Renzsu
Well-known
Hi guys, I've decided to jump into this little project head-first. I've always wanted a Hasselblad SWC, but I've found them a bit too pricey for me and because I have a workshop available here at work, I have decided to have a go at building one myself.
I've played with ALPA cameras at Photokina and (while executed magnificently) I found the idea behind them actually quite simple. Please keep in mind that my only experience with anything bigger than 35mm comes from me shooting with my Hasselblad 500C/M and a brief stint with a Fuji 6x9 (which I didn't really like).
Ezzie's camera ( http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85548 ) and this project here ( http://www.horrorcoder.com/blog/post/40 ) really inspired me to have a go at this myself.
My goals for this project are to create something quiet and compact. First prototype will be quick and dirty, modeling foam, mdf, basically anything to get a somewhat working camera. As long as the dimensions are good and it can produce a sharp picture either on my film or on a ground glass, I will have achieved my goals.
Second prototype will be a bit more elaborate. Depending on my funds, I will draw up a design in CAD and either execute it myself in wood, or have it CNC'd somewhere. Goals are to have something with an exchangeable back and groundglass and a grip.
What I got so far... well, a collection of bits and pieces, some still in the mail:
lens:
Schneider-Kreuznach Super Angulon 65mm f/5.6 with shutter and focusing on a lensboard:
I found the spec-sheet with all the necessary data, dimensions, etc. on their website (phew), so hopefully this will allow me to get something quick and dirty fairly early on in the project.
film back:
This is the Hasselblad A12 film magazine that I have, old style.
Now, here's probably a problem. One of the cameras I linked to above has a Kiev film back. I don't know if it's possible to advance the film on that back itself, but I'm pretty sure it's not possible on the back that I have. So, either I will have to include an advance mechanism in the camera body (err.. not looking forward to making that), or chose a different back. I've heard something about people using Mamiya backs, any other options would be welcome.
rangefinder:
This is something I found in a big box of old camera gear, a Medis rangefinder with hot-shoe mount. I'm sure it'll come in handy (especially since you can calibrate it yourself)!
So, any feedback would be welcome. I will keep this thread updated with any news that I got.
I've played with ALPA cameras at Photokina and (while executed magnificently) I found the idea behind them actually quite simple. Please keep in mind that my only experience with anything bigger than 35mm comes from me shooting with my Hasselblad 500C/M and a brief stint with a Fuji 6x9 (which I didn't really like).
Ezzie's camera ( http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85548 ) and this project here ( http://www.horrorcoder.com/blog/post/40 ) really inspired me to have a go at this myself.
My goals for this project are to create something quiet and compact. First prototype will be quick and dirty, modeling foam, mdf, basically anything to get a somewhat working camera. As long as the dimensions are good and it can produce a sharp picture either on my film or on a ground glass, I will have achieved my goals.
Second prototype will be a bit more elaborate. Depending on my funds, I will draw up a design in CAD and either execute it myself in wood, or have it CNC'd somewhere. Goals are to have something with an exchangeable back and groundglass and a grip.
What I got so far... well, a collection of bits and pieces, some still in the mail:
lens:
Schneider-Kreuznach Super Angulon 65mm f/5.6 with shutter and focusing on a lensboard:
I found the spec-sheet with all the necessary data, dimensions, etc. on their website (phew), so hopefully this will allow me to get something quick and dirty fairly early on in the project.
film back:
This is the Hasselblad A12 film magazine that I have, old style.
Now, here's probably a problem. One of the cameras I linked to above has a Kiev film back. I don't know if it's possible to advance the film on that back itself, but I'm pretty sure it's not possible on the back that I have. So, either I will have to include an advance mechanism in the camera body (err.. not looking forward to making that), or chose a different back. I've heard something about people using Mamiya backs, any other options would be welcome.
rangefinder:
This is something I found in a big box of old camera gear, a Medis rangefinder with hot-shoe mount. I'm sure it'll come in handy (especially since you can calibrate it yourself)!
So, any feedback would be welcome. I will keep this thread updated with any news that I got.
Last edited:
Krosya
Konicaze
Interesting. I think it would be easier to forget about removable backs and just get a simple old folder, remove bellows, lens and folding door and add that lens/board to it, figuring out the correct film to lens distance. That way you will already have a body, some even have a film counter, or just use a red window. I'll be interested to see what develops.
Renzsu
Well-known
Krosya, thanks for your suggestion. I have thought about that, but you know, for me half the fun is in the designing of this camera, to come up with something that I can put my name on and improve on 
I'm an industrial designer myself, so already my fingers are itching to start hacking something together in the workshop!
Oh and I looked at those Mamiya backs, I think this could be useful. Creating a system so that I can mount this will be interesting, but I'm sure I can make something that works:
They're pretty cheap and have pretty much everything in them that I would need it seems?
I'm an industrial designer myself, so already my fingers are itching to start hacking something together in the workshop!
Oh and I looked at those Mamiya backs, I think this could be useful. Creating a system so that I can mount this will be interesting, but I'm sure I can make something that works:
They're pretty cheap and have pretty much everything in them that I would need it seems?
Jamie123
Veteran
You could also get one of those rollfilm backs for large format cameras. Don't know how cheap they are but the good thing about them is that the film advance is independent from any specific camera. You could even go as wide as 6x12 like this guy: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47970772@N06/4430115152/
hans voralberg
Veteran
The back that you should look into is the Mamiya Press system back. They are red window back with their own advance knob with size from 6x6 to 6x9. You can ebay them or ask Kuzano where to find them
Renzsu
Well-known
Jamie123, that's a great looking camera, but to be honest it's far bigger than what I want to make. I'm going to try to keep it as compact as possible
Hans, you mean something like this?
It's an interesting option for sure, I'm not too sure about the shape of these, I would prefer to keep this a small cube-shaped package.. but it looks a bit easier to create a connection with the body and the grip is already included. The Mamiya RZ67 backs look quite intricate compared to these, but would leave me free to play around more with the shape of the body / grip.
Hans, you mean something like this?
It's an interesting option for sure, I'm not too sure about the shape of these, I would prefer to keep this a small cube-shaped package.. but it looks a bit easier to create a connection with the body and the grip is already included. The Mamiya RZ67 backs look quite intricate compared to these, but would leave me free to play around more with the shape of the body / grip.
oftheherd
Veteran
Renzsu,
hans voralberg is referring to the Mamiya back that had multiple formats. It had masks for 645 and 6x6, and without them was 6x9. Because of the mult-formats, it indeed used a red window and a wind knob.
The one you showed would be the preferred back in my opinion, simply because it has a crank wind, but that might not fit your preferences. It is indeed a bit larger tha a Hassy or RZ back, or even Kiev. The Mamiya back would also need a lip at the top, and two rotating tabs on the bottom to hold it in place.
EDIT: The Mamiya crank-wind backs also come in 6x9.
hans voralberg is referring to the Mamiya back that had multiple formats. It had masks for 645 and 6x6, and without them was 6x9. Because of the mult-formats, it indeed used a red window and a wind knob.
The one you showed would be the preferred back in my opinion, simply because it has a crank wind, but that might not fit your preferences. It is indeed a bit larger tha a Hassy or RZ back, or even Kiev. The Mamiya back would also need a lip at the top, and two rotating tabs on the bottom to hold it in place.
EDIT: The Mamiya crank-wind backs also come in 6x9.
Renzsu
Well-known
oftheherd, thanks man. I think I will not go for one of those Mamiya Press backs. I might be shooting myself in the foot by not going with one, but I prefer the look of an exchangeable square film back. 6x6 is pretty much what I plan on shooting anyways, but I will most likely make the camera in such a way that whatever back I chose, it will attach to an adapter part that in its turn will connect with the camera body. That way I can always decide to go for a different back if I have some issue with it (maybe I'm overthinking this already though).
I've noticed that Bronica SQ 120 backs also have film advance functionality, and they're probably a bit smaller than the RZ backs. They could be a good option I think (though the RZ backs can be had for pretty cheap as well and they're probably better made).
I've noticed that Bronica SQ 120 backs also have film advance functionality, and they're probably a bit smaller than the RZ backs. They could be a good option I think (though the RZ backs can be had for pretty cheap as well and they're probably better made).
Last edited:
kuzano
Veteran
Jamie123, that's a great looking camera, but to be honest it's far bigger than what I want to make. I'm going to try to keep it as compact as possible
Hans, you mean something like this?
It's an interesting option for sure, I'm not too sure about the shape of these, I would prefer to keep this a small cube-shaped package.. but it looks a bit easier to create a connection with the body and the grip is already included. The Mamiya RZ67 backs look quite intricate compared to these, but would leave me free to play around more with the shape of the body / grip.
FILM FLATNESS. The reputation of the Mamiya Press backs is very positive in the area of film flatness. It's said that the reverse curve that the S shape the holder applies to the film is conducive to this reputation. Furthermore, it's an independent system, and any of the older press Mamiya Press camera back mounting plates are small and adapt easily to a simple box concept in the body of the camera itself.
These backs sell in large numbers on eBay and for quite reasonable prices.
Ideally, the best back is the Type III back with a shutter release incorporated into the right end. Both end curves provide excellent hand holding characteristics. Here is a pic of a Type III, but I haven't scored a cable yet. I have pics of the cable end that goes into the bottom of the right end, and feel it could be easy to fabricate the cable to use that release button on top.
There is also a multi-format back using interchangeable masks. I have one that shoots 6X4.5, 6X6 and 6X9 by changing the mask. This can be done mid roll, and uses ruby window and numbers on the film for spacing. I just purchased the masks new. Many parts are still available from certain sources.
Here are images of the Type III back. I've seen about 4 of these on eBay in the last year.
Last edited:
Renzsu
Well-known
kuzano, are you building a camera as well?
I like what you mention about film flatness, I didn't really think about that.. then again, in my Hasselblad I never really noticed problems with focusing because of that.
I will keep your suggestion in mind, for now I have settled on a Mamiya RB67 120 back. It's pretty compact, doesn't look very distracting, has a simple looking mechanical interface with the body (unlike the elaborate looking system of the RZ67) and a nice big film advance lever on the back itself.
Suppose this doesn't work out, I will seriously consider your TypeIII back. It'll be larger, but it definitely has its charm by the looks of it.
So, for now I will have to wait for my parts to arrive in the mail. I found a great big chunk of pink modeling foam in the workshop downstairs. It's very easy to work on, light-tight and quite stiff, more than good enough for the first mockups. Fingers are itching already!
I like what you mention about film flatness, I didn't really think about that.. then again, in my Hasselblad I never really noticed problems with focusing because of that.
I will keep your suggestion in mind, for now I have settled on a Mamiya RB67 120 back. It's pretty compact, doesn't look very distracting, has a simple looking mechanical interface with the body (unlike the elaborate looking system of the RZ67) and a nice big film advance lever on the back itself.
Suppose this doesn't work out, I will seriously consider your TypeIII back. It'll be larger, but it definitely has its charm by the looks of it.
So, for now I will have to wait for my parts to arrive in the mail. I found a great big chunk of pink modeling foam in the workshop downstairs. It's very easy to work on, light-tight and quite stiff, more than good enough for the first mockups. Fingers are itching already!
Renzsu
Well-known
Also found this camera by chance, quite cool and close to what I have in mind..
http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2006/09/homemade_camera_ultrawide.html
Too bad I can't really find more info on it...
http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2006/09/homemade_camera_ultrawide.html
Too bad I can't really find more info on it...
Renzsu
Well-known
One question for the infinitely more knowledgeable people on this board.
Is this lens alright? I get the feeling it's missing some parts in the back, since most images I see of this lens are of the typical hourglass shape:
vs.
I know, it's a different lens, but the spec sheet of my lens also has an hourglass style shape to it and since I'm not familiar with this kind of lens, I was wondering if I'm missing something.
Is this lens alright? I get the feeling it's missing some parts in the back, since most images I see of this lens are of the typical hourglass shape:
vs.
I know, it's a different lens, but the spec sheet of my lens also has an hourglass style shape to it and since I'm not familiar with this kind of lens, I was wondering if I'm missing something.
Last edited:
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Same back as on my DIY project, mentioned by the OP.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Hi Renzsu. I see you found both some of the inspirations I myself have leaned heavily on, and even some that have found inspiration in my camera. Feel free to PM me with questions if you like. Collimation is the most important issue, second to light tightness of course. All else is cosmetic. If I have one piece of advise to share is to put it together properly first, make sure it works and then do the finishing touches. I took a unit at a time and finished it off, not a good idea, because when you put the pieces together you may have to revisit one already finished part, and it can be quite a beeeeech to get redo the paint/lacquer/polish/whatever and get it nice.
The helicoid you´ve got there works a treat. And I see a beaut of a lens as well. External RF also works, I use mine frequently. Take your time finding a proper finder, and get some spirit levels, it does help. If you are smart you may be able locate the levels so they are visible through the finder (through a hole in the mask under the image area cut-out). Also think of parallax correction. I don´t have it on mine, and I miss it. Maybe no so much a deal for square 1:1 format, but for a semi-panorama 1:2 clipping the bottom or top can ruin the picture.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
One question for the infinitely more knowledgeable people on this board.
Is this lens alright? I get the feeling it's missing some parts in the back, since most images I see of this lens are of the typical hourglass shape:
vs.
I know, it's a different lens, but the spec sheet of my lens also has an hourglass style shape to it and since I'm not familiar with this kind of lens, I was wondering if I'm missing something.
Could you post a picture of the lens from the rear? I´m not familiar with Schneider-Kreutznach lenses, but I agree with you in that it would seem that the rear element is missing. LF lenses are mostly symmetrical, but not all. Some can be converted to other focal lengths by removing an element. Do you see any threads to the rear?
When I mounted the helicoid on the lens-board and then the lens to the helicoid, I had to remove the rear element (as is normal), and then screw it back in afterwards.
Last edited:
Jamie123
Veteran
One question for the infinitely more knowledgeable people on this board.
Is this lens alright? I get the feeling it's missing some parts in the back, since most images I see of this lens are of the typical hourglass shape:
vs.
I know, it's a different lens, but the spec sheet of my lens also has an hourglass style shape to it and since I'm not familiar with this kind of lens, I was wondering if I'm missing something.
The lens in the upper image has a helical focusing mount attached while the one on the bottom does not. My guess is that your lens isn't missing anything but that the bottom part of the ''hourglass'' is hidden under that focusing mount.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Or is it the helicoid obscuring the rear element? Post a picture of it seen from the rear, at a skew.
Anyhow, this is what it should look like, not mounted to lens-board (or helicoid)
http://www.lightandcameras.com/Large-format-lenses/schneider-super-angulon-65-f5-6.html
EDIT: Jamie beat me to it.
Anyhow, this is what it should look like, not mounted to lens-board (or helicoid)
http://www.lightandcameras.com/Large-format-lenses/schneider-super-angulon-65-f5-6.html
EDIT: Jamie beat me to it.
Renzsu
Well-known
Hi Ezzie, thank you!
Here's an image from the rear of the lens. It does come with front and rear caps that fit on the lens as shown in the images, so that might be a good sign..
Collimation, do you mean that the lens axis is perfectly perpendicular to the film plane? I plan on making my first foam proto on a lathe, so that problem will solve itself hopefully.
I am taking your advice though about finishing first and detailing second. That's how I'm used to work on commercial projects as well, and that's more or less how I intend to do this one.
Here's an image from the rear of the lens. It does come with front and rear caps that fit on the lens as shown in the images, so that might be a good sign..
Collimation, do you mean that the lens axis is perfectly perpendicular to the film plane? I plan on making my first foam proto on a lathe, so that problem will solve itself hopefully.
I am taking your advice though about finishing first and detailing second. That's how I'm used to work on commercial projects as well, and that's more or less how I intend to do this one.
Renzsu
Well-known
Jamie123... ahhh, yes I think that's it! Obscured by the helical.
Obscured by the helical.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Hi Ezzie, thank you!
Here's an image from the rear of the lens. It does come with front and rear caps that fit on the lens as shown in the images, so that might be a good sign..
Collimation, do you mean that the lens axis is perfectly perpendicular to the film plane? I plan on making my first foam proto on a lathe, so that problem will solve itself hopefully.
I am taking your advice though about finishing first and detailing second. That's how I'm used to work on commercial projects as well, and that's more or less how I intend to do this one.
The rear element seems to be there alright.
Collimation is setting the lens to film plane distance correct. If you find (I´ll see if I can locate a lens table somewhere) the factory figures it applies to the distance from the rear of the shutter (or front of helicoid) to the emulsion side of the film. Since you don´t have a ground glass you can make do with frosty tape and a marker pen to perform collimation in this manner:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1320408&postcount=47
What you do is use an SLR with a long lens, 300mm or more. (200mm on a crop dSLR will also work).
1. Set the helicoid on your DIY camera to infinity.
2. Set the SLR to infinity (manual focus, and make sure the lens doesn´t go past infinity, some do)
3. Tape over the film gate so that the it is in plane with where the film would be. Mark the front facing plane with a marker pen, X's centre and corners.
4. Place the DIY camera with back towards a light source and with back open.
5. Put SLR lens to lens with DIY camera and gaze through SLR finder. The mark on the tape should be in absolute focus.
6. Sand down the chambre noir (lens box et al.) until the marks are in focus. You should see dust particles and blemishes in the ink etc. See my example.
And of course you are right about the planes being parallel. Very important or you get perspective shift.