7x17 Back and Bellows Weight?

Daniel,

Thanks for providing the measurements. That's pretty close to what I've been assuming. I was thinking the back of my camera would be about 20" x10" and the bellows frames would be about 18"x8" inside dimensions.

Also, I don't plan to make my back removeable. For my design, the bellows will be attached/inserted from the front. So, I can't think of any reason to ever remove the camera back. Am I missing something? Making the back removeable seems to just add compexity and additional hardware. I was planning to permanently glue my back to the rear standard frame. It seems like it would end up being sturdier and less prone to light leaks than a removeable back. Can anyone think of any reason not to do this?

The back on my 4x10 is removeable, and the bellows are installed from the rear, but as they are held in place with screws, it's not like you will be swapping bellows in the field. I plan to mount my bellows from the front of the rear standard frame. While I've considered also gluing the bellows frame in place, I'm leaning toward using screws so that the bellows can easily be replaced if they are ever damaged. Thoughts?

Kerry

Dan,
that might be one difference...my back has same L and W but is not quite 1.25 counting the thickness of the spring back...

kthalmann said:

.. Also, I don't plan to make my back removeable... . Thoughts?

Kerry

Click to expand...

Good point. Why have the extra weight if you can do without. Mine is removeable simply to remove the bellows and to allow left-side loading if so desired.

Maybe save some weight there I dont Know, however there is still 2 or 3 lbs difference (less weight) between Kerik 's camera and my camera verses
Dan's camera....must be thickness of the wood? i do enjoy and do use my 5 x 7 back and dont even load my 5 x 7 camera anymore.....I do pack the 5 x 7 back...(in the truck)

Dave Wooten said:

Maybe save some weight there I dont Know, however there is still 2 or 3 lbs difference (less weight) between Kerik 's camera and my camera verses
Dan's camera....must be thickness of the wood? i do enjoy and do use my 5 x 7 back and dont even load my 5 x 7 camera anymore.....I do pack the 5 x 7 back...(in the truck)

Click to expand...

Not sure how to account for the extra weight, Dave, other than mine may have heavier/thicker wood. Also, mine is the "technical" version with rear rise and rear geared shift (more weight). Does yours have those features too?

yes it does Dan it looks like the photo you posted but has the 30 inch bellows....I will seek out a different scale, but can't see how I would be off that much....also maybe your hardware is sturdier, also I do not have a serial number on my camera, unless I just don't know where to look, i should add that this has become the most "fun" camera I own....

Mine is also the technical field model with rear rise and geared tilt. The hardware is blackened brass.

Hi Dave,
Sounds like you have a nice light camera there, but I don't know why it would be that much of a difference in weight though.
Kerry, I think that is a pretty good idea to have the back on permanantly. I often wonder why more pano's are not built this way. The only problem I might consider is if you have a less than perfectly folding bellows (sometimes a problem with 7x17) as they are so long lengthwise in relation to the width, then it is nice to be able to remove the back to make sure the pleats are folded right when closing. Ron has had some problems with his 7x17 leather bellows folding correctly in the past as they are packed so tight in such a small package. I do think though that the camera you are building will be much stonger with a permantly attached back. Good luck! Emile

Emile,

I believe the Phillips 7x17 has a rigid, non-removeable back. It would be in keeping with his lightest weight, maximum rigidity philosophy. As my camera is a monorail design, bellows compersion when folding up the camera isn't really an issue. I also plan to order a nice, lightweight synthetic bellows for it from Camera Bellows in England. Leather looks nice, but my cameras get exposed to some pretty harsh conditions (I live in a very damp, wet climate). So, I prefer a synthetic bellows when possible.

In addition to the permanently attached rigid back, I am also considering painting the wooden parts flat black (gasp!). While I love the look of a traditional wooden camera, the one I am building is a more modern, high-tech design. As I'm starting with an ARCA-SWISS monorail as my platform, most of the parts will be black anodized aluminum. So, painting the wooden parts flat black will be cohesive with the rest of the design. It also allows me to consider other materials (like lightweight plywoods) in place of the traditional hardwoods (cherry, mahogany and walnut).

Kerry

kthalmann said:

..... As my camera is a monorail design....Kerry

Click to expand...

Kerry.

With that in mind, you may want to PM fellow APUGer Richard Wasserman (disfromage) as he is currently having Richard Ritter build him a 7x17 based on a Sinar F1. He may have some pointers for you.