Is it difficult focusing 6x9 on a ground glass?

[crumpet8]

Trying to decide whether I want a view camera with a rangefinder... I would like to use it handheld when possible, but wonder how easy it is to zone focus or even just use the GG handheld...

Thanks for all the help so far everyone! Think Ill end up buying something next weekend

The cameras Im tossing up between at the moment are a horseman 45 field camera or a horseman 6x9 rangefinder.

 

[ic-racer]

4x5 Horseman is hard to hand hold and GG focus. You would need to set it down to put the film holder in after focusing. The [optical] viewfinder is pretty expensive; maybe cost more than the camera body. 6x9 Horseman works great hand held, but I needed to get the electric solenoid because the mechanical 'plunger' release for the thumb caused too much movement. Would probably be fine with flash, however. Your results may differ.

 

[Paul Howell]

I dont have any issues with focusing 6X9 or 6X6 (Kowa SL66) for that matter, I believe that the Horseman 6X9 has both roll film back and ground glass backs. The reason to use the ground glass back is when using a lot of adjustments, for street shooting or for matter landscapes or portraiture when adjustments are not needed then the rangefinder is quick and accurate. As mentioned in the other thread, if you plan on wet darkroom, a 4X5 enlarger costs more than a 6X9, dont know how common 4X5 enlargers are on your side of the world. A Horesman field camera will also serve you well, rugged and portable. What lens for the 4X5?

 

[Dan Fromm]

When I got my first 2x3 Graphic, a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic, its ground glass was very dirty. Cleaning helped, replacing the GG with a SatinSnow GG (made by Dave Parker, no longer in business, alas) helped more. I use one of Dave's GGs on my Century Graphic too. My 2x3 Cambos (yes, plural) have their original ground glasses. They're fine. I've used a variety of loupes, primarily Ednalite Magnifinders and now a 3.6x Toyo.

A Cambo in-line viewing hood (2x3 size, SF-320) is very useful. I have a 2x3 Horseman monocular reflex finder. I don't like it, too dim, but usable.

I also shoot 2x3 with a 4x5 Cambo SC. The original issue Cambo GG is just fine. I recently replaced it with a Boscreen (spelling?), am still not sure it gives better results.

Practically speaking none of my 2x3 cameras has a usable rangefinder. I have no choice, must focus on the GG, don't feel deprived.

Zone focus? You might as well shoot a 35 mm rangefinder or SLR and get the plane of best focus where you want it. More seriously, Crumpet, you're much too locked into the 35mm/digital imitation 35 mm mindset. The typical 2x3 and 4x5 camera doesn't have focusing scales (one needed for each lens) and it doesn't have lenses in focusing mounts either.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

My 2x3 Technika has a working rangefinder and cammed lenses, so I can focus with the rangefinder handheld. It can be a little cumbersome, since the viewfinder and rangefinder are separate, and you have to adjust the viewfinder for the focal length and subject distance in addition to focusing with the rangefinder, so it helps to stay in practice. If I don't, I find I miss shots, because I forget things (forgot to focus, forgot to change the infinity stop when changing lenses, forgot to change the cam when changing lenses, forgot to set the focal length or subject distance on the rangefinder so framing is off, etc.). If you do it regularly though, it becomes a routine.

The groundglass is best for tripod shots and static subjects and for use with camera movements. I find it works best to use a stronger loupe than I do with larger formats. I like 4x for 4x5" but use 6x for 6x9.

 

[crumpet8]

I dont have any issues with focusing 6X9 or 6X6 (Kowa SL66) for that matter, I believe that the Horseman 6X9 has both roll film back and ground glass backs. The reason to use the ground glass back is when using a lot of adjustments, for street shooting or for matter landscapes or portraiture when adjustments are not needed then the rangefinder is quick and accurate. As mentioned in the other thread, if you plan on wet darkroom, a 4X5 enlarger costs more than a 6X9, dont know how common 4X5 enlargers are on your side of the world. A Horesman field camera will also serve you well, rugged and portable. What lens for the 4X5?

Thanks Paul I believe we have a 4x5 enlarger at my school so will double check this week. Looking at a lens between 150mm and 250mm.

When I got

I also shoot 2x3 with a 4x5 Cambo SC. The original issue Cambo GG is just fine. I recently replaced it with a Boscreen (spelling?), am still not sure it gives better results.

Practically speaking none of my 2x3 cameras has a usable rangefinder. I have no choice, must focus on the GG, don't feel deprived.

Zone focus? You might as well shoot a 35 mm rangefinder or SLR and get the plane of best focus where you want it. More seriously, Crumpet, you're much too locked into the 35mm/digital imitation 35 mm mindset. The typical 2x3 and 4x5 camera doesn't have focusing scales (one needed for each lens) and it doesn't have lenses in focusing mounts either.

Yep this is all very new to me, thanks for the info Dan. Agreed it's not ideal, but wouldn't it be possible to set a not so shallow depth of field, frame your picture and then wait for your subject to jump in it?

 

[Dan Fromm]

Yep this is all very new to me, thanks for the info Dan. Agreed it's not ideal, but wouldn't it be possible to set a not so shallow depth of field, frame your picture and then wait for your subject to jump in it?

Fantasy, IMO. To be fair, possible but iffy.

 

[crumpet8]

Fantasy, IMO. To be fair, possible but iffy.

Do you have any insight into this question Dan?

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Dan Fromm]

Do you have any insight into this question Dan?

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

None. I haven't read the 45HF's specs and I have no idea which movements or how much of them you'll need.

 

[crumpet8]

None. I haven't read the 45HF's specs and I have no idea which movements or how much of them you'll need.

What do you commonly use? for example how much swing do you usually use?

 

[Dan Fromm]

What do you commonly use? for example how much swing do you usually use?

The movement I use the most is front rise, to reduce/eliminate the foreground and to include the top of the subject without having to tilt the camera, which introduces converging verticals. I shoot mainly landscapes.

 

[crumpet8]

The movement I use the most is front rise, to reduce/eliminate the foreground and to include the top of the subject without having to tilt the camera, which introduces converging verticals. I shoot mainly landscapes.

Ok, How much rise do you usually need?

 

[Dan Fromm]

It depends on the situation. Really.

Look, the best thing for you to do is stop analyzing, buy a camera with reasonable capabilities and use it. A Horseman, for example, rather than a Graphic because Graphics are less capable. For most of us the first LF camera teaches us what we like and really need. And then, if necessary, we sell the first one, usually at a minimal loss, and buy one that fits our needs better.

 

[AgX]

Zone focus? ... The typical 2x3 and 4x5 camera doesn't have focusing scales (one needed for each lens) and it doesn't have lenses in focusing mounts either.

The rack&pinion focusing at a dropbed field camera is what a helicoid is at a 35mm camera.
It should not be that difficult to add a distance scale to the dropbed, even exchangable for different lenses.

 

[Dan Fromm]

The rack&pinion focusing at a dropbed field camera is what a helicoid is at a 35mm camera.
It should not be that difficult to add a distance scale to the dropbed, even exchangable for different lenses.

This has been done. See, e.g., Graphics. But it isn't practical for more than a couple of lenses because of lack of space on the bed.

By the way, Graphics' focusing scales are verniers -- two pieces, one moves relative to the other. They were never specific to lenses, e.g., 127/4.7 Ektar, but to measured focal lengths. One can't just whump these things up.

Removing and replacing tiny screws in the field is possible but too terrible to contemplate seriously. Graphics' focusing scales are held to the bed by tiny, tiny screws. Theory is nice but practicality is very important.

 

[AgX]

I was not thinking of screws. You could hold such a scale by magnet for instance.

 

[nosmok]

While bowing to Dan Fromm's prodigious expertise generally, you CAN just whump these things up, as long as you know/accept what you're doing. Especially for wider angles. I bought a modified-for-Wide- Angles (100mm - 38mm) Graphic that had a focusing scale set for about a 95mm lens on 4x5 (around 35mm FL on 35mm as a rough guide). I then got a great deal on a 47mm f/5.6 Super Angulon. Using the GG I got the SA focused at infinity, then I used a tape measure, Sharpie, and masking tape to make a focus scale for the SA. I now have a camera that has an 18" - infinity focusing scale that works, and macro CU capabilities on the GG. If one puts down a hashmark as to where to paste the appropriate masking tape scale, there's no reason not to have scale-focus capabilities for multiple FL's-- not as good as RF, but most likely good enough if you're knowledgeable/careful.

(edit) This combo is wide enough that even the lack of a viewfinder hasn't been much an obstacle. When focused at 18", an orange on my tree was the size of my thumbprint, and at infinity my knuckles gripping the handleless body are out of frame.

 

[tedr1]

My answer to the question in the subject line of the thread is YES, it IS difficult to focus 6x9 on ground glass. The reason is that focusing on ground glass requires the camera to be on a tripod and the use of a magnifying lens to inspect the image. This process is suitable for some types of photography, still-life and landscape, also some portraiture, but it is hopeless for snapshots and handheld photography of any sort. That is why the rangefinder and focusing scales were invented.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Technikas have focus scales. On the 4x5 they're on a rail that slides in with three scales, and that rail can be swapped out with others, if you have more than three lenses that use them. On the later 2x3 Technikas, the focusing scale snaps in and out easily.

On other field cameras I've owned, I've made my own scales by measuring and marking a tape on the bed and marking an index line on the rail. On a 4x5" you might be able to put 3 scales side by side or use more than one index mark and put the scales one in front of the other along the rail. If you have a rangefinder with one cammed lens, for instance, you can use the rangefinder to determine the subject distance from the scale for which the rangefinder is calibrated, and then adjust the focus according to the scale for the lens you actually have on the camera.

 

[Ian Grant]

My answer to the question in the subject line of the thread is YES, it IS difficult to focus 6x9 on ground glass. The reason is that focusing on ground glass requires the camera to be on a tripod and the use of a magnifying lens to inspect the image. This process is suitable for some types of photography, still-life and landscape, also some portraiture, but it is hopeless for snapshots and handheld photography of any sort. That is why the rangefinder and focusing scales were invented.

You don't need a loupe to view and focus a good screen and if not so good a hood helps, I've shot LF since 1976 and never used one, there's a knack when using a GG screen of spotting when an image snaps into (or out of) focus. I use 5x4 regularly and occasionally a 6x9 camera hand held in situations where I have to work quickly. It's remarkably easy in practice.

About 6 maybe 7 years ago I took a fellow APUG member to Ephesus, a huge tourist attraction, he was mazed at the LF images I could make working fast hand held dodging the milling coach loads, and I mean a lot of coaches

It's about confidence with your equipment and techniques. One morning in March I got up early and with a full back pack made my homage to St Paul and walked from our apartment to Ephesus, the images were worthwhile and all hand held, some of the best I've made. You have to believe in yourself, I'm not religious but you know walking there like St Paul was inspiring, it was along hot walk.

So comments like hopeless for snapshots or hand held work just show a lack of will to try

Ian

 

[crumpet8]

Thanks for all the tips everyone!

 

[Dan Fromm]

You don't need a loupe to view and focus a good screen and if not so good a hood helps, I've shot LF since 1976 and never used one, there's a knack when using a GG screen of spotting when an image snaps into (or out of) focus. I use 5x4 regularly and occasionally a 6x9 camera hand held in situations where I have to work quickly. It's remarkably easy in practice.

Ian, it all depends.

I have a nifty little Cambo SF-320 viewer that fits 2x3 Graflok backs, have used it with insertion roll holders on my 2x3 Graphics. Focusing through it is possible -- you're right, the image on GG snaps into and out of focus -- and using it to shoot handheld can make sense if the subject is a considerable distance away. With near subjects, teetering back and forth can move the plane of best focus enough to matter. I don't shot that way at distance because I can't be sure that slight motion (mine), especially apparently minor rotation, won't change framing. With a good viewfinder -- my little Graphics' tubular view finders aren't quite good enough -- framing subjects at moderate distance is possible. Closer and parallax starts being a problem.

I recently got a new adapter for my 4x5 Cambo back from Grimes, put it, the lens it is for and my C-288 viewer on the camera and carried the assembly outside to check whether the lens could be focused through infinity. It can. I wouldn't use the rig to shoot handheld but checking whether focusing "far, far way" is possible can be done handheld.

I think the moral for the OP, your experience notwithstanding, is if he wants to work quickly he should get a 2x3 camera (or a 4x5 and a 2x3 roll holder to fit it) with coupled range finder and cams, bed stops &tc to suit his lenses. I can't recommend a fast-working 2x3 or 4x5 SLR that allows use of a broad range of lenses or even short ones because I'm not aware of any.

We haven't made it clear to the OP that if he wants to use movements he's limited to shooting from tripod.

 

[Brian Schmidt]

Hello.

I guess in my experience with an old German 6X9 plate camera I haven't had much difficulty with out of focus exposures. If you are good at guesstimating distances the focus scale is about spot on. If it isn't it can be adjusted. Anything closer than about three feet needs the ground glass to be used with a tripod. I can't say that using a coupled rangefinder is much faster than guessing and setting the bed to the right number. Typically you have to look through the rangefinder and move to the viewfinder which takes time.

If you plan on doing action shots with one of these it is in fact possible (or there wouldn't be many motion shots from the early days). It is more about preparedness. Set the focus to where you expect the action to happen and keep the aperture choked up to make up for differences.

Movement wise my camera has a wire frame viewfinder that moves with the lens so it stays fairly close to what the film sees. It doesn't look like the Horseman does.

I would say to get a tripod if you want to do anything fancy with it. Even a cheap Craigslist tripod is better than just holding it in your hand. I never realized how jittery I was until I started in Photography. Otherwise, for regular shots at more than a few feet with short exposures I would probably usually hold it.

-Brian

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

If you don't need movements, get a Fuji GW690. Hell of a lot easier handheld (and much lighter). I have both a GW690III and Horseman VH. The Horseman almost never gets used - but mostly because if I need movements the 4x5 comes out.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, it all depends. . . . . . . . . . . . .

We haven't made it clear to the OP that if he wants to use movements he's limited to shooting from tripod.

It really depends on the camera., and also the range of lenses used. With a range-finder you need to change the cams to suit the lens which is not very practical when out in the field, I'm always working with 2 sometimes 3 lenses.

I do use some movements working hand held with my Super Graphic (or Crown Graphic), usually slight front tilt and the wire sports finder compensates when framing, as it also does when I use a 90mm or 203mm instead of the 135mm or 150mm standard lens.

My assumption when I realised tripods were not permitted many places I shoot (archaeological sites) and that I would have to work hand held with 5x4 was it would be difficult, I needed a re-think. In fact it's not hard at all, it meant instead of using slow films like Delta 100 and slow shutter speeds at f22 I had to switch to HP5, I try to shoot at 1/200, or 1/100 and f22 or f16, but 1/50 has been OK. That's my personal preference for my landscape work, of course other subject matter may well be fine at wider apertures with shallow DOF.

Brian Schmidt mentions the wire finders on German 6.5x9 plate cameras, it's the same with the 9x12s and larger sizes. The film Henry & June has a couple of scenes showing Brassai at work, in one his colleague is measuring the distance with a tape measure (it's a night shot), and focus is set by the focus scale. With my 16x9 camera I regularly shoot by estimating the distance and setting the focus with the helical, there's always the option of using a separate (uncoupled) range finder, they are small & light.

Personally for hand held work the wire sports finder is the most important feature whether it's a 6x9 or 5x4 camera.

Ian