View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
coolie
Joined: 13 Feb 2004 Posts: 1 Location: arizona
|
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
i'm wondering if anyone has experience shooting aerials with a 4x5, either a crown or a k-20 or similar. i'm currently using a pentax 6x7 out the window of a 172. i use a kenlab gyro, and it works well but i want to make large(40x50) prints and i don't like the grain i get from the 120 film. i shoot 4x5 landscapes all the time with my sinar, but can't use it in the plane.
i'm wondering if the k-20 can be adapted to use holders, or had that option, as i shoot color., no plus-x roll film. i'm considering trying a crown graphic, but am concerned the focus may not be accurate enough as i shoot a lot of low light wide open aperture.
any help would be greatly appreciated. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2120 Location: New Jersey
|
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
On 2004-02-13 16:37, coolie wrote:
i'm wondering if anyone has experience shooting aerials with a 4x5, either a crown or a k-20 or similar. i'm currently using a pentax 6x7 out the window of a 172. i use a kenlab gyro, and it works well but i want to make large(40x50) prints and i don't like the grain i get from the 120 film. i shoot 4x5 landscapes all the time with my sinar, but can't use it in the plane.
i'm wondering if the k-20 can be adapted to use holders, or had that option, as i shoot color., no plus-x roll film. i'm considering trying a crown graphic, but am concerned the focus may not be accurate enough as i shoot a lot of low light wide open aperture.
any help would be greatly appreciated.
| Two thoughts. People who shot from aircraft with Graphics used to shroud the bellows to protect them from the wind. I think the shrouds were made from sheet metal. Unless you're shooting at quite low altitude, shouldn't prefocusing the Crown at infinity suffice? What was your experience with the 6x7?
FWIW, I've dismantled a number of ex-RAF aerial cameras and lens cones, and they were all fixed focus. The cameras with fixed lenses (AGI F135, 2x38/4.5 Biogon) had no easy way of collimating the lenses. Each lens had its own shim that sat between the back of the lens and the camera body; the lenses' focal lengths were measured to 0.1 mm, the shims were calibrated to 0.01 mm and each was marked with its lens' serial number. The cones (Agiflite) showed signs of having been recollimated, either because lenses were swapped from cone to cone or because the cones were swapped from camera to camera.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
t.r.sanford
Joined: 10 Nov 2003 Posts: 812 Location: East Coast (Long Island)
|
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2004 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, the only difficulty is preventing the slipstream from ripping the bellows out. Some sort of shroud is indicated (heavy cloth tape was used successfully for quick-and-dirty aerial photos).
Infinity focus should not be a problem; you'd confirm the infinity position with a careful test on the ground, lock the track and install the windscreen.
The difficulty with an aerial camera, other than the cost of the film, is that it's not easy to use one for anything besides aerial work. If you stumble on an old 4x5 "Printex" camera, you could have pretty nearly the rigidity of an aerial camera, plus the ability to focus closer than infinity, if you ever wanted to. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|