Fotoman adapter for 615 format

[Reinhold]

I just took delivery of a brand spanking new 617 fotoman, but just couldn't leave well enough alone...

Here's an adapter which lets you shoot 615 negatives (6 x 140 mm image), which can be printed in a 4x5 enlarger.

http://www.classicbwphoto.com/Blog/Blog.html

615, by the way is a 1:2.5 ratio, so it fit's the definition of a panorama format. Of corse, if you suddenly need 617 (1:3 format), just carry a changing bag and swap out the mask. A tad time consuming, but it's one way to have a multi-format panorama camera.

I'm having so much fun....

Reinhold

www.classicbwphoto.com

 

[paul ewins]

Umm, why do you call it 615 when it is 56x140mm? I shoot that format in a modified Kodak 3A and have always called it 6x14. FWIW I use the 6x4.5 numbers, but have put the ruby window at the end of the negative and consequently use the sequence 3 6. 9.. 12... 16

regards,
Paul

 

[MAGNAchrom]

that is very, very cool. Nice "machine work" on the masonite carrier!

I also think your panos are noteworthy.

 

[Reinhold]

Paul,

615 is the film size. A couple of examples: for 612 format, the actual image is only 56x112 on my Horseman. On 4x5 film, the actual image is only 3-3/4 x 4-3/4". Image size varies slightly among camera designs, but film size is a "constant".

Regarding the number sequencing, remember that I am using a standard camera which has a red window configured of 617 using the central row of numbers for 6x6 format (56x56 mm, not 60x60, by the way...).

If I decide to permanently incorporate the 615 mask into the camera, I might choose to add a second red window for the 645 numbers, as your camera does. But for those folks who already have a 617 camera, this is a method that provides another format easily.

Don't you just love the format? I think it's the "sweet spot" between the "too narrow to be called Panoramic" format (612), and the "too wide to be all-around useful" format (617). Plus--- I can enlarge it on a 4x5 Beseler.

Have fun...

Reinhold

www.classicbwphoto.com

 

[paul ewins]

I really like the format, 1:3 seems to be too wide for anything other than "dramatic landscapes" but I think 1:2.5 looks better for a wider range of scenes. My first version of the camera used an old Angulon 90/6.8, but I'm playing about with a 105/6.8 at the moment as the 90 was a little wide for some subjects. Being able to use small, cheap lenses is another plus for the format in my opinion.

I've been playing around with an RB67 back, trying to figure out how to add 70mm into the middle via a "cut and shut" and still get the mechanism to work properly. My first attempt wound on properly, but wouldn't stop winding when the film had been advanced far enough. I want to be able to dispense with the Ruby window all together so that I can use 220 film and films like Ilford and Kodak whose backing paper makes using the 645 numbers difficult.