Sinar 8x10 Conversion - movements even POSSIBLE???

[Sparky]

Being kind of a 4x5 guy I've never started even looking at 8x10s seriously until now - conversion kits for 8x10 seem to be around at a pretty good price, as do whole 8x10 P cameras I've seen on ebay... but looking closely at the whole ones available - they all seem to be converted - and from what I can tell - it seems like there's precious little front rise available on them (!!) as a result. Does anyone here have any experience with this issue? Based on my experience with the Sinar system, it seems that a zeroed out sinar 8x10 should be at mid travel on both front and rear rise controls (??) - any hints?

 

[Groundloop]

I'm sketchy on exact details, and some of my terminology might be off, but years ago I worked at a photo rental house, and we sometimes had to put together 8x10 Sinars, and if we didn't have the proper front standard (standard bearer?), we had to use all or most of the front rise to centre the lens on the ground glass. All other movements were possible, but no front rise to speak of. We did have a pair of proper 8x10's from Sinar, and they worked like scaled up versions of the 4x5 cameras (though much heavier). So in my experience, what you're guessing about the cameras you're seeing is correct: if there looks to be no front rise available, you're looking at a camera assembled from the rear of an 8x10 and the front of a 4x5.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Correct. A 4x5 front can be raised to accommodate 8x10, but will be a compromise in both rigidity and
in positioning.

 

[Hermes07]

You can make an aluminium spacer block to raise the front standard to your height of choice.

I've always found that the problem you mention is less of an issue if you substitute the norma 8x10 standard which sits lower on the rail than the P version.

 

[aluncrockford]

The p2 10x8 back standard has three coloured dots for 10x8 7x5 and 5x4 and has extensive movements, you can put a 10x8 back on the 5x4 back standard but the back movement is limited, the front as far as I am aware is standard,

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Remember that with the levels and scales on a P, you can get plenty of additional front rise by pointing the camera up and then making the standards plumb with the base tilts.

 

[Sparky]

Thanks for your thoughtful replies. Okay- yeah pretty much what I thought.

Remember that with the levels and scales on a P, you can get plenty of additional front rise by pointing the camera up and then making the standards plumb with the base tilts.

well technically yes - but then you might as well start using any random field camera - all the quick setup advantages of the Sinar go out the window, David.. the way I see it...

 

[Sparky]

and besides - you can do the same tricks with most other 8x10 monorails too... though with most other 8x10 monorails you shouldn't need to...

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

In practice, I haven't often needed more front rise/rear fall than is directly available on my 8x10 P, but I suppose that if you wanted to schlep an 8x10 P around for architecturals, it might come up. The attraction of using base tilt for indirect rise in that situation is that you can keep the geared asymmetric tilts zeroed and still use them in the normal Sinar way, and having separate levels and base tilts scales on each standard makes is a fairly quick operation.

 

[Sparky]

agreed... i find people obsess over camera movements that they will NEVER use in practice. I need front rise for some interior shots I need scanned and printed very large however...