Can I mount this small (cinema?) Bethiot lens in a LF shutter somehow?

[ame01999]

I found this lens on eBay: 45mm, f2.8, that the seller hypothesized once fit a motion picture camera, likely 8 or 16mm. A 45mm focal length seemed pretty long for 8mm, so I guessed it might be meant for larger negatives, and bought it.

I've been searching for a lens that would be wide for MF, and wouldn't fully cover 6x6. Of course, to integrate this lens into a Mercury camera I need to add a shutter to it.

Assuming I can get a flange made, I'm just wondering: can any (small) lens me made to work with a small LF shutter? I know that large lens run the risk of being too large for a shutter's iris, or for a shutter's diameter entirely, but I don't know if there exists a lower limit as well.

Here is the lens, integrated into a highly sophisticated cardboard body so that I might estimate its image circle:

 

[xkaes]

That video doesn't help at all, but most short focal length lenses can be mounted on shutters by using step DOWN rings from the front thread of the shutter. The lens you have might be an enlarging lens. Any lens can cover any film format if there is enough distance between the lens and the film plane. Depending on the angle of coverage of the lens and the size of the film format, you might only be able to use it for close-up or MACRO work. See:

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/macrolenses.htm

 

[RJ-]

Your lens is a standard Société d'Optique et de Mécanique Berthiot SOM Berthiot C or D mount cine camera lens, probably from the late 1950's - 1960's. It has a short flange distance (shorter than 35mm film rangefinders) so you will struggle to form an image on an LF camera, let alone medium format camera.
The C or D type mounts can be coupled using a 26mm threaded adapter --> LTM 39mm or M42 and then from there you can mount it to a Rolleiflex SL66 using the body cap cut lens mount method .. but you still won't achieve infinity focus let alone near focus at the minimum distance.

I use a Lytar 25mm f1.9 from the same company for the Robot half frame and Periflex 35mm. The close focussing guesswork on the Robot limits its use - the Periflex, using a periscope focus, with the rangefinder flange distances from film to lens nodal point, does away with the longer retrofocus distances required of your medium format and 35mm SLR lenses. However the lens does not focus to infinity. Similarly - the Robot Biotar 4cm f2 can be used from the half-frame Robot onto a 35mm Periflex and achieve the optical vignetting effect. Too bad it's not a 36mm x 36mm square format ...

I've been searching for a lens that would be wide for MF, and wouldn't fully cover 6x6. Of course, to integrate this lens into a Mercury camera I need to add a shutter to it.

I thought the Mercury was a half frame camera, not a MF camera. If you are looking for a lens for an optical vignetting wideangle effect on a medium format, you will need a retrofocus type 35mm SLR lens without automated shutter. The Som Berthiot cine lenses are not these. Old fashioned Schneider Angulon 47mm f8s (not the Super prefix) are popular for these kinds of projects for 4x5inch optical vignetting appearances. For medium format like 6x6cm, you may need to explore brass dialytes, old fashioned lantern lenses or Cooke/Ross/Dallmeyer triplets and worry about the shutter one you match a focal length with barrel diameter for fit.

If you are indeed referring to a half-frame Mercury camera - it's a much easier job transplanting a 35mm equivalent Som Berthiot lens into the chassis since there is no focus coupling mechanism: the lens will be scale focussed once collimated.

 

[abruzzi]

Old fashioned Schneider Angulon 47mm f8s (not the Super prefix) are popular for these kinds of projects for 4x5inch optical vignetting appearances.

I've never seen a 47mm Angulon. The shortest Angulon I was aware of is the 65mm. This Schneider Brochure only shows down to 65mm as well:

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00832/00832.pdf

And they are all ƒ6.8. The following page shows the Super Angulon 47mm ƒ8.

(Also note that the 65 definitely doesn't cover 4.5, but I've never tested mine on 4x5 to see if the vignietting looks nice or if I should only use it for 6x9.)

 

[Kino]

I thought the Mercury was a half frame camera, not a MF camera.

I do believe the OP is referring to the 3D printed Mercury MF camera...

6×9 Medium Format Camera

Our most popular, light, and compact camera. Nearly endless exchangeable back options. Nearly endless lens options. This camera accepts scores of interchangeable backs, from medium format 120 film …

mercurycamera.com

 

[RJ-]

I've never seen a 47mm Angulon. The shortest Angulon I was aware of is the 65mm. This Schneider Brochure only shows down to 65mm as well:

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00832/00832.pdf

And they are all ƒ6.8. The following page shows the Super Angulon 47mm ƒ8.

(Also note that the 65 definitely doesn't cover 4.5, but I've never tested mine on 4x5 to see if the vignietting looks nice or if I should only use it for 6x9.)

I had one of those over 20 years ago on a Graflex Century before parting ways (couldn't focus without a bed drop). Was it 47mm or 65mm ... or a Super Angulon..... whatever it was it will be in the Vade mecum - neither cover 4x5inch and the wider version barely covered 6x9cm with slight movements...

 

[OAPOli]

OP, a simpler solution would be to get a fixed-lens RF for 135 format. Those came with a ~40 to 50mm lens in a #00 shutter. There are some with a cock-and-shoot shutter that you could transplant directly, but most are cocked internally.

I've mounted one of those on a 645 camera. There is a hard vignette and mushy edges as expected.

Fuji GS645W with Mamiya 4.8cm f2.8 by Olivier, on Flickr

 

[RJ-]

I've never seen a 47mm Angulon. The shortest Angulon I was aware of is the 65mm. This Schneider Brochure only shows down to 65mm as well:

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00832/00832.pdf

And they are all ƒ6.8. The following page shows the Super Angulon 47mm ƒ8.

(Also note that the 65 definitely doesn't cover 4.5, but I've never tested mine on 4x5 to see if the vignietting looks nice or if I should only use it for 6x9.)

Here you go: the Schneider Angulon 47mm f8 lens: https://www.largeformatphotography....527-Coverage-of-various-Schneider-47mm-lenses

 

[Dan Fromm]

Here you go: the Schneider Angulon 47mm f8 lens: https://www.largeformatphotography....527-Coverage-of-various-Schneider-47mm-lenses

Sorry, every instance of "Angulon" in that post is preceded by "Super."

 

[RJ-]

Sorry, every instance of "Angulon" in that post is preceded by "Super."

I wasn't sure it was that Super ... unconscious got the better of me lol.

Do you still have yours on the Century Graphic? It's strange how years later using the Super Angulon 47mm XL, I miss the vintage look of the early non-XL version.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I wasn't sure it was that Super ... unconscious got the better of me lol.

Do you still have yours on the Century Graphic? It's strange how years later using the Super Angulon 47mm XL, I miss the vintage look of the early non-XL version.

I still have it, also too many lenses with focal lengths around 60 mm. Never noticed that any of them has a "vintage look" but have never used a 47 SAXL. You should know that I'm a certified ignorant barbarian insensitive to the fine points. Took the course, passed the exam, have the certificate.

 

[RJ-]

No way Dan..!

I was still in school when I learnt most everything I knew about the Century Graflex from you on that amazing Graflex.org site some 20 years ago! Your incisive wisdom has not gone unnoticed

Here's an example from the Schneider Kreuznach Super Angulon XL 47mm shot on the Silvestri architectural camera on 5x4. The viewfinder is 4x4 and this is how I visualise it. It's a very modern lens: door to door and corner to corner high definition; accurate and neutral colour balance (this is shot on Fuji Tungsten 64T sheet film); absence of coma, spherical aberration and distortion (the appearance is not distorted - it is achieved using cross-shift movements).

Perhaps we call this look - clinical - or modern - compared to the cute Super (!) Angulon 47mm f8 with its lower contrast and slightly fuzzy edges and strong vignetting/light fall off ...and of course....it's far weaker image circle coverage.

Kind regards

 

[Dan Fromm]

No way Dan..!

I was still in school when I learnt most everything I knew about the Century Graflex from you on that amazing Graflex.org site some 20 years ago! Your incisive wisdom has not gone unnoticed

Here's an example from the Schneider Kreuznach Super Angulon XL 47mm shot on the Silvestri architectural camera on 5x4. The viewfinder is 4x4 and this is how I visualise it. It's a very modern lens: door to door and corner to corner high definition; accurate and neutral colour balance (this is shot on Fuji Tungsten 64T sheet film); absence of coma, spherical aberration and distortion (the appearance is not distorted - it is achieved using cross-shift movements).

Perhaps we call this look - clinical - or modern - compared to the cute Super (!) Angulon 47mm f8 with its lower contrast and slightly fuzzy edges and strong vignetting/light fall off ...and of course....it's far weaker image circle coverage.

Kind regards

Thanks for the kind words.

Yes indeed, the 47 SAXL is more capable that the 47 SA. But using a 47 SA, /8 or /5.6, on 4x5 is lens abuse. They weren't intended to be used on 4x5. As we say, horses for courses. This has never stopped people from using what they have on hand, fully fit for purpose or not.

Cheers,

Dan

Y'r sample shot makes y'r point, I think. I don't care for it but since that's a matter of personal preferences it is irrelevant. If you're happy with it, I'm happy for you. As I said, I really am insensitive to the fine points.