Hi Ian,
The modifications I have seen involve permanent hacking (in the figurative sense; it was actually done so it looks almost factory seamless) to elongate the channels that limit shift to a certain point. One person I know also added extensions to the vertical shift slots that work nicely and blend into the camera's styling well. I would never do it to a nice example, but it's a very harmless mod. Both of these friends were commercial photographers in the 80s and 90s who extended the shifts for architectural use. They are the ones who first opened my eyes to the fact that rear movements are almost 100% unnecessary, and can be replicated using front shift. Before that, I would always angle the rail, then use rear tilts and swings to change convergence; as I had been instructed in school. Now I find it more simple and intuitive to use shifts alone to achieve same. But then again, I don't shoot much architecture so rarely even do that.
Personally, the way I would do front tilt in portrait orientation would be to tilt the whole camera forward the necessary amount, and then change the resulting convergence in printing. Obviously not ideal, as you need more tilt to do it, and you have to do some tweaking compositionally to make it work. However, I can't recall ever needing to use a front tilt in portrait orientation whilst truly in "the field". I have used swings in portrait orientation, however, which you can get on a Crown. I cannot recall a situation out in nature in which I have used more than 5 degrees of tilt or swing.
Looking at my Speed, I see that if you really need this movement, you can hack some more and get it, at the expense of some smoothness and stability of the standard (things that shouldn't affect the pictures at all). The guides that ride the outer edge of the focusing rails need to be ground away. Then the clamping plates themselves need to be cut, with the cut beginning on center to the width of the plates. There will still be enough meat to clamp the rail firmly; it just won't slide in and out as smoothly when you are unpacking/packing the camera. You will probably need to increase the clamping tension using the set screw. This would be removing the outer side from the plate on the side of the camera with the vertical tripod mount, and the inner side of the plate from the side of the camera opposite the vertical tripod mount. You would get a forward tilt, but not a rearward one.
Personally, I would rather just tilt my enlarger. This is a fairly major hacking just for one rarely used movement.
I guess it all depends on what the OP really means by "the field", and on budget. I, perhaps foolishly so, assume that people are on budgets and have no apprehension to modifying cheap equipment to suit their needs. Personally, I say if you are that concerned about lack of movements, and you already have a Sinar, suck it up and put the Sinar in your pack. I have done this more times than I can count. They aren't heavy. They just take longer to set up. Personally, I don't need much in the way of movements when truly in "the field". If "the field" just means going out and shooting something out in the real world outside of your studio, then I have no aversion whatsoever to a monorail camera. If you can't hang, or don't want to, hire strong assistants, AKA having kids.
I don't believe anybody is paying so much for Crowns. Who are these jokers?
Anyhow, cost and compromise were in mind when giving my response. It's fun to talk about what would be ideal, but not everyone can afford an Ebony, etc. I know I can't, given what I have into Sinar equipment. There is no right or wrong way. I'm just throwing out options.
The modifications I have seen involve permanent hacking (in the figurative sense; it was actually done so it looks almost factory seamless) to elongate the channels that limit shift to a certain point. One person I know also added extensions to the vertical shift slots that work nicely and blend into the camera's styling well. I would never do it to a nice example, but it's a very harmless mod. Both of these friends were commercial photographers in the 80s and 90s who extended the shifts for architectural use. They are the ones who first opened my eyes to the fact that rear movements are almost 100% unnecessary, and can be replicated using front shift. Before that, I would always angle the rail, then use rear tilts and swings to change convergence; as I had been instructed in school. Now I find it more simple and intuitive to use shifts alone to achieve same. But then again, I don't shoot much architecture so rarely even do that.
Personally, the way I would do front tilt in portrait orientation would be to tilt the whole camera forward the necessary amount, and then change the resulting convergence in printing. Obviously not ideal, as you need more tilt to do it, and you have to do some tweaking compositionally to make it work. However, I can't recall ever needing to use a front tilt in portrait orientation whilst truly in "the field". I have used swings in portrait orientation, however, which you can get on a Crown. I cannot recall a situation out in nature in which I have used more than 5 degrees of tilt or swing.
Looking at my Speed, I see that if you really need this movement, you can hack some more and get it, at the expense of some smoothness and stability of the standard (things that shouldn't affect the pictures at all). The guides that ride the outer edge of the focusing rails need to be ground away. Then the clamping plates themselves need to be cut, with the cut beginning on center to the width of the plates. There will still be enough meat to clamp the rail firmly; it just won't slide in and out as smoothly when you are unpacking/packing the camera. You will probably need to increase the clamping tension using the set screw. This would be removing the outer side from the plate on the side of the camera with the vertical tripod mount, and the inner side of the plate from the side of the camera opposite the vertical tripod mount. You would get a forward tilt, but not a rearward one.
Personally, I would rather just tilt my enlarger. This is a fairly major hacking just for one rarely used movement.
I guess it all depends on what the OP really means by "the field", and on budget. I, perhaps foolishly so, assume that people are on budgets and have no apprehension to modifying cheap equipment to suit their needs. Personally, I say if you are that concerned about lack of movements, and you already have a Sinar, suck it up and put the Sinar in your pack. I have done this more times than I can count. They aren't heavy. They just take longer to set up. Personally, I don't need much in the way of movements when truly in "the field". If "the field" just means going out and shooting something out in the real world outside of your studio, then I have no aversion whatsoever to a monorail camera. If you can't hang, or don't want to, hire strong assistants, AKA having kids.
I don't believe anybody is paying so much for Crowns. Who are these jokers?
Anyhow, cost and compromise were in mind when giving my response. It's fun to talk about what would be ideal, but not everyone can afford an Ebony, etc. I know I can't, given what I have into Sinar equipment. There is no right or wrong way. I'm just throwing out options.
Last edited by a moderator: