AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

There are a number of options, but none of them are good. I've been looking for the same thing for a couple of years now, and researched everything I can find online.

The sliding or "stitching" back allows you to directly mount a DSLR on the back, of most Graflock type backs. The Sinar should also fit. You slide a central panel back and forth, and reverse it top to bottom, moving the attached camera body with it. The images overlap and you stitch them together in PP. This is the one that MtShooter was referring to and the OP was asking about. It produces a huge image file, the Sinar won't focus to infinity with anything shorter than 110 mm, and the front and back standards are so close together that you have a very limited range of movement available for the front and back standards. Monkeying around with the back also takes a little bit of time, so it's kind of slow. Here's a video on using it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALDQ3a2r-wQ

Then there are scanning type adaptors. BetterLight is the best known among photographers, and is very capable. They are no longer made, apparently because of a limited market and high price, but there are quite a few on the used market. Search BetterLight 4x5 digital back and several will come up, generally between $2,000 and $6,000 US. There are other models available, but much higher cost. They're used a lot in medical imaging. One big disadvantage is that the scanning process takes from 30 seconds to up to six minutes, which limits the kind of image you can capture. Image sizes range from about 150 MP up to 225 MP.


Single shot digital backs are not currently produced in full 4x5 format, but I've seen a couple custom built ones. You are generally limited to about 6x9cm dimensions on production models, but at least you can use your full array of camera movements. But be prepared to spend more than $25,000 for a production model, and two to three times that much for a custom built array.

We're still a long way from having a useful direct digital path to 4x5 images, unless there is some progress in the "stitching" type backs that involves some kind of custom lens fitted directly to the back. I don't think there's enough market for them, but with growing interest in large format, there's always a hope.


For now, I'm going to stick to shooting and scanning film. I could shoot and scan more sheets than I've exposed in my lifetime before a full 4x5 scanning back became cost comparative. So I'll just dream on that a better stitching back will be developed some day...

Andy

gessman Loc: Colorado

It works well on my Calumet 24" rail 4x5. If your old "woody" has a graflok back it should work fine. There's some irrelevant, some wrong, and some blatantly ignorant comments in this thread and I won't bother to point out which is which but you folks who know nothing about this device and process really are misleading people and making a fool of yourselves, and there's more'n one.

If you want to do this, unless you plan on buying another camera body to use with this adapter back, it doesn't matter whether you have a full frame or a crop body, you get what you get and the lens coverage, etc., don't matter. Some seem to think you use a dslr lens between your dslr and the adapter which you don't. You're using the dslr or mirrorless to shoot through the 4x5 lens and the adapter moves around the image cast from that lens to cover the image being cast and then stitch the resulting dslr images into one high resolution image nearing 4x5" in size. Watch this: https://youtu.be/ALDQ3a2r-wQ

Now, disregarding all the fancy math footwork, the size of the resulting file, regardless of how big or small it is, IS precisely the point and it may take your computer quite long to process them but again, that IS precisely what you're wanting to do this for, to make a big high resolution file, hopefully taking advantage of the tilts and swings you already own, that you cannot get anywhere as close to as inexpensively as this produces so if it takes your computer two or more hours to process it, you have what you want and you may not need a whole lot of them to satisfy your needs, just like using sheet film. We're not talking "fps" here. If you want to sit and look at the screen while it processes, it'll seem like an eternity. On the other hand, if you get it all set up and hit "Enter" just before you go to bed, you'll awaken in the morning with a real nice big high resolution image, all being well, and you won't feel a thing. Consider it to be "the cost of doing business" and get over it or, if that doesn't work for you, spring for a more powerful computer.

One other thing, don't let anyone, think Fotodiox support rep, convince you to buy a RhinoCam on the pretense of you getting the best of both worlds by having the RhinoCam for precision panoramas and double duty as a 4x5 adapter back like the one we've been talking about in this thread. One of the ways we have traditionally apparently increased resolution on a 4x5, as many of you know, is to use a wide 90mm or wider lens that often requires a recessed front lens board and replacing the accordion bellows with a "bag" bellows to allow us to get the front and back standards as close as possible which, as AndyH noted, severely limits the functionality of the use of tilts and swings. With the RhinoCam being used as a 4x5 adapter, you cannot get the front and back standards close enough to focus with even a 180mm lens on the 4x5.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Looks like Andy beat me to the punch on posting the fotodiox video url while I was typing, never mind my mid-reply breakfast break.

BebuLamar

The Sinar P3-df is a completely new digital view camera. It has smaller sensor than 4x5. It has lenses for its format. It's very cool but also not very affordable.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

I'm a couple of time zones ahead of you, so I was already on my third cup of Joe!

Do you think there's enough of a market for a stitching back that incorporates some sort of retrofocus lens to extend the physical lens to film plane (or, more accurately, "sensor plane") distance? Would this be physically possible?

I really want to pull out my old view and press cameras to produce true large format architectural work, and I'm constantly searching online, but I can't really see much usability factor for the camera movements at the current state of affairs. If I put on a lens long enough to focus at a distance, I'll be shooting from a half a mile away!

Very interested in your opinion on this - as one of the few who seems to have both actual experience and an understanding of the reasons why this would be such a major find for large format photographers, especially those of us trying to make architectural photos. At this point, I can't even shoot Polaroids in the field for test exposures, so I'm limited to "one shooting session" attempts, with a full re-shoot if I screw something up.

Andy

AzGriz Loc: Sedona, Arizona

I have used my 35mm to 4x5 adapter on a Toyo field 4x5 and also a Sinar 4x5 studio camera a lot. All you so called experts have totally missed the purpose of the adapter. Do you remember using Polaroid Film to check exposure? Have you tried lately to purchase fresh Polaroid Film for a special 4x5 Polaroid, Kodak or Fuji Film Back?
I use the adapter as I used to use Polaroid Film, that is to check exposure before putting in the 4x5 Film Holders. Works great and saves bracketing film.
Loren

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

So are you using it for final images or just proofing? If proofing, how do you stitch the images in the field, and does the smaller image give you an accurate proof of focus with all your camera movements in play? Or do you set up for film, then refocus with the back in place, losing all the camera movements? I'd love to hear more about your work process.

Andy

AzGriz Loc: Sedona, Arizona

After I have the camera all set up to take the photo, I use a Nikon Dslr Camera to double-check the exposure. I also always use a Pentax Spotmeter and record the exposures. The digital camera, as well as Polaroid film, will always be more accurate.
Hope this helps.
Loren

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback.

If I'm understanding correctly, you take a similar shot view angle on the DSLR with manual settings and ISO corresponding to the film you're using as a proof? That's also what I do, and it works perfectly as long as your film camera's shutter speed and f/stop are accurate (I've been testing all of my combinations lately with a shutter speed tester so I can adjust if necessary). I always shot 4x5 using a spot meter for zone measurement and placement, but I think it's been nearly ten years since I shot any 4x5 at all. It's something I'm looking to get back into, but I no longer have a home darkroom. I do a lot of digital post processing, and I drool at the thought of a 100MP plus image to work with.

The type of digital back that I've been talking about mounts the DSLR body (without lens) on the film plane for final images, which are then stitched together in PP, resulting in a much larger image to work with. The distance added to the lens to image plane distance and the long focal length lenses required are what make this a challenging process.

Best,

Andy

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Wow Andy, thanks so much for your lengthy write-up. Very informative indeed. It doesn't look I will be converting my Sinar anytime soon. In the meantime I guess I will be using my Fuji X-T2 and D750

AzGriz Loc: Sedona, Arizona

That is the back I use but I shoot film and have the Darkroom (thedarkroom.com) process the film. They scan the film and email me the results in a couple of days. They send the processed negs back via slow mail. If you see a photo you really like, they will wet print it for you.

Loren

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Thanks Loren. I appreciate the information.

I don't think I'd like to have to refocus the rig after shooting the test shot with the Fotodiox, and the limitations on lens focal length and difficulty of adjusting the movements wouldn't work for me.

It seems that there are more people interested in this topic and with some experience in it than I would have expected.

Andy

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Actually I actually HAVE the Fotodiox adapter but I see I had typo in my comment - its a minimum focal length of 110 MM that is required to make use of it. Anything shorter cannot be focused - I know from personal experience.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Yup, I understood the typo. As a user of this rig, I hope you can answer some of my questions...

It's not a common size lens though, is it? What size do you commonly shoot with, and, even with a recessed lens board, can you get any use out of the camera movements in shooting landscapes or architectural work?

Also, what do you estimate the picture area at? It looks to me like you can get fully to the left and right edges, but that the top and bottom limits are proscribed by the back itself, resulting in a somewhat panoramic format with any lens. Is this correct?

Thanks for your experience and anticipated response!

Andy

ecurb1105

Back in the film era I had a plate with a nikon extension tube mounted on it. The plate replaced the 4x5 back of my Sinar allowing me to mount a Nikon body on the view camera. Great macro/micro stage.