Large Format photography group - From "zero to hero!"

On loupes, I got a Kaiser 4.5x loupe with dioptre correction for around £30 via fleabay. I didn't expect to need the dioptre, but foun that I needed to wind it all the way out to focus properly!

The only disadvantage apart from being a bit large, is that it's round so you can't quite get into the corners. However, given my legendary (in)attention to detail, this hasn't proved a problem so far!
 
On loading the DDS, I had lots of problems getting the film under the proper notch. In the end one of the Chris's on the Glencoe trip suggested putting the dark slide in place, closed down to the right point so that sliding the film under the dark slide gets it under the notch too! Brilliant, it works!!
 
I was just experimenting with this, a small cardboard tube, square in section an about 2" long fitted into the phone case. I'm not convinced it worked for metering because stopping down two stops didn't seem to cause the meter app to go down two stops. But it does make an excellent focusing loupe - just zoom in the phone camera on the opening and it was very clear when things were in focus.

View attachment 300658

I did some more tests of metering with this today as a I had a bit of time during what passes for "daylight" here. I think the upshot is that it would be workable but it really needs it's own app, at least for someone with my feeble brain, if it isn't going to be a faff to use. I got the light meter app I have to work on a stop-for-stop basis by using the app "spot" function to zoom in on the aperture of the cardboard tube but there are issues. Primarily the issue is that it shows significant vignetting across the ground glass and I suspect that some of that is due to the fact that the tube is at 90 degrees to the GG but at the edges the light from the lens is being projected at an angle. Also and fairly obviously if the camera lens is stopped down then the light meter app responds by making the aperture larger, i.e. the light meter reading is the inverse of what is needed.
 
Anyone have or used one of these? Schneider Kreuznach LUPE 4X MC magnifier, looking for a focussing loupe for 5x4

thanks

Is it grey plastic with diopter control?
If so then yes I had one .
 
wife shows me next month's credit
Anyone have or used one of these? Schneider Kreuznach LUPE 4X MC magnifier, looking for a focussing loupe for 5x4

thanks
Is it grey plastic with diopter control?
If so then yes I had one .

This is the one I had which was 4x

Can recommend it .
Light, diopter control and a large viewing area compared to some loupes.
Only sold it ( to @auntiemaryscanary ) as i purchased a new 6x loupe due to failing eyesight.

IMG_1390.JPG
 
nope, not that one, I think it's an earlier version though

View attachment 301819



Schneider glass is pretty darned good in their lenses both in LF and smaller formats so I see no reason why the loupes won't follow suit.

there's a chance this one has the same optics as the one that auntiemaryscanary has
 
The Intrepid 5x4 sure does scrub up nicely:


I have a feeling it may end up going for more than a Chamonix, but all proceeds go to a good cause.
 
not strictly LF but as it's the only film I'll be shooting it gives me an opportunity to bump this thread

Took delivery today of the various alchemy potions and mixing aids, and also an email telling me my order for the black cauldron to mix them in will be mid Feb as they're out of stock (Stearman Press 445 tank for those wondering what I'm blabbering about).

Patience is a virtue with large format photography i'm told.....
 
not strictly LF but as it's the only film I'll be shooting it gives me an opportunity to bump this thread

Took delivery today of the various alchemy potions and mixing aids, and also an email telling me my order for the black cauldron to mix them in will be mid Feb as they're out of stock (Stearman Press 445 tank for those wondering what I'm blabbering about).

Patience is a virtue with large format photography i'm told.....
A bit frustrating for you colin, but also an ideal opportunity to shoot a few sheets over the next couple of weeks and be ready to process when the tank arrives. (there's usually some silver lining in LF somewhere. Or is it philosophical ....... :cool:)
 
A bit frustrating for you colin, but also an ideal opportunity to shoot a few sheets over the next couple of weeks and be ready to process when the tank arrives. (there's usually some silver lining in LF somewhere. Or is it philosophical ....... :cool:)

Yes that's the idea, just need some daylight over a weekend and then sneak out early, somewhere local of course :) Either that or stand the missus in front of the garden shed
 
Yes that's the idea, just need some daylight over a weekend and then sneak out early, somewhere local of course :) Either that or stand the missus in front of the garden shed
FPOTY 2021 February topic is "cluttered", so maybe shoot the inside of the shed if it's anything like my garage? :facepalm:
 
I can't find this by searching on Charlie Waite, so here he is at the Intrepid factory interviewing the main man and seeing how it is made. 25.37 long, so get settled. :)

 
Last edited:
I can't find this by searching on Charlie Waite, so here he is at the Intrepid factory interviewing the main man and seeing how it is made. 25.37 long, so get settled. :)


Having visited their original workshop a couple of times in Brighton, this video looks like it may have been recorded since their moved to new premises in Hove ( that i have yet to visit , hopefully, one day!)
 
I seem to remember @Woodsy bemoaning the lack of Ilford Pan-F in 4x5 sheets, though I can't find it on this thread. For some other reason I was looking at Fotoimpex today, and noticed that Adox are selling CMS 20 II in 4x5 sheets. I'm guessing you probably know about it anyway. ISO 20 with their developer, 80 and super contrasty with standard developers, I think they say...
 
I seem to remember @Woodsy bemoaning the lack of Ilford Pan-F in 4x5 sheets, though I can't find it on this thread. For some other reason I was looking at Fotoimpex today, and noticed that Adox are selling CMS 20 II in 4x5 sheets. I'm guessing you probably know about it anyway. ISO 20 with their developer, 80 and super contrasty with standard developers, I think they say...
I have 50 sheets of that, yet to try it but looking forward to it, hope for something similar to Tech Pan so I can save/sell the Tech Pan that I have
 
So it's back in stock then...
 
I used Adox CHS 25 and 50 years ago in quarter plate.
Cracking film .
Always a supply problem though especially the slower speed.
 
Ooo, that reminds me, I actually still have a box of CHS25 in the freezer! Really must get that out and use it!

I do wish Ilford made PanF in sheet film, but really I’m just being idealistic. It’s not like there I a shortage in variety of good b&w film in sheet formats.
 
I used Adox CHS 25 and 50 years ago in quarter plate.
Cracking film .
Always a supply problem though especially the slower speed.
I read that as “I used Adox 25 and 50 years ago…
I knew you were getting on a bit Asha but that’s ridiculous :lol:
 
Well, I used Adox KB14 in 35mm just over 55 years ago...

We can't all be sprightly youngsters like you Nick.
 
Well, I used Adox KB14 in 35mm just over 55 years ago...

We can't all be sprightly youngsters like you Nick.
If only Stephen :LOL:
 
I do wish Ilford made PanF in sheet film, but really I’m just being idealistic. It’s not like there I a shortage in variety of good b&w film in sheet formats.

#filmfeb on twitter is a series of questions put to the film twitter world. Today's question was: "What would be the most exciting new product Ilford could bring you this yeaar? If film, it must be black and white". Ilford is one of the sponsors of #filmfeb. The most common answer I saw was Pan-F in 4x5 (one was from me, on your behalf!). So, you never know...
 
Ilford would have a few technical problems to overcome. PanF is on a different base, and it would I think need a new coating line, or something like that. It's not just a matter of (conceptually) adjusting the guillotine to cut a larger size. Simon Galley then of Harman explained the problem on APUG years ago.

Conventional wisdom is that you don't need fine grain in larger sizes. Given that the smallest common LF format is 5x4, which is (say) 4 times the area of a 120 frame, and that film grain size doubles for every 3 stops increase in speed, you (well, I) could argue that HP5 in 5x4 is as fine grained as PanF in 120. The same argument of less need for enlargement also applies to resolution.

If PanF was available in sheet film, I'd still use it though :)

It's late, so I think I can add an afterword in this edit. The amount of detail recorded is a combination of film and lens, and always less than the smaller of the two components. If the lens can't record more detail, then the only way to increase the information in the negative is to increase the film's capability. That only leaves the question "do I need more"? That's rather like "do I need a new camera" or "do I need a new lens" :). It can always come in useful.
 
Last edited:
Evening all!

I need to call upon the collective wisdom that is TP :)

The other day, after having received a lens I purchased from an online retailer that had some fungus in it, I felt compelled to check my collection of lenses for fungus. This is something I had never done before, and in any case I am thankful to report that none were affected. Happy days.

However.

At some point during taking the lenses apart, to get the best view through each cell, an adjustment shim fell out and onto the floor. Of course, I didn’t notice this at the time, and put everything back together and put all the lenses back in the bag. Some days later I find said ring on the floor and hazard a guess that it was from a lens. Now, a few simple observations later:

I only have lenses with either copal 0 or 1 shutters, and said ring does not fit the 0 shutters or cells. Good start. I then have two copal 1 shutters, and it fits quite perfectly onto the threads of the front cell of a copal 1 shutter. This is too much of a coincidence to not be a lens shim, I have therefore convinced myself. So how do I know what lens it came from? The only indication I have is that one lens had some black dirt around where the shim would sit that wiped off on my finger, whereas the shim was clean, so likely not from that lens. Also, when installed into the dirty shutter, let’s call it, tightening the cell onto the shutter just didn’t feel right, or at least how I vaguely remember it feeling. As unreliable as that may be, I’m fairly happy the shim is now back on the correct lens.

In any case, I have a few questions:

Is there any way to find out with any certainty which lens it came from, and, given that the shim is probably 150-200 microns thick (at a guess), how much of a difference does it really make?

As always, any help would be very much appreciated! :)
 
They are usually there to correct aberrations for focusing distance - specifically, I know that some process lenses (corrected for 1:1 work) have an additional spacer inserted when they are mounted in a shutter to improve performance at infinity. Was either of the two possible lenses a shutter mounted process lens?
 
I've just checked, and limiting myself to Copal 1 shutters, I have Apo Ronar and G Claron lenses that fit that size of shutter and were originally process lenses. A lens id might help; and if you check the S. K. Grimes site on mounting barrel lenses into shutters, you may possibly find a clue as to whether your lenses would need a spacer.

I think that's about as far as I can go with the available information.
 
Hey, many thanks for getting back to me :)

The two lenses in question are:

Fujinon A 300mm
Schneider super symmar 110mm XL

Does that help at all?!
 
It might. As far as I know, both those lenses were intended to be shuttered but I have one of those lenses myself, so I can unscrew the front (over a desk:)) and see what I find. That could still beg the question, if I don't find anything, of if my lens has lost a ring.
 
As I type, I have my Super Symmar 110mm XL on the desk in front of me. I found no extra rings or spacers after unscrewing the front cell from the shutter. I hope this means you'd already concluded that the Fujinon A was missing the part.

I don't have a Fujinon A 300mm, but I do have a Fujinon A 240mm if you'd like me to examine that?
 
Last edited:
No no, please don’t worry. Essentially, I had concluded that it likely came from the Fuji lens rather than the Schneider as well, and this ties in with your findings as well which is reassuring. Many thanks chap :)
 
Thinking of getting a 90mm or there abouts for 4x5, what's good? There seem to be quite a lot of Super Angulon F8 and I guess F8 would be bright enough, any views on the image quality, is there anything better?
 
Back
Top