Burke & James SW Orbitar 4X5

[summicron1]

OK, so I acquired one of these recently and can find almost nothing about it on the interweb -- no owners manuals, darn little discussion.

There must be more than one or two of them around?

It seems to function pretty much like any other 4 x 5, although I've found focusing through ground glass with a lens that is widest at f8 is a bit dodgy -- the focus mount has a distance scale, however, and when you put it at f 16 or f 22, it seems to manage pretty well. The 65mm Super Angulon does not vignette in those f-stop ranges.

One question -- the focus mount goes WAY past infinity -- the catalog picture I found mentions something about that being to allow for aerial photography, but I can't for the life of me understand why. Anyone got a clue?

Also discovering how important the rising front on this is -- and the importance of keeping it absolutely level when shooting anything with straight lines. See sample images:

Anyway -- fun camera.

 

[Paul Howell]

Over the years I have owned or used a few B&J 4X5s, this is a first for me, the add lists a 65mm, is your with the 65mm or has been changed over the years? Any movements other movement than the front rise?

 

[summicron1]

Over the years I have owned or used a few B&J 4X5s, this is a first for me, the add lists a 65mm, is your with the 65mm or has been changed over the years? Any movements other movement than the front rise?

it has the 65mm, as shipped from the factory, and only the front rise/set.

Yeah, I'd never seen one, and interweb discussion on it is sparce ... perhaps they only made a few when they didn't sell.

 

[Dan Fromm]

How much front rise did you use in y'r three example shots?

Interesting that they mention three formats (2x3, 4x5, 8x10) but only one lens, a 65/8 SA, that just covers 4x5.

Question partially answered: https://www.popscreen.com/prod/MTMy...-Field-Camera-WIDE-ANGLE-121mm-Super-Angulon-

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?108391-Burke-and-James-Orbitar-Camera
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?80513-Burke-amp-James-ORBITAR-infos
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?67487-Burke-and-James-Orbitar

 

[Paul Howell]

"Navy Instrument Gray" just ideal speculations may have bee developed for the Navy. Very compact package, should easy to take backpacking. Ground glass back or just point and shoot?

 

[summicron1]

"Navy Instrument Gray" just ideal speculations may have bee developed for the Navy. Very compact package, should easy to take backpacking. Ground glass back or just point and shoot?

ground glass back, but dim because of the f-8 lens, so you end up doing some zen, but it all works out.

I think it would backpack pretty well. Haven't tried.

the links in the comment above to large format photography have some guy really dissing on this particular model. Whatever, dude. If we were so worried about speed and convenience we'd not be messing with 4 by 5 photography. I'm having fun with this, that's all that matters.

 

[Paul Howell]

Great Camera, may be somewhat dim at F8, but with a 65mm you can scale focus. The widest I have is a 90mm that I can use on my Crown with dropped bed, the B&J is much more compact, the advantage of a Crown is that the Crown has a little, I mean little front tilt. I don't think B&J gears gets respect , but then my 4X5 view camera is a NewView.

 

[John Koehrer]

Leveling removes/minimizes the Keystoning like the last photo and the ad says it's helical focus with several distances marked on the ring.
Maybe the ability to focus is optimistic unless you're on the surface of the sun and it's
main use is by guess and by golly focus

 

[Dan Fromm]

Paul, a 4x5 Crown Graphic's minimum extension is 52.4 mm. A 65/8 SA's flange-focal distance is 70.5 mm.

I know the Orbitar is cute in a clunky way, but I think you've just acquired a 65/8 SA for your Crown. But before you rush to agree with me, check whether the Orbitar has more front rise than the Crown.

 

[Paul Howell]

Crowns have a fair amount of front rise, very little tilt and shift, can't tell from OP's picture how much rise the B&J has. There appears to a level next to lens with a scale which I assume is the tilt. I always thought that a 65 would catch the dropped front bed.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I always thought that a 65 would catch the dropped front bed.

Nope.

 

[bobbotron]

This is so neat, I've been mulling over building a similar camera out of wood for my 65mm 4x5 lens for a while. It's amazing how close the lens needs to be to the film with such a wide lens.

 

[summicron1]

Crowns have a fair amount of front rise, very little tilt and shift, can't tell from OP's picture how much rise the B&J has. There appears to a level next to lens with a scale which I assume is the tilt. I always thought that a 65 would catch the dropped front bed.

the rise and fall above centerpoint is 3/4 of an inch each way, or 1.5 inches travel from top to bottom. Normal shooting position, of course, is in the middle.

Originally they had a rack/pinion wheel to work the rise/drop of the lens, but my model is later, I suspect, when they went simpler and put a simple clamp operated by a lever which you unlock and then move the lens up or down.

 

[summicron1]

This is so neat, I've been mulling over building a similar camera out of wood for my 65mm 4x5 lens for a while. It's amazing how close the lens needs to be to the film with such a wide lens.

Yeah, the camera is only two inches wide. The lens actually doesn't project very far into the body, even at full retraction of the focusing helical. I suspect they didn't mind the lens poking out from the front and this kept weight down.

You want to see a lens that really sticks back in there, check out the 21mm Super Angulon that Schneider made for the Leicas in the mid 1950s -- the rear element on that is about 3 mm away from the film. Maybe 4. You can't use the lens on the Leica CL because the meter arm hits it.

 

[seabee1999]

I have one of these cameras as well. It is a fun little 4x5 and light enough to carry around in the field. The one I have I acquired from the Navy. It was about to be trashed by the command I was attached to. I have used mine quite a few times but I still haven't developed any sheets from it to know if it really worked. I had to do a lot of work to clean off some rust from the shutter. My only real complaint is that the 65 f/8 is indeed quite dim and I do wish it had, even if it was slight, front tilt.

R/
Dave

 

[John Koehrer]

Bill Brandt used an 8X10 Kodak that's very similar though made of wood & able to use several different size lens boards. I believe he used it with an 8.5Cm Protar & relied on hyperfocalizing. P

 

[M Carter]

the links in the comment above to large format photography have some guy really dissing on this particular model. Whatever, dude. If we were so worried about speed and convenience we'd not be messing with 4 by 5 photography. I'm having fun with this, that's all that matters.

Screw 'em. That is one funky-ass sexy thing of a camera. Not in the "I'm so slick way" but "I'm cool with being a metal box with a label riveted to the front". Looks like someone pulled a panel from a Gemini capsule. And hell, looks like it makes some snappy negs, too, so it's more than just a retro-crazy-pretty face.

I freaking LOVE that thing!!! It must be plugging into something deep in my DNA, every now and then something does that to me. Never saw one before, thanks for sharing.

 

[bobbotron]

Screw 'em. That is one funky-ass sexy thing of a camera. Not in the "I'm so slick way" but "I'm cool with being a metal box with a label riveted to the front". Looks like someone pulled a panel from a Gemini capsule. And hell, looks like it makes some snappy negs, too, so it's more than just a retro-crazy-pretty face.

I freaking LOVE that thing!!! It must be plugging into something deep in my DNA, every now and then something does that to me. Never saw one before, thanks for sharing.

I agree 100%. I would be super happy if I got a hold of such a camera!

 

[Dan Fromm]

Bill Brandt used an 8X10 Kodak that's very similar though made of wood & able to use several different size lens boards. I believe he used it with an 8.5Cm Protar & relied on hyperfocalizing. P

Interesting camera, apparently very rare. See https://greg-neville.com/tag/kodak-wide-angle-camera-with-zeiss-protar-lens/ Whole plate, not 8x10, and the odd thing about the device is that Zeiss claims the lens covers 8.5" "at small stops" while whole plate's diagonal is 10.7". Images' corners must have been very dark indeed.

 

[Drew B.]

Interested in selling it?

 

[summicron1]

Interested in selling it?

absolutely not. It was used in San Francisco by Gene Wright, a really wonderful photographer who used this and a handfull of extreme panoramic cameras to capture a look that came to define San Francisco for a long time. When his daughter offered it to me I was honored to accept it with the promise it would be used with honor.

Plus, as others have noted, it's really cool!

https://www.amazon.com/FRANCISCO-LOVE-AFFAIR-First-Last/dp/0976274779