Cheapest path to Pano's

[hoffy]

Greetings Friends,

I've been contemplating the lint in my navel a bit this morning and have been wondering how I would go about photographing panorama's.

As I am a tight wad and I am not sure if this is something I want to do, I'm curious to know what might be the cheapest path to taking this style of Photos?

Would I be best to find a roll film back for my Toyo 45A and suitable lens? Or would I be best off looking at a dedicated roll film camera?

Cheers

 

[summicron1]

depends on what you mean by panorama -- you can buy a 24mm lens for a 35mm camera, crop the top and bottom thirds of the resulting negative and there you are...

A TRUE panorama camera has a curved film plane and rotating lens. Those tend to be pretty expensive, but you can get some nice effects with them. The Lomo folks sell a rotating camera.

It really depends on how much you want to shoot panorama, or just want pics that look as if they were. A dedicated camera with a curved plane limits you to just those types of shots.

 

[wilper]

If cheap is all that matters, build a pinhole camera. I'd guess you can do it for free using stuff you already have in the kitchen and garage.

 

[Steve Smith]

Make your own... like I did.

http://stevesmithphoto.webs.com/pano612.html


Steve.

 

[hoffy]

OK, very good questions and ones I don't have answers for!

I suppose what I want to do is produce some nice quality land/seascapes - not for sale, just for me! I want to avoid 35mm, Pinhole and lomo at this stage.

 

[wilper]

Just getting a wide angle lens for your 4x5 and then cropping the negatives is perhaps the easiest way forward.

There are 6x12 roll film backs for 4x5 cameras readily available. But I suppose we can do cheaper than that.

I did some trivial modifications to a Kodak folding camera originally intended for 122 Autographic film. It now produces negatives 6x14 size. Such cameras go for ~$100 on the auction site. There are some samples on https://photofying.wordpress.com/2015/06/14/roll-307-and-308-spelmansstamma-folk-music-festival/

 

[Ian Grant]

You can get spare darkslides for your DDS/film holders and cut them to give 2 2x5 inch exposures per sheet of 5x4 film, actually it'll be a touch under 2 inches to prevent overlap. People do this with other formats like 10x8 as well. I'm planning on using my 7x5 cameras this way although when I get time I intend to make a roll film back.

Currently I shoot 6x17 with a Gaoersi camera and a 75mm f8 Super Angulon, I looked at extension backs for my 5x4 cameras but they don't allow lenses as short as 75mm so I rulled that out. I like the perspective of the 75mm which is close to standard on a normal 6x6 roll film camera so on my 617 camera it's wide when it comes to the horizontal axis and normal in the vertical. I can use a 90mm SA but find it a touch too long in the spaces I work in.

It's heavy carrying a dedicated 617 camera as well as LF gear hence the reason to try to use just one camera for everything with just a separate 617 back. I found that 6x12 wasn't really that wide compared to 5x4 and not really advantageous in my case.

There's no easy choices.

Ian

 

[hoffy]

Ian, I don't mind that idea. Wouldn't be a hard thing to achieve either with a dremel and a file.

 

[ic-racer]

The question is more about paper management. Long aspect ratio prints are made during the printing process. Do you have an easel to hold half-sheets of 16x20 (16x10) or were you going smaller? You can assemble as many individual prints together on mat board to any length (depending on the size of the mat board). The only need for a special camera being would be if you want to contact print the rebate.

 

[removed account4]

hi hoffy

there are places in the us like anchor optical or the surplus shed that sell lens ( maybe where you live there are similar optical parts sellers ? ).
you could easily build a camera out of materials that would have a fixed focal length and expose paper negatives
to be the size/format that works best in your workflow. the camera could be made of cardboard/foam core
or "fancy" like wood, solid gold or other materials.
a single cell meniscus costs very little, or you could harvest something off of a junque camera or mount a nice lens on your home made frame.
have fun !
( and good luck ! )
john

 

[gone]

This isn't nearly as elaborate, or as nice, as Steve's camera, but it looks like a simple modification that even I could do w/ minimal time and tools. The link to the PDF is on this link below

http://kodak.3106.net/index.php?p=516

The cheapest route is to simply crop. These are 35mm film, and nothing manipulated (even the colour shots, that's just how they came out) other than the neg was cropped. I might fire up the 'ol Durst and print some of these because they might be OK. Who knew? They don't have that true pano look like Ian's wonderful photos, but if you took the shots w/ this sort of format in mind w/ a wide lens instead of a 50 from the get go, you could improve on these quite easily. Really, only the first one works, and the second might be made to w/ some more work, but its a start. Never even considered this format, as it's not how I see things.

 

[Hatchetman]

I crop 6x9 or 4x5. not sure that counts but it gives me what I want.

 

[DannL.]

You may need to click twice to see the full scan.

Dead Link Removed

That was made using a 35mm and printing each frame separately. The same method should work also with 4x5 sheet film and larger. When you don't have a circuit camera or wide angle lens, there are other ways to skin the cat. I'm not much for wide angle lenses, as the distortion I find unsettling. "Short images with too much scene."

The first example found under the "History" section of this Wikipedia entry reveals how this was done. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramic_photography

 

[Dan Fromm]

OK, very good questions and ones I don't have answers for!

I suppose what I want to do is produce some nice quality land/seascapes - not for sale, just for me! I want to avoid 35mm, Pinhole and lomo at this stage.

hoffy, thanks for answering my question before I got around to asking it. I'm sorry, I don't see what your answer has to do with the final print's aspect ratio. Could you explain further what you want to accomplish?

Re Ian's split dark slide suggestion. It will work and you can implement it but if what you want is a long low print shooting 4x5 (or whatever format suits you) and cropping when printing will give you more cropping/fix the composition opportunities.

Re cropping, nearly everyone who has a Hasselblad SWC loves it and its fixed 38/4.5 Biogon. Me, I have a humble Century Graphic and an ex-aerial camera 38/4.5 Biogon in Copal #0. When I shoot it on 2x3 (6x9 in metric) I waste a bit of film real estate (black corners and all that) but I have much better cropping opportunities that the 'blad users do. The lens actually covers 84 mm. 24 mm x 80 mm is there when I want it.

 

[GKC]

A grease pencil, about 39 cents IIRC. Mark a "fixed" center (a rock or tree) on your gg, align with one edge of your scene, shoot, pan the camera so the line is on the opposite edge and shoot again. Assemble the negatives and make a contact print. 39 cents!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have a WideLux 7 that shoots a 140 degree wide photograph with a sweeping lens on 35mm film. WideLux 1500 does the same on 120 film.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widelux

 

[hoffy]

hoffy, thanks for answering my question before I got around to asking it. I'm sorry, I don't see what your answer has to do with the final print's aspect ratio. Could you explain further what you want to accomplish?

Re Ian's split dark slide suggestion. It will work and you can implement it but if what you want is a long low print shooting 4x5 (or whatever format suits you) and cropping when printing will give you more cropping/fix the composition opportunities.

Re cropping, nearly everyone who has a Hasselblad SWC loves it and its fixed 38/4.5 Biogon. Me, I have a humble Century Graphic and an ex-aerial camera 38/4.5 Biogon in Copal #0. When I shoot it on 2x3 (6x9 in metric) I waste a bit of film real estate (black corners and all that) but I have much better cropping opportunities that the 'blad users do. The lens actually covers 84 mm. 24 mm x 80 mm is there when I want it.

Because I love being non committal?

What I want to try is produce some nice wide format land/seascapes, that I can produce and print at around 40 inches x 14 inches or similar. I see what has been produced by people using 120 film based pano camera's and think 'how can I get similar quality without having to shell out the thousands to buy one of those'....

OK, so, I think the cheapest way with the gear I have now would be to get a wide angled lens and recessed board for my Toyo. Would a 90 be OK (considering most Fuji 617's I have seen have this lens as the widest option), or should I really be looking for much wider?

If I went a 75mm, what would be a cost effective starting point? Something like a Caltar? Or should I be saving my clams and getting something better? I will keep in mind that I could easily go to KEH now and buy a EX condition Fuji G617 with 105mm lens for less than $1500.

Cheers

 

[OptiKen]

Make your own... like I did.

http://stevesmithphoto.webs.com/pano612.html


Steve.

WOW

 

[Dan Fromm]

hoffy, you're asking for advice about what you should do. I don't know you, have no idea what your tastes/preferences are. Without knowing you fairly well I can't begin to imagine what would be good, not even to think of best, for you.

If I were in your situation -- non-committal, have a 4x5 camera, want to print wide, not all that many clams in the ice chest -- I'd go on walkabout with a viewing frame that will let me see what the candidate lenses for 4x5 see.

If I were dead set on a 3:1 aspect ratio (more or less) and prints 40" long I'd think hard about shooting 5x7 and cropping. This has to be less expensive than a dedicated 617 camera and will give more flexibility.

 

[hoffy]

I know it's probably a bit cliche (and most certainly 'done before'), but this is the kind of imagery i'd like to start to learn how to take....

local pano examples

Where I go from there, who knows. It's all about getting a starting point.

 

[Ian Grant]

If I went a 75mm, what would be a cost effective starting point? Something like a Caltar? Or should I be saving my clams and getting something better? I will keep in mind that I could easily go to KEH now and buy a EX condition Fuji G617 with 105mm lens for less than $1500.

Cheers

I've just bought a 2nd 75mm an f5.6 Super Angulon (approx 1966 pre-Multicoating) in excellent condition for $200 (£130) inc shipping from SF (US) to the UK which took 3 days, that was via this Forum. I paid about the same for my 75mm f8 Super Anhulon on Ebay from Italy, when it arrive it was new in it's box (NIB) and had clearly never been mounted on a camera.

If you went for a later Caltar then you'd be getting a Super Angulon or a Grandagon (Caltar II-N) rebadged anyway and both are excellent lenses, not sure who made the earlier Caltar Pro 75mm f6.3 WA. Initially I was obsessed with making sure I used Multi Coated lenses but people like Dan Fromm used to pull me up on this and as I began using (Single) coated lenses I realised that with LF lenses this wasn't and issue, I've never had flare issues or lower contrast results with post WWII coated LF lenses compared to my MC lenses and they get used alongside each other..

You need to think carefully which focal length will be best for you, I'm in a minority preferring a 75mm, and it would be too wide in wide open landscapes shooting from a distance but it's perfect for me in the more confined areas I work.

I'm intrigued to see the KEH site describing the 180mm as being the standard lens for a Fuji 617, 90mm as Super wide angle, 105mm Wide anngle and 300mm as Telephoto. I use the word intrigued because I think of a Panoramic camera in the opposite way in terms of the Vertical aspect where I want to include more of my field of view to either side so 75mm-90m is a normal lens for 6x6/6x7 and only wide on the horizontal aspect.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

I know it's probably a bit cliche (and most certainly 'done before'), but this is the kind of imagery i'd like to start to learn how to take....

local pano examples

Where I go from there, who knows. It's all about getting a starting point.

If you've got a 5x4 camera (which I guess you do) try making a cardboard mask to compose Panoramic shots on the Ground Glass, see what Focal length lens might suite you best. I did shoot some 6x12 images this way on 5x4 film in the early 90's I think using my 90mm Grandagon, it felt a bit lke cheating but I knew the 5x4 format wouldn't work for the images. I knew then that the 6x17 format would be ideal but that a 65mm would be a bit too wide, my 65mm f8 SA barely covers 5x4 anyway so no good for 617. It was more than 10 years before I finally bought a 6x17 camera, it was what I needed an finally I could capture what I so often saw and couldn't do justice to.

Ian

 

[LJH]

Hoffy,

You can buy the 6x17cm back from one of the Chinese sellers on eBay for about US$500. This is the Gaoersi one, and NOT the one for 4x5"; it is a spare for their dedicated 6x17 camera. You could easily build a box to mount it and bung a lens on the front. Done. If you already have the lenses and they're mounted, it wouldn't be difficult to build this box to take these boards. The timber is the easy part!


Bear in mind the relative costs of 120 v 4x5" for colour, and the availability of (for example) Velvia 50 in 120 versus 4x5".

I'm happy to chat about how to build this if that's of any interest.

 

[trythis]

I have been shooting a Kodak 2c that takes 130 film. Add Spacers for 120 film and you get 6x12 images. Camera is about $20.


Typos made on a tiny phone...

 

[Mick Fagan]

Just a thought to keep things in perspective. As you will no doubt be running a wide angle lens, you are more than likely going to require a centre graduated filter.

I myself have just gone through this exercise with the purchase of a 65mm for my 4x5 and happening to chance upon a Heliopan centre graduated filter. Huge difference, I will now not use the 65 without it, unless I wish to have darkened edges for whatever effect I deem necessary.

The good news is, these centre graduated filters work and work well, the bad news is, they cost. They also require any filters you may wish to stack on the outer to be 86mm, filters don’t come cheap at that size, nor are they lying around.

Mick.