OK, heres an odd question for you...

[EdColorado]

If you had both an ICA 146/1 9x12, and an Agfa Standard 9x12, which would you choose as a basis for conversion to a 6x17 panoramic camera?

I have recently acquired both in a large "package deal" but know very little about either.

My thought points are:

Which would be the better camera from a quality perspective for the conversion. Better build, better accuracy of the design. Both cameras are in about the same condition but which is the better box? The panoramic camera will have a different, modern LF lens in place so optics are not a concern. It will also be fitted with a 6x17 roll film back so its all down to the bellows and linkages, the woodwork, just the overall quality. They seem the same to me but??

I also want to use the non modified camera just as it is so which camera is the better overall camera as built, optics included? I do have some film holders that fit both so which would you prefer to have as a nice old original camera to use on occasion?

Are either if these worth too much money to be modifying them like this? The back section should just be done with adapters but I'm not yet sure how to fabricate the lens board setup. Ideally I will be able to return the camera to original but I'm not sure yet. I don't think either are worth much at all but again, I know next to nothing about them.

Is there anything you can think of that kills the whole deal? I don't see a reason it shouldn't work but I also haven't tried this before.

Thanks for any input,

Ed

 

[gone]

Is the standard lens that's designed for a 9x12 camera going to cover a 6x17 negative?

 

[EdColorado]

Is the standard lens that's designed for a 9x12 camera going to cover a 6x17 negative?

Don't know but it wont matter as I'll be putting a new large format lens on the camera. That's one of the fabrication issues to be worked out!

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ed, I'm not familiar with either of the 9x12 folders you're considering, am familiar with other somewhat similar cameras. I'm puzzled why you think either would be a good starting point for making a 6x17 camera.

What puzzles me is that it appears -- I could be mistaken -- that using a 6x17 roll holder on either will require an extension frame at the rear of the camera to avoid vignetting. People who've done this with monorail view cameras and with flatbed field cameras consistently report that the extension frame limits how short a lens can be used and the camera body (rear standard, in the case of monorails) limits how long a lens can be used without vignetting.

Did you mean 6x12?

 

[EdColorado]

No, I am looking for 6x17. From what I've read a 6x17 back on a 4x5 camera will be ok with around a 65mm - 150 mm lens. I can get a 4x5 adapter/holder to go on the back of the 9x12. To that adapter I can mount a 6x17 roll film back. At that point I should be good for the likely focal lengths I want which are 90mm and 75mm. I can also open up the 4x5 adapter a bit and probably get rid of that vignetting with a longer lens. I'm left with possible close focusing issues with the shorter lenses but as I want this format for landscapes I don't think it should matter.
The reason to go with this method is cost. I was figuring it would be a cheap way to get into 6x17 panoramic. A light tight box is a light tight box, especially when dealing with large format lens with shutters so if the front mount is square to the film plane, all is good. Now however, looking at the total cost it's getting pretty close to what I might have to pay for a used Chinese 6x17 camera. I'm still evaluating. Plus I have the option of firing up the old table saw and seeing if I still have any woodworking skills. That is the cheapest way.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ed, thanks for the reply and explanation. I'm still unconvinced, in part because to use the LF lens you have in mind you'll need a focusing panel too.

Here's (there was a url link here which no longer exists) a recent discussion that you might find interesting. In post #15 I gave a link to a discussion that what you might want to look at and strong hints to do a Google search. Try the search.

I don't think that getting rid of the vignetting with longer lenses will be as easy as you hope. But, as you suggested, if you make your own camera body it certainly won't be an issue.

 

[EdColorado]

Ed, thanks for the reply and explanation. I'm still unconvinced, in part because to use the LF lens you have in mind you'll need a focusing panel too.

Only if focusing is important to you. The 6x17 roll film back comes with a dark slide and ground glass, and a hood. However, depending on what I build (if I build it from scratch) I could just go with a set hyperfocal point and leave it at that.

Here's (there was a url link here which no longer exists) a recent discussion that you might find interesting. In post #15 I gave a link to a discussion that what you might want to look at and strong hints to do a Google search. Try the search.

I don't think that getting rid of the vignetting with longer lenses will be as easy as you hope. But, as you suggested, if you make your own camera body it certainly won't be an issue.

I've been following that thread too but as of yet haven't wandered over to the large format forum. I will though, it looks interesting. LF is the one area of photography I've yet to explore. The more I think about this whole project the more I'm tending back toward the idea of a fully home built camera. My first design included an internal film chamber with winding knobs, guides, rollers, etc. Now I'm thinking more on the idea of a box, to attach a 6x17 back too, which would make the whole thing much easier and more useful with ground glass focusing and a much stouter film handling system. More money though, but not excessive.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ed, thanks for reminding me that the 6x17 back etc. you intend to get (or do you already have it?) has a focusing panel.

Re focusing, I find it necessary with a 35 mm lens on 6x9 and 6x12. I keep looking for whatever it is that people who say focusing isn't important know that I don't. Leading candidates for what I don't know/have and they do include poor vision, low standards, and hallucinations.