Perhaps Schneider compensated for the position of the diaphragm when manufacturing the lenses, although this does seem unlikely. I tried to reverse the cells in a Raptar 90mm for micro-photography, and the results were really bad.
Large Format Macro?
Some years back, there was a college in Mississippi that required biology and geology majors to take a macro-photography course. In this course, some students made ten foot (and longer) cameras with pipe, a lens on one end and a 4x5 spring-back on the other. Talk about bellows-factor. By changing the lens you could enlarge crystals, mosquito larvae, etc. I always thought that a good idea to make these students familiar with optical tools. Things like that are probably considered tooooo haaaard nowdays. but then maybe they still have that course. The professor wrote a book on macro-photography. I think I may have a copy if I haven't lent it to someone....Regards!
Makro symmar hm 180mm f5.6 for 8X10 film
It results in a faster working aperture, better working distance higher resolving power then trying to for example push my 90mm Super-Angulon or 125mm Fujinon to the same level of magnification.
By the way, A. A. Blaker wrote about your two lens trick in his book Field Photography. Where did you learn of it?
As did Lefkowitz in his Close-up book. It's a good approach if all you have is a long and short lens, and you want to get really close, but nowadays, good enlarging / process / macro lenses are very inexpensive -- and some have a 40mm (#1) thread.
https://www.photocornucopia.com/1061.html
Actually, the MP-4 Tominons aren't my favorites. The 17 isn't a Luminar, but is very cost effective if one doesn't need Luminar performance. The 35 isn't the best at or near its focal length but, again, is cost effective. The 50 is so-so, and the longer ones -- except perhaps the 105, which I never tried out -- are mediocre. I've had several 35 Eurgons, all awful.I'm thinking of your favorites -- the Tominon process lenses, all with 40mm threads -- but there are others, as well. The Rodenstock Eurygons come to mind, also with 40mm threads. And 39mm-to-400mm adapters are easy to get.
Has anyone done macro photography with a large format camera? If I'm not mistaken, Karl Blossfeldt shot macro with an 8x10 camera (I could be wrong about that), but I haven't seen anyone else do a macro shoot with a 4x5 or an 8x10. If anyone has tried it, please share your experiences.
Thanks
Karl Blossfeldt used the 9x12cm format, a little bit smaller than 4x5" (10x13cm)
All pictures from him were made in a 1:1 ratio with a 500mm aplanatic lens at f/36 (source: das deutsche Lichtbild, 1928)
I try to make pictures in this way but I don´t use a 500mm lens in 1:1 because it needs an extension of 1000mm (40inch) Here I used a 320mm Rodenstock aplanat in 9x12cm size:
I read that his camera were self made and only a wooden box with the 1000mm extension, very simple.
He don´t were a photographer he were a professor of scupture, specially stonemason and this pictures were pattern for his students to learn the forms and the aesthetics of natural forms.
I guess he realised that the long focus gives the best perspective for this.
His book is still in use in the education of stonemasons.
I read that his camera were self made and only a wooden box with the 1000mm extension, very simple.
He don´t were a photographer he were a professor of scupture, specially stonemason and this pictures were pattern for his students to learn the forms and the aesthetics of natural forms.
I guess he realised that the long focus gives the best perspective for this.
His book is still in use in the education of stonemasons.
Alternatively, I have one of those adapter boards for RB67 lenses; a 65 or 90 on that board would give huge magnification on the Graphic View if the image quality holds up...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?