mtbear

A good source of specialty adapters is https://fotodioxpro.com. If you are familiar with them note that they have changed their URL from fotodiox to fotodioxpro. The old site is no longer supported and may be malicious. The person I know with the most experience with adapters is Bohaus Blahut, he can be found on FaceBook, he also stars in a Canadian Techno Pickers show, kind of like American Pickers. He has done promotional work for FotoDiox.

If you have room on your rail you might adapt a camera back bellows, like this one: https://amzn.to/2Uv9JiT
to your DSLR. You would just need to select a suitable lens an make a small light block to go around it

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Alas, I have not been able to use it, since I only have a super wide angle lens (65MM) for my 4x5 field camera. But since the flange-to-chip distance in the Nikon DSLR is 42.5MM, and the Fotodiox adapter adds about 80MM to that, it makes sense that a focal length of less than 110- 120 MM cannot work. Had I read their own description more carefully, i wouldn't have had to figure that out myself. So, like I said, a "normal" focal length for the 4x5 is thus on my wish list...

Bipod

Since no 4 x 5" diigital image sensor exists, what's the point?

Gee, can you tell me how to install a VW engine in a Ferrari Testarossa?

Order some 4 x 5" B&W negative film, and go to work. If you don't want to operate a darkroom,
send the film ot to a good pro lab for processing. A few labs still do sheet film and will let you
specify push or pull processing for each sheet (for a price).

If you want, you can also have the lab scan your negatives (with some loss of IQ -- but not as
great as you'd have by going to a minature or subminiature format digital sensor). Then you
can use PhotoSlop if you want, and even print with inkjunk printer.

You can have IQ, or you can have convenience. Who said good photography was supposed to
be easy and convenient?

Besides, how you gonna use an adapted Calumet 4 x 5" with a selfie stick?

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Well, for me, the appeal was the ability to use the Scheimpflug effect using tilts without having to get a too-costly tilt-shift lens (which won't have as much variability anyway). But as I explained, I'll have to wait to try it.

And while valid, the suggestion to just buy film and get it processed does not, of course, feed the need for (relatively) instant gratification.

gessman Loc: Colorado

I've been on "honey do" missions ever since I posted this morning and am not ignoring your post referenced to mine. I will hopefully get to it after dinner if I don't get slammed with more "honey do." Sooner or later I will reply but I don't have answers for some of your questions - just haven't approached it from the angle of your interests.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Thanks! Always appreciate your sharing your knowledge. No rush - I've been looking at various 4x5 workarounds for nearly two years now. At the very least, I'm inspired to buy some sheet film and have it developed and scanned locally.

Andy

User ID

Yes. And the price is worth its
weight in amusement value.

.

mtbear

I just remembered, I was looking for a way to adapt my 4x5 with a Mamiya Universal Pro for a back and there is an adapter available for that which may be re-engineered for your purposes. I found several on eBay but I never bought one.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

I've shot 24MP (Pentax) stitched panoramas using Photoshop and gotten say a 1.3GB image file that must be saved as a PSB (not PSD) file! Things do slow a bit but with 32GB of RAM...

I actually do not get the premise of the post. Just use a 4x5 digital back (that is actually a smaller than 4x5" large sensor). Using a 35mm camera I don't get at all. I have view cameras and lenses and a 210mm Symmar or 120mm Super-Angulon for a DSLR makes no sense.

I know people who's stitched together grid-like multiple DSLR images to make equivalent to a 11x14" film camera!

But bottom line, if you have a view camera, shoot some film. Vintage large format lenses likely don't have the resolution you are used to with digital cameras. How many times do you think a 4x5" negative must be enlarged to make a 16x20" print, only 4x. Compare to a 35mm negative (24x36mm)!

User ID

You didn't follow the link to the device ?

You read the threads ? You read it well ?
Cuz your comment doesn't follow at all.

No one has suggested using a 4x5 view
camera to make 24x36mm images.

But thank you for figgering out that a
4x5 needs 4X to make a 16x20. We all
were toadally stumped on that one.

.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

You're right - I think you're missing the point. Some of us, including the OP and I, would like to go direct to digital from our 4x5 rigs. Film is hard to get, development and scanning is more difficult to find than for 35mm or medium format, and even the logistics of storing and transporting film long distance can be difficult.

A 4x5 digital back costs as much as a new car, and is currently only available in "scanning" rather than single shot format, which entails exposures of 30 seconds or more. A "single shot" purely digital back for medium format costs tens of thousands of dollars, one for a 4x5 camera might cost into six figures - the market just isn't sufficient to mass produce one.

Some of us thought that the Fotodiox back (you won't understand what it does until you click the link to the video) might offer an inexpensive alternative. You mount a 35mm or APS body (only the body) on the built in flange, and shift it around to capture the full film plane, or close to it. You then stitch the images together in your preferred PP suite to produce a very large image.

However, from those who've actually used it, we've learned that it can only be focused to infinity with lenses longer than 110mm, and even with a lens of that focal length, the lens to focal plane distance eliminates the use of most of the camera movements.

I asked the question of whether some optics could be built into the back that would effectively lengthen the working distance between the back and lens, and am still hoping that one of our more technical members can provide an answer. But unless there's enough of a market to warrant such a product, I think many of us will continue to either shoot film or keep our 4x5 gear in mothballs.

Hope that clears up the confusion!

Andy

Shutterbugger2 Loc: Chicago

Idea 1) If you have a film holder, use it to make a B&W paper negative. Then make a digital & inverted copy of that negative.

Idea 2) Put a Fresnel lens behind the ground glass to even out the image. Use your digital camera to make a picture of the image on the ground glass. It would preserve the antique look of the image from the view camera. The focusing cloth would have to keep out stray light.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

That would be an interesting way to produce a vintage effect, but it's not really what I'm looking for in terms of architectural work. Could be a lot of fun, though!

Andy

User ID

Do you have experience with that ?

I don't think so. Sounds like armchair
engineering powered by a PhD in PhD.

But, maybe I jump to wrong conclusion
and you will show us results !

Also maybe you will explain the purpose
of shooting a focusing screen image with
a small SLR ? And what is the "Antique
Look" of a view camera image ? All mine
always made modern SoTA images.

And remember, read before you type ;-)

.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Gosh, sir, you have me confused with someone who has a clue and I don't think I do. It would be interesting to see if a person could come up with some kind of a "Rube Goldberg" unit just as a one off but I have no concept of whether or not such a device would have any broad appeal or not. Someone with some old lens lying around he/she could dismantle and play with attaching it/them to the back of a mounted lens just to see what they would do. I rigged a There could very well be a market for an improved version. It doesn't look to me like there's much of a market for the Fotodiox version that we already have just judging by the almost total absence of any used ones online. If they've sold many, people who bought them either must really love them and won't part with them or they've tossed 'em in the trash and that's anybody's guess.



You'd certainly know more about that than I would with me having never done architectural work with any kind of camera, let alone a large format. I got this adapter to experiment with for macro shots and I haven't done much with it to be honest. One thing I have done with my 4x5 (3 of 'em) is adapt a Cokin "P" filter holder onto the back of a Caltar/Ilex 215/360 convertible lens in an Acme shu tter to facilitate the use of Cokin filters with that lens. I don't see any reason that a person couldn't fix it up in a similar fashion with a lens but I have no clue what lens that would be. Might be possible to mount one of the 250 or 500 macro lens a lot of people use or just one or more of the lens in the sets that we've all probably owned at one time or another. You know - +1, +2, and +3 sets that can be stacked to increase the magnification. Not sure what the effect of that would be but it might be a place to start in lieu of dismantling an old lens. It would just take some experimentation.



Well, I hate to disappoint you and wish I could be of more help. I certainly think it would be worthwhile if you could come up with what you want. One thing that comes to mind is the fiasco the Canon FD to EF adapter has been that requires an intermediary lens in the adapter to achieve focus to infinity. I think though, that most of that has been because the people who have made those adapters have mostly tried to get away with poor quality lens made from plastic. Canon initially made an adapter with quality glass but had to sell it for $1500 and due to a lack of demand, didn't make many. On rare occasion a used one will show up on ebay with a price in the region of $1500. I can see something clipped onto the back of a 4x5 lens but precisely what that "something" would be leaves me dumbfounded. I'll be watching though and regretful that I cannot be of more help.