kram
Well-known
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Let us know! It should be fine at f/22. I've used a 47/5.6 SA on 4x5 inch, so an inch of rise should be fine on 6x8. In fact, come to think of it, I've used maybe an inch of rise (56x84mm) on 6x9cm with the 47/5.6 (Alpa) and it was OK.
This is a VERY rare camera. I've tried one, and liked it (but prefer Alpa). Anyone else who's tried both?
Cheers,
R.
This is a VERY rare camera. I've tried one, and liked it (but prefer Alpa). Anyone else who's tried both?
Cheers,
R.
kram
Well-known
Just developed the second film using the 6x8 back. I have good news and bad news. Good news, negs are equally spaced, back is working fine, and have just done a test with my Mamiya 7 43mm finder - this shows nigh on 100% of what is on the negative at close range i.e. 8-15ft, not sure about infinity. Bad news at f11 there is slight cut off at the corners, at f22 there is definite cut off. The extreme of the image circle may just cover the full width. When I use the back again in vertical mode and shift, I will stop down 1-1.5 stops more than the indicated shift on the ready reckoner indicator on the camera.
Roger, there is some horizontal metal linkage in the camera - probably connected to the viewfinder tilt. This is my main concern of what will interfere with the image in vertical mode.
I would also like the Alpa, but the only second-hand SWA 12 I have seen (film back) did not have the lens I wanted, and it was just under £4K, which with hindsight, now seems reasonable.
Roger, there is some horizontal metal linkage in the camera - probably connected to the viewfinder tilt. This is my main concern of what will interfere with the image in vertical mode.
I would also like the Alpa, but the only second-hand SWA 12 I have seen (film back) did not have the lens I wanted, and it was just under £4K, which with hindsight, now seems reasonable.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The only way I can think of to get MORE cut off in the corners at smaller apertures is the wrong hood. As I say, the 47/5.6 JUST covers 4x5 inch at f/16 or so. Might be a problem with the linkage but I've not tried 6x8 and no longer have the camera.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
kram
Well-known
Roger, you beat me to it. I was thinking about it last night, it probably is the hood. The current hood is ok for horizontal, but in portrait position f9 shift position is about the limit. Will try without the hood next time.
kram
Well-known
Have not used the Corfield for a while, until last week. Took it on holiday, and have tried it with a new lens hood (which has a slightly wider field of view). Put the 6x7 back back on, to get that extra frame.
I must 'big up' Oliver's Photographics - 8a, The Terrace, Penzance, Cornwall, TR18 2HN; who had refrigerated 120 film in stock (phew) so I could continue using the Corfield WA67 throughout my holiday (yes the bag with the spare film in was accidentally left behind at home - groan).
I must 'big up' Oliver's Photographics - 8a, The Terrace, Penzance, Cornwall, TR18 2HN; who had refrigerated 120 film in stock (phew) so I could continue using the Corfield WA67 throughout my holiday (yes the bag with the spare film in was accidentally left behind at home - groan).
kram
Well-known
Update, I have tweaked the back (hopefully) , will report back on if it succeeds or not, possible 56mmx 78-80mm 
kiteboy
Member
I have used a Corfield WA67 for a number of years. As an experiment I tried a Mamiya 6x9 rfh in combination with a Mamiya M adaptor.
There is no vignetting from about f11, however shift capability is restricted to almost zero.
I have also noticed that even with a standard 6x7 back a simple step-up ring can lead to dark corners.
Hope this helps
Andrew
There is no vignetting from about f11, however shift capability is restricted to almost zero.
I have also noticed that even with a standard 6x7 back a simple step-up ring can lead to dark corners.
Hope this helps
Andrew
rjschell
Established
I wish I could find a Corfield.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
They're nice, but the Alpa S/WA 12 is even nicer and more versatile: you can even use shift on 6x9 cm with a 35mm Apo-Grandagon. Pity about the price, though. What would a Corfield WA67 go for now, do you think?
Cheers,
R.
kiteboy
Member
I am considering selling my WA67 since I have moved to large format and am trying to limit the amount of gear I carry around. I can achieve around the same field of view with more movement on my TK45 and a 75mm lens. So, to partly answer your question - £1250.00 is what I am asking for mine, roughly what I paid for it five years ago. (a lot less than an Alpa S/WA
)Cheers
Andrew
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Andrew,I am considering selling my WA67 since I have moved to large format and am trying to limit the amount of gear I carry around. I can achieve around the same field of view with more movement on my TK45 and a 75mm lens. So, to partly answer your question - £1250.00 is what I am asking for mine, roughly what I paid for it five years ago. (a lot less than an Alpa S/WA
Cheers
Andrew
Thanks very much for that. Good luck in selling it! Though come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen a second-hand S/WA for sale. Or a WA67 for that matter.
Cheers,
R.
kram
Well-known
Two wa67s came up a couple of years ago (plus mine, w hich makes 3), £1200-1500 was th going rate. Alpa swa 2-3 years ago for a little more (OK 3x plus more).
Took the photos this morning, devdloped the negs. The neg size is (sigh) 56x 78mm. The back is having difficulties in winding on so I need to make a slight alteration to the roller positions. Knowing my luck this will reduce to 77mm or 77.5mm in length.
The best bit about the Corfield is that it is really compact with the back (length and height), it has some depth though. I prefer using it than my Mamiya 7 with the 43mm lens, so much so I sold the 43mm lens. Mamiya used with 50 -150mm lens.
Took the photos this morning, devdloped the negs. The neg size is (sigh) 56x 78mm. The back is having difficulties in winding on so I need to make a slight alteration to the roller positions. Knowing my luck this will reduce to 77mm or 77.5mm in length.
The best bit about the Corfield is that it is really compact with the back (length and height), it has some depth though. I prefer using it than my Mamiya 7 with the 43mm lens, so much so I sold the 43mm lens. Mamiya used with 50 -150mm lens.
kiteboy
Member
Dear Roger
Thanks for the good wishes. The reason you may not have seen a secondhand WA67 is they sell very quickly.
Mine is now sold
Thanks again
Andrew
kram
Well-known
After a bit of very fine metal shaving around the ends of the very thin rollers locted in the film gate, the back winds on OK now, negative size now 56x78mm. That is 2mm longer than the standard 6x8 back, or 8.5mm longer thant the 6x7 back (and only 6mm shorter than a Linhof 6x9 back). With shift I have tried 2 stps down than indicated on the camera with no problems. Say f16 on the lens and f8 on the camera body shift mechanism. Might be able to do f9.5 on body and f16 on lens. Main issue now is to sort out a veiw finder. The mamiya 7 43mm is OK for horizontal, but can't be used when the back is in the portrait position.
kram
Well-known
After even more fiddling ( made upsome new film roller guides) , negative size is now 79x56mm, but thats the maximum I can get. 9 frame onf 79mmx56mm not back. 47mm lens work out at 20/21mm equivalent on 35mm.
kram
Well-known
My. WA68 adventure continues: I have replaced the 47mm SA with a 47mm XL. Had to get a spacer made up, machined the rear lens retaining ring (via SRB) so the rear of the lens fits into extention tube, readjusted the focus, got prints back this week. Full raise can be used at f5.6, but other image naff. All OK by f11. With the old SA with 68+ f22 was not enough for full raise.
kram
Well-known
Finally I have 80mm x56mm size negs. No vignetting at full shift at f5.6 ( but in portrait format top 15% of negative very soft). All sharp at f11. So the neg length is 1mm shorter that a horseman 6x9 back, but 9 negatives rather than 8 negs 81mmx 56mm. Success!