and a negative which should be fixed in a sodium
>sulfite solution and used in enlarger. The impressive part was the lens
>was delivering over 65 lpmm (again, from memory) on the negative,

In the January 1997 issue of Shuttergub, page 163-164, Roger Hicks wrote
regarding Polaroid Type 665 P/N film,"On the print resolution is typically in
the range of 20-24 lp/mm...I have seen better than 48 lp/mm on negatives that I
have made myself...Admittedly, Polaroid P/N records about one less Zone than
conventional materials.."
(Article: The Other Medium Format, Don't Rule Out Polaroid For Image Variety.
Roger Hicks, author.)

I second Bob's advice, the Polaroid lenses are not bad at all. I hacked off
one of the glass-lensed front boards from a Polaroid pack film camera, made a
lens board to fit my 4x5 Speed Graphic from a piece of black matte board, and
glued the whole Polaroid board onto the matte board and fitted it to the
Graph'. Now I have a 4x5 with auto exposure! I've only used it on 4x5 Polaroid
film, not with any regular emulsions, but the image is pretty decent. It's just
a playing-around kind of project, but I suppose someone who wanted a cheap lens
for a 4x5 could try it. There are some tricks to using it, like sticking putty
over the light sensor to create a Bulb setting (the shutter will stay open for
as long as you hold down the shutter button).If you know the apertures in the
Polaroid shutter assembly you can more accurately calculate exposure.
Perhaps the most overlooked problem with the folding pack film cameras is the
fact that their lens boards can get bent out of alignment with the film plane.
I have a couple with this problem and they create an image that is in focus on
one side of the picture and out of focus on the other. The struts are somewhat
flimsy. 

I've been down the Polaroid hacking road, it's fun and mostly cheap, but
mostly I've found that if I want images on Polaroid, my Graph' with the 545
Polaroid back is the most reliable and most easily handled. I've looked at my
pack film cameras and my model 110A, with the idea of converting them to 4x5,
but it looks like alot of work to get a reliable, accurate camera from them.
Oh, and then there's the thing about getting good color balance on Polaroid
film. That's a topic for another thread!

R.


From: "Simon Cygielski" editor@nwe.com.pl
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 
Subject: [Cameramakers] Polaroid Roll Film Conversion

That seems easy --
You just drill a hole for the 2-1/4 format and use the even frames -- 2, 4,
6 etc. Not too elegant, and the frame spacing will be a bit loose, but you
still get six frames per roll. I've done the same for a 17.5cm-wide pinhole
camera and it works well enough.

Take care,
Simon


Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 
From: Gordon Moat moat@attglobal.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: unloved folders, hacking autoexp. MF lenses Re: Polaroid 110a

Good afternoon Bob,

Bob Monaghan wrote:
> I have had so much fun with my veriwide 100 that I'd like a similar wide
> angle but bigger film format camera, so that's one reason I am looking at
> the polaroids and cambo passport shell 4x5" setups. I think some of the
> cheap angulon and super angulon lenses would probably do okay with the
> smaller 3x4.." format too. Some folders have a degree of vertical shift,
> which would be ideal for buildings and cityscape corrections if lens
> coverage permits? In fact, I find it a bit remarkable that so many older
> folders had shifts and tilts of a sort on the front lens standard, ground
> glass backs, and so on making them virtual mini-LF view camera/folders ;-)

You really need to look at this creation:
http://www.PatzImaging.com/Patz616.html

It uses two 6x9 folder shells, a Polaroid sourced 127 mm lens/shutter unit,
and some other parts. I would guess that careful deal shopping could get all
the parts for under $100. However, the fabrication is another matter.

> One of the big problems with many folders is the weakening of the struts
> on many models, with the result that you don't get good stability. I am
> not sure it an interchangeable lens setup would be worth the effort, given
> you can hack each camera for low $$, adjust optimally, and avoid the
> problem ;-) [years of academic training at work here ;-) ] Plus the
> polaroids are quite light and compact, so carrying a second camera would
> not be a huge burden. The option to switch between a rollfilm back for
> panoramic work (2 1/4" x 4"+) and perhaps 3x4.." or 4x5" film would be an
> attractive feature...

Absolutely. I agree that having one lens dedicated to each camera body is a
much simpler solution. However, just to prove that it is not too crazy, I do
change lens/shutter units on one of my folder cameras. It is similar to large
format usage, though in this case each assembly uses the same mounting
threaded part, instead of changing lens boards.

Looking at the way ALPA does the 12 body, they have built-up mountings for
each lens/shutter unit. It would take some fabrication, but interchangeable
lens/shutter assemblies, or just interchangeable shutters, might be easy with
similar mounting system. This would also be a way around the bellows issues,
with a focusing mount and box lens board type of construction.

This seems to be an era of custom cameras. I am seeing more pro photographers
getting into unusual processes and unusual formats, films, and cameras.
Printing with sprocket holes, edges, Polaroid emulsion lifts, and other
techniques from fine art photography are making there way into more
publication based photography. The time feels right for experimenting.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com



Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 
From: Gordon Moat moat@attglobal.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: unloved folders, hacking autoexp. MF lenses Re: Polaroid 110a

Bob Monaghan wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> Yes, you can find some old folders which may have some nice lenses etc.
> But most don't have replacement bellows available, and so I feel the
> better later polaroid bellows material is a pretty big plus. The
> rodenstock is a rather decent lens too, more modern design and
> construction, and certainly worth the $75 price by itself (esp. with flash
> synch) that the cameras usually fetch.

Sometimes as low as $40 on EBAY, plus shipping. If you will be modifying one,
a non-working camera might be a bargain . . . though it depends upon how
resourcefully one can repair it.

> you can find some older folders (Kodak #3a etc.) which can be used for
> 6x12cm or even 6x14cm work, see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/postcard.html
> But you have an older bellows, an older and not as sharp lens, and older
> flash connections etc.

Often needing shutter adjustments. People anticipating doing this should be
aware that the small springs and pivots in some of these can be worn out.
Getting two or more might be one way to get one working final camera. Expect
to do a complete tear down and clean-up, then the results may prove worth the
efforts.

> . . . .
> re: where have all the new folders gone?

There is a mini bellows on some of the Silvestri cameras. Unfortunately,
those are not cheap.

http://www.bromwellmarketing.com/silvestri.htm

They are also mostly wide angle cameras, similar to the ALPA 12 family of
cameras. I know these are not exactly folder cameras, but currently only
large format technical cameras really fit that description.

> . . . . .
> That alone is a big worry and problem with older folders, and the lack of
> replacement bellows and their high cost for custom built ones makes the
> option of a polaroid bellows based camera attractive to many hackers ;-)

Also, cutting the Polaroid bellows out of a cheap camera, and using it to
repair an old 6x9 folder. Some of the really old leather bellows seem to hold
up better than the newer materials, though Polaroid is definitely an
exception.

> Polaroid also has a reputation for very sharp lenses, as does rodenstock -
> pretty hard to find a relatively fast 127mm f/4.5 rodenstock in prontor
> shutter or its equivalent for much under $75 used price of the polaroid
> 110a too - and it is strobe synch'd, and not with 75 year old oddball
> connections either. the lens is also coated IIRC, and in a reliable
> prontor shutter with speeds from 1 sec to 1/300th etc. - pretty useful.

Kodak Ektar 127 mm is another choice, though with the two post flash sync.
Costs are sometimes similar, though less bargains than Polaroid items.

> . . . .
> re: hacking an auto-exposure lens with electronics for MF/LF use?
> . . . .
> my latest intriguing idea is making an auto-exposure lens for LF & medium
> format cameras (esp. portraiture) using the lens and shutter and
> electronics guts from a polaroid 250 and hacking it onto something like a
> bronica or norita, dual cable release etc. or a cambo passport shell (like
> the walker titan..) with a 4x5" film holder (and polaroid back option ;-)

Hmmm, wonder where that idea came from . . . I am working on something along
these lines. The Polaroid 350 would be another good choice. The basic idea is
to recreate the Polaroid 180, 190, or 195 type of camera, though with
aperture priority operation. I am still not too sure about how easy the
conversion will be, nor if it will be worth the effort.

> I'm also looking for an oddball portrait telephoto polaroid body which was
> a less stellar lens, but had the electronics shutter and a 200mm ish lens.
> I am sure that there are lots of other polaroid items which are now being
> surplused as obsolete with their bankruptcy, but which could see new life
> in some fun lens hacked projects ;-)

Much longer than 135 mm will be a problem with lens mounting, and rangefinder
operation. Actually, using shorter lenses might be easier, since the
extension limits of the arms on the 250 Automatic would not be exceeded.
Another issue is being able to swap lenses, and I think it would be easier to
just dedicate a lens to each body.

The rangefinder base of the 250 Automatic, and similar, is not that great,
and may not work well for longer lenses, even if you could figure out a good
mounting system. The only problem I see with going much wider would be the
viewfinder not showing what the lens will cover. Maybe this will be a
do-it-yourself Plaubel, but for now I think it will be Frankenkamera.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com


From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: unloved folders, hacking autoexp. MF lenses Re: Polaroid 110a
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 

Bob Monaghan wrote:
SNIP -my latest intriguing idea is making an auto-exposure lens for LF &
medium format cameras (esp. portraiture) using the lens and shutter and
electronics guts from a polaroid 250 and hacking it onto something like
a bronica or norita, dual cable release etc. or a cambo passport shell ...

You may want to examine the Polaroid 900 and its fine autoexposure
lens/shutter combo. If you are willing to make a holder tray to hold a
3 x 4 film holder, you wind up with a LF autoexposure camera with an
accurate rangefinder and ground glass (if you wish).

One step further is to hack the 900 (or 110A/B) to take a Polaroid 545
film holder. This gives you the ability to shoot Polaroid, Kodak
Readyloads, Fuji Quickloads.

For the camera hacker, the possibilities are endless.

Regards,

Marv


From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Polaroid 110a/b/pathfinder converted to 120roll film
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 

There are a group of rugged indivdualists out there who enjoy camera
hacking. Especially with the old Polaroid cameras because they have
little present value, you can't get film for them, and they are quite
well built. Taking a hacksaw to one of our modern MF cameras would cause
some twitching on this NG. Taking a hacksaw to an old Polaroid causes
no comment at all.

Besides that, camera hacking is fun. I have modified Polaroid 110A/B
cameras to take 3 x 4 holders, 6 x 7 and 6 x 9 roll holders.
Cost - nearly zero.

Regards,

Marv

Dan Fromm wrote:
> LG gonsaj@iinet.net.au wrote
>>Hi all,
>>Anyone here ever tried converting a Polaroid 110A/110B/Pathfinder camera
>>to 120 roll film. I'd like to try this myself and would like some pointers.
>>Cheers
>>jag2x
>
> Pardon my lack of insight, but what's the point? Those things are too
> big to fit in a pocket and there are already lots of 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 and
> 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 folding roll film cameras around, some pocketable, some
> not. Some of the nots are more compact than the 110 and more
> flexible, as allow lens interchange, to boot. I know we're all into
> masochism, but there are limits.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dan


From: john@xyzzy.stafford.net (jjs)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Machinist in the house?
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 

rmonagha@engr.smu.edu (Bob Monaghan) wrote:

> how about the cambo passport camera case and 4x5" back? take off the 4
> lens front and septa, and you have a plastic 4x5" shell with back, simply
> mount your lens in front.

I appreciate the tip, Bob, but that's far from the design objective of
this particular camera. I saw this:
http://members.aol.com/dkfletcher/widecamera.jpg but that idea doesn't
work with my lens, which is much too large to be supported by a lens
board. You also recall the 4x5 WA I built several years ago at
http://WIND.WINONA.EDU/~stafford/sandwich-4x5 which is similar to your
idea, but won't work. (Say, would you mind taking that page and putting it
on your server instead of just linking to it? I am losing my server any
day now.)

Some time ago I posted a rejected design here:
http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/WA-75.JPG

That's a modified Printex 4x5 body. A bad idea. Rejected. The body is
totally unneccessary in this project for a number of good reasons.

[Ed. note: archived page posted at Homemade 5x4" Superwide Camera by John Stafford [2/2004] ]


From: john@xyzzy.stafford.net (jjs)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Machinist in the house?
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 

"Sherman" nobody@dunnam.net wrote:
> "jjs" john@xyzzy.stafford.net wrote ...
> > FWIW, check out these folks: http://www.emachineshop.com
> > Very cool business. They have made things for me that I've designed using
> > their software. But in that case we were talking about dozens of copies of
> > each item, not two of each.
>
> John,
> Thanks for that link! I've been looking for an effective way to prototype
> something I've been working on and it looks like this company may well be
> exactly what I need.
> Very cool.

The entrepeneur is a very good programmer and machinist. The software is
updated regularly and gets better every couple of weeks. If I may suggest
that you put together a quick version of a part and run it through to the
pricing stage. When you see the cost of one part (say, $120), then check
the cost of 20 parts. Chances are good the total for the 20 parts is as
little as $150. That's CNC. :)

I love it when the software interrupts and says things like "If you reduce
the number of splines, you will save money" or "you have two different
sized holes. Make them the same and you will save money" or "You have
exceeded the recommended span for this material. Try..."


From: john@xyzzy.stafford.net (jjs)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Machinist in the house?
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 

w-buechsenschuetz@web.de (Winfried Buechsenschuetz) wrote:
> john@xyzzy.stafford.net (jjs) wrote
> > If you can nudge me in the right direction, offline if it is
> > appropriate, I would be quite greatful.
>
> You mentioned that your camera hardly has any flat surfaces. So I
> think it will take numerical controlled (NC or CNC) machines to
> manufacture your design. There are quite a few machine shops which do
> not manufacture any devices but only components for other companies,
> and they will be happy to receive such an order because it will bring
> them some money. [...]

Yes, CNC shops are common. Unfortunately, I am going to make all of _two_
(maybe three) of these cameras and having a comercial shop make the parts
would be hugely expensive. In any event, I'm still in the advanced
prototype stage and can cut the parts at home until/if it proofs out. It
may never make it past the hand-cut stage.

FWIW, check out these folks: http://www.emachineshop.com
Very cool business. They have made things for me that I've designed using
their software. But in that case we were talking about dozens of copies of
each item, not two of each.


From: Edward Meyers [aghalide@panix.com] 
Sent: Sat 3/27/2004 
To: Clayton Tume Cc: Panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au 
Subject: Re: film holders

No, Simon used the 6x17 torpedo back only and then made a
6x17 camera using two Mamiya 6x9 cameras side by side. He
had it don by a prototype builder in Tokyo. It had interchangeable
lenses by Schneider. Ed

Clayton Tume wrote:
> The torpedo backs are 6x18 so maybe he built a 6x36?..........this is a
> format I use all the time with rotation cameras but would be interesting to
> see in a non rotating camera.
>
> Clayton
>
> > Wasn't it Simon Nathan who grafted two 6x9 Torpedo backs together,
> > into one 6x18?
> > --
> > Bye,
> > Willem-Jan Markerink



From: "jjs" nospam@please.xxx
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: awesome new 4x5 design for less bux
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 

RE: previous post

Here's one 4x5 Printex: http://wind.winona.msus.edu/~stafford/printex/

Pretty ugly camera, no? :) If you don't need perspective controls it's just
super. (But who doesn't need perspective controls?)


From: argon3@aol.com (Argon3)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: 28 Mar 2004 
Subject: Re: Question for backpackers

No...each lens is already on a board. I do recall a system that was advertised
wherein the lenses were put in some kind of smaller "univeral" mount and
appropriately sized lens boards that accepted this "universal" mount were then
purchased and thus the lenses could be carried with just the smaller mount on
them and snapped into place on one lensboard. This was also a solution for
those who had systems with differing lensboard sizes...the lenses could be
switched between different boards easily. 

argon






From: rmonagha@engr.smu.edu (Bob Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Question for backpackers
Date: 28 Mar 2004 

[re: lightweight way to use multiple lenses with one lens board...]

you can fabricate a similar setup easily using filter stack caps. One
stack cap goes on the lens board, where it is drilled out as appropriate
(or you can mount a lens filter ring etc.). The matching filter stack cap
is then drilled out and the lens mounted in it. Stack caps are relatively
cheap and light, making it easy to have a lot of lenses for use with one
board (esp. with a focal plane body camera).

The filter stack caps are aluminum or some other metal which can easily be
cut and used to mount different lenses in shutter. You need a stack cap
for each lens. I have used this setup more for macro lenses on bellows,
such as those obsolete glass lenses from 8mm and 16mm movie cameras, but
the original idea was in an article in Modern Photography in the 1960s
IIRC on mating different lenses to homebrew LF or MF cameras. The obvious
point is that the lenses have to be relatively modest in size.

A related use for this trick is to modify a large cheapy shutter (e.g.
alphax from oscilloscope lens) on a lens board and then put a treaded
step-up ring matching the shutter outer lens cell threads to a standard
filter size (e.g., 52mm, 67mm etc.). Now you can mount your junkbox lenses
onto a leaf shutter (rather more flexible than a Packard shutter).

just some ideas - blasts from the past ;-) 

hth bobm


From: "f/256" askme@my.email.pls
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Focusing Helicals
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 

"Glenn Barry" glennrbarry@yahoo.com wrote ...
> I've been slowly building a 6x17, and am having problems tracking down
> suitable focusing helicals for my lenses, primarily I want to use my Nikkor
> 90 F4.5, Rodenstock 150 Sironar W 5.6 and Schneider Xenar 300 F5.6. All of
> them are fairly large lenses so I need focusing helicals large enough to
> accomodate the rear lens elements. Does anyone have any tips on what might
> be sutable

what about this one: http://www.skgrimes.com/thisweek/1_5/index.htm

Guillermo


From: Bob Salomon bob_salomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Focusing Helicals
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 

"Glenn Barry" glennrbarry@yahoo.com wrote:
> I've been slowly building a 6x17, and am having problems tracking down
> suitable focusing helicals for my lenses, primarily I want to use my Nikkor
> 90 F4.5, Rodenstock 150 Sironar W 5.6 and Schneider Xenar 300 F5.6. All of
> them are fairly large lenses so I need focusing helicals large enough to
> accomodate the rear lens elements. Does anyone have any tips on what might
> be sutable
>
> Thanks
>
> Glenn
>
> Please reply to glennrbarry@optusnet.com.au as I've had to change my rely to
> address to cut down the spam influx

Rodenstock makes focusing helicals with calibrated focusing scales and
DOF scales for all of their lenses from 35 to 150mm in 0 shutters.They
do not make any for their lenses in 1 shutter. If you were to use the
90mm 6.8 and the 150mm Apo Sironar S you could easily find helicoids.
--



From camera makers mailing list:
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 
From: Robert Griego rgriego@juno.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Focusing Helicals and stuff.


...
>Holy smokes! That could make it handheld!

Please don't tell me I'm the only fool carting around an 8" x 10" hand
held point and shoot? :-} Have you ever seen the Hobo? I made a
version of that for myself (for considerably less than they wanted for
theirs.. :-} ). Total, about $4 in 1/4 MDF. The Hobo is a great idea
and I applaud the inventor. I made a 4x5 and an 8x10 and the only thing
holding me back from an 11x14 (or larger) is finding a filmholder.

Anyone have plans for one? It doesn't need to fit any standards since
the whole camera is homebrew...

Robert


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 
From: "Lam" lamxyz@singnet.com.sg
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Focusing Helicals

Hi Edward

Do a search for Bronica and Helical
There is a easily adaptable helical for the Bronica S,SA,S2A series
that many have modified for hand holdable large formats camera
( ala Cambo Wide )

Lam



Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 
From: Gordon Moat moat@attglobal.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: homebrew AF confirmation for non-AF kits? Re: AF mf camera

Bob Monaghan wrote:
> I think the major benefit of AF for many of us using MF would be
> confirming focus, esp. for low constrast scenes and wide angle lenses?
> Rather than buying new AF bodies and all new AF lenses, I would like to
> find a means to modify a prism or chimney finder to indicate in-focus or
> not using LEDs or whatever.

The Rollei 6008AF does indicate focus confirmation on many of the manual
focus lenses. I have not tried one, so I have no comments on how well
that works (or not).

>
> One of the pentax transitional 35mm SLRs ( ME-F, IIRC?) was an
> intermediate design with focus confirmation but w/o AF mount or lens
> control interface. The lights in the prism indicated in or out of focus.
>
> Has anyone experimented with a focus indication module to see if these
> can be reworked for standalone use (e.g., Nikon Multi-CAM530 autofocus
> module etc.)? Perhaps a simpler sensor from a low cost P&S; unit could be
> used too?

One weird idea is to use the module from a Polaroid SX70. These are
sonar autofocus, but they have a simple mechanical drive to move the
lens. Perhaps a rework of one could be rigged. The device is easy to
remove from the SX70.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com


From: john@xyzzy.stafford.net (jjs)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Machinist in the house?
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 

"Sherman" nobody@dunnam.net wrote:
> This stuff is very cool! [...]

If you like that, then check out the Rapid Prototyping area, and this
site: http://www.quickparts.com/



[Ed. note: how to build a $14 pipe based steadycam...]
From russian camera mailing list:
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 
From: Matt Denton mattdenton@mac.com
Subject: [Russiancamera] DIY Steadycam
To: Russiancamera-user 

Linked from slashdot this morning, might be slow, I thought it would be of
some interest to some of you tinkerers. I love harwdare-store tech!

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/steadycam/

Matt



Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 
From: Jan Bernhardtz cereus@telia.com
Subject: [Russiancamera] DIY for photography - links
To: Russiancamera-user russiancamera-user@mail.beststuff.com

Hi friends, found this page on a photo forum in Sweden. There are many
interesting links here for DIY photographers. /Jan

http://www.xs4all.nl/~wiskerke/html/diy.html

Jan Bernhardtz http://navig8.to/cereus


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 
From: mustafa umut sarac organistist@yahoo.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Scanner with short ccd for photography

I am looking for a cheap scanner with a short or very short lenght ccd linear array for scanner photography.
I mean 10 centimeters or shorter range.
Scanners are widely used machines but its hard to find a new hand held - or something else - scanner for to disassemble.
I am using windows 98 and looking for high res. solution.
I learned old Kodak Snapshot scanner and Genius Key Scanners - hand held - are good.
But Kodak told me that Snapshot was for Windows 3.1.
And Genius told me that Genius Key handheld scanner been history long ago.
Can anyone advise me a cheap and easy to find short ccd scanner for to disassemble ?
I have no USB port.

Best ,

Mustafa Umut Sarac


Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
From: "R. Mueller" r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Scanner with short ccd for photography

Most CCDs themselves are about 3 to 4 cm long, though there are some
combining multiple CCDs into single units which are longer. What you see
on the scanner (that 10 cm or more slit) is the width covered on an object
and then projected onto the CCD by a lens. I have never seen anything
except a photo of the long bar kind, but some are probably intended for
contact scanners (ones not depending on a lens).

Hand scanners seemed to have largely disappeared as CPUs of the 486 vintage
went out but the table-top scanners also have short CCDs so if you are
prepared to take a cheap scanner apart you have what you want (I was
recently thinking of the possibilities for a 360 degree panorama based on
using one of these with a suitable mount. It has been done and I suspect
the results would be excellent if carefully repeated with a high resolution
scanner as a basis.)

The fact that hand scanners are out works to your advantage; buy at a flea
market- nobody wants them anymore. I get these things for $5.00 or so
with a little patience (the color ones are rarer). However, I have
obtained table-top scanners for hardly more beyond a bit extra
patience! A 600 dpi scanner might cost about $20 with software and all
accessories. 600 dpi x 8 inches paper width tells us the CCD has about
4500 to 5000 pixels.
(I now have a harder problem; I want a cheap 10,000 pixel MONOCHROME CCD,
but finding that scanner is not so easy. This would be for reading out a
spectrum after a diffraction grating, where the color filters and three,
slightly spaced rows of pixels make trouble.)

I cannot advise on your hopes of finding a hand scanner with software for
later than Win 3.1 but I might hope for something operating with Win
95. If you are prepared for the work of using a page scanner (table-top),
you have a wide range of choices. Even new ones are not too expensive if
you choose carefully, and as I wrote above, used ones are almost
gifts. Unless you want the latest versions of Windows software, you should
be able to stay in the cheap price range. And it should be possible to
find something for which software support is available for most operating
systems including UNIX, LINUX and MacIntosh, and not just Windows. This
may not always be on the CCD with the scanner but there are drivers on the
Internet for LINUX, for example, even for somewhat older scanners. And I
thought, perhaps mistakenly, that TWAIN was supposed to provide a bridge to
most scanners if you can get TWAIN for your choice of system. Where I
expect trouble is with MS-DOS. If anybody knows of drivers and display
software for DOS I would like to learn about them.

One nice thing about older scanners is that I can run one on a laptop which
lacks USB. With new models that is a little hard to arrange.

Bob
...


From: ralph fuerbringer [rof@mac.com] 
Sent: Mon 3/1/2004 
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au 
Subject: Re: Widepan price

simple: a few decades ago i imported some photographic equipment to
sell in the usa. the price at the factory was c. 1/4 the list price
for the items to be sold here. that allows for up to 40% discount to
dealers on large orders. shipping and import duty, advertising, etc. 
now i just make a 612 camera here that sells direct to photographers,
the Vistashift w/35,45,55mm a\Apo-gGrandagons. comparisons showing how
this rectilinear ultra wide compares to the Noblex swinglens on the
same scene can be see at http://homepage.mac.com/rof 
Ralph

 Brian Walton wrote:
> How can the Widepan price be 852Euro in China and 2876Euro in
> London?
>
> Brian


[Ed. note: please pass on suggestions and ideas...]
From: Umit Ulgen [umitulgen@blueyonder.co.uk] 
Sent: Mon 5/31/2004 
To: Monaghan, Robert 
Subject: homebrew 6x13 panoramic camera

Dear friends, 
this is my pride and joy 6x13. it originated the hacking an old agfa isolette, cutting it from the lest and right 
keeping the film chambers intact. and gluing them together with a new frame hacked and reduced to 6x13cm 
frame from an old Kodak no3 camera. Then the whole new film chambers covered by a hard wood, new door is 
being made to stuck on the back of it. 

this is where I need your valuable advice. my choice of lens is 90mm angulon because of its coverage and relatively 
low price comparing to other SA. 

is there any way i can set the lens distance to the film plane so I can have a fixed focus lens from a very close focus 
(as close as the lens allows) to infinity, rather than setting the lens to the infinity where I loose focus in the foreground?? 

any help would be greatly appriciated 

umit ulgen



From: "Q.G. de Bakker" qnu@tiscali.nl
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: plungercams ;-) Re: Mounting 80mm Enlarger Lens over Pentax 6x7
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 

Bob Monaghan wrote:
> in the case of the plungercam, instead of a toilet tube, you use a rubber
> plunger (without the wooden handle) used for toilet clearing duties (or a
> new one, if you prefer) for mounting lenses in a highly flexible lens
> tilting/shifting/moving mount for taking soft photographs ;-)

Those rubber plunger thingies are quite stiff. Too stiff.
I made a light-tight flexible sleeve using black pond liner instead. Cheap,
easy to work with (glues beautifully), and very flexible. I have it attached
to what once was a body cap on one end, and a cheap magnifying glass with
handle on the other end. It's difficult to hold the lens still during
exposure, but hey... it adds to the fun, doesn't it?
;-)



From: john@mychain.stafford.net (one_of_many)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: F-stop Sweet Spot
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 

rmonagha@engr.smu.edu (Bob
Monaghan) wrote:

> my 38mm biogon is jealous - talk about experiencing "lens envy" ;-) ;-)
>
> great project, an interesting and unique shape too for a LF camera!

Thank you, Bob.

I am working on two more versions of the camera (I have four of these
lenses.) One camera is not pictured anywhere yet. It is a rigid camera
with a variation of the lens so that it more easily accomdates filters.
It has no bellows, rear tilt or swing, so it is more compact and, of
course, a lot quicker to setup and easier to schlep - basically a 200%
scaled up 38mm SWC with 4x5 sheet film! Maybe there's one in your future.
(Let's hope for long lives! :))


From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 
From: "John Cremati" johnjohnc@core.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] cheap optics.
To: "E-mail discussion about homemade cameras" cameramakers@opusis.com



This is another internet lens place with some cheap optics...
John Cremati
http://www.apogeeinc.com/optics.html#79



From: john@xyzzy.stafford.net (jjs)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: 75mm in 4x5 update
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 

...and a huge concession. :) I worked off and on all winter devising a
prototype of the new body and lens carrier for a variation of this lens
(different machining) and it just did not work out due to materials
problems. (I can only work in wood and I need aluminum or steel.)

So shown is the compromise that must do unti I find a cooperative
machinist, or several hundred dollars. :) I will be cutting the rail much
shorter soon.

http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/n/


[Ed. note: this lens is long sold, but info is provided here for project designs and ideas..]
From: BobE besk@shtc.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.large-format
Subject: FS: 38/4.5 Biogon, Copal 0
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 

I have a 38/4.5 Zeiss Biogon mounted in a Copal shutter by SK Grimes
for sale. The glass is single coated but practically mint. Includes
custom caps. (This is the same basic lens used in the Hasselblad SWC.)

The lens was purchased and mounted in the shutter about 2 years ago
but I just haven't had time to do anything with it.

It will cover somewhat more than a 80mm image circle at infinity. But
at a 80mm diameter it covers: 56X56 or 44X67 for a real wide angle as
used on the ALPA which is equivalent to a 20 or 21mm lens in the 35mm
format. This is one of the few lenses that can be used wide open with
good results.

Price is $750 plus shipping.

Thanks!
Bob Eskridge



From: "jjs" nospam@please.xxx
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Slightly OT - wide lens revisited
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 

"Gordon Moat" moat@attglobal.net wrote
> Makes sense. Which lens do you think would produce nicer images, comparing those
> two?

The 47mm lens I have is the F5.6 Super Angulon and it is not nearly as well
corrected as the Biogon but it does 'stretch' to a lot of unscheduled
coverage, so my bet is on the Biogon which by design does not even try to
cover a lot of film. I've shot the 47mm as-is on the Veriwide 6x9cm and on
one of my handmade 4x5s http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/sandwich-4x5.

If I see daylight soon I'll have some shots from the Biogon to show.

(That 'sandwich' camera is very old news but still gets a lot of hits.)



Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 
From: "John Cremati" johnjohnc@core.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Clear Optical Glass..
To: "Camera Makers" cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com

This outfit has clear optical glass 8x 10 sheets 2.4 mm thick for five bucks
... Might also be interesting for UV experiments, sandwiching gel filters,
enlarger applications, ect..
John Cremati.


http://www.sciplus.com/category.cfm?category=191





End of Page