New Old Lens for the Wista (Continued)

For those following along, here's my 4x5 with the new-old lens on it. (The camera is a rosewood Wista 45DXII, the lens a Calumet Caltar II-N 135mm ƒ/5.6.) I got the lensboard off eBay. You have to get one with the right sized hole—this lens has a Copal 0 (zero or zed) shutter, so (naturally) I got one with a Copal 0 hole.

For those who might know little to nothing about view cameras, to mount a lens on a lensboard is simple. The rear cell of the lens unscrews from the back of the shutter. Then you remove the retaining ring.

Clockwise from front: rear optical cell; plastic lenscap; retaining
ring; and the rest of the lens, here set
down with its front cell facing down

Simply seat the lens on the board, fix in place with the retaining ring, tighten with a lens spanner wrench (here's one of those on Amazon). Actually what I do is just hold it in place and rotate the shutter itself a little until tight, taking care that the retaining ring isn't riding up on one edge of the hole in the board. Then replace the back cell.

Rear cell of lens on board, showing retaining ring

By the way the lens board is a "board" even if it's made of metal. And the hole is said to be "drilled" even if it wasn't, as in, "a Technika metal lensboard drilled for a Copal 1 shutter."

There's a lens in there. Chien ancien in background.

The camera folds up with the lens on it! Which is not necessary and not something you can do with most lenses because they're too large. Normally you'd remove the lens on its lensboard and put it in your bag. But setting up and knocking down the camera in the field is a process you might go through many times in a day or half-day of shooting, so eliminating steps saves time. So it's nice.

Keiichiro Nagaoka
You might recall our posts on Nagaoka cameras, handmade in Japan, here and here. The first was called "Last Man Standing." Alas, the last man is perhaps no longer standing. I have not been able to confirm the news through journalistic channels, but we have heard multiple rumors now that Keiichiro Nagaoka recently passed away. We heard from a friend of a friend of a friend that he entered the hospital, where he was unable to receive visits from his family due to the cursed COVID-19, and never came out again. Deep respect to Nagaoka-san and his family. His work lives on. He lived his life doing what he wanted to do!

Old view cameras never die, but they do migrate
While I'm still on the topic of old view cameras, our friend Ned (the retired President of Pentax USA) recently gifted his old Kodak to our friend Christopher (whose print I critiqued here—I'm going to do more print crits soon, by the way)—and Christopher decided to use his old Kodak lens with it and shoot Kodak transparency film, for a spiffy all-Kodak outfit. Without pictures it didn't happen, so here's the picture:

Photo by Christopher J. May

Sweet!

Mike
(Thanks to Ned, Chris, and the many readers who send news)

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Thanks to all our Patreon contributors!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

David Dyer-Bennet: "I'd never really considered the process of mounting a lens on a view camera lens board before. Now that you've laid it out so clearly, I'm startled that the positioning of the rear cell is sufficiently precise! I would have expected the distance of the rear cell from the front cell to be critical to the usual sorts of optical tolerances, and I wouldn't have thought screwing down a nut, even metal-on-metal, would be sufficiently precise. Learn something new every day! (On consideration, probably the precision needed in large-format lenses is somewhat less than miniature formats, for one thing.)"

William Schneider replies to David: "The front and rear lens cells are precisely spaced, but the shutter retaining ring has nothing to do with it. Here are some illustrations that show how the retaining ring and rear lens cell attach. That should demonstrate how precision is achieved...

Mike adds: Yes, and the cells do have to be precision calibrated to each individual shutter, which is why shutters aren't considered user-interchangeable. Old lenses can be mounted in new shutters, but only by specialists, for instance by S.K. Grimes, "The Photographer's Machinist."  These days you would also have to have a donor shutter, as Copal stopped making new shutters in 2013. I don't know whether Compur shutters are still made or not.

Bill Tyler replies to David: "The positioning of the two cells is quite precise. The retaining ring holds the front cell in place, but neither the retaining ring nor the thickness of the board interfere with the rear cell as you screw it in. There's enough of the front cell's rear that extends past the board so that the two cells mate precisely. And yes, for most lenses, that spacing is critical. Incidentally, lens boards are quite easy to make for most view cameras for anyone with a modest supply of tools. They're just square pieces of wood or metal with a hole in the middle, except for some camera, like the Graphics, for which the lens board actually has a lip around the edge."

Rob de Loe: "I've mentioned previously in these comments that I'm done with film. That's it! Done done done. Never coming back. But...someone introduced me to Portrait Pro and Portrait Body Pro software over the weekend. I knew this kind of thing existed, but I didn't really know if you know what I mean. I thought 'Sky Replacement' was bad. After checking out Portrait Body Pro, I actually felt ill. I hate everything about what this kind of software is doing, and will do, to photography. And so while going for a walk to shake off the queasy feeling, I thought to myself, 'I guess I'll have to go back to film after all.' Nope, not doing it! But really, within a decade, at the outside, film will be the only way to make a remotely authentic photograph. So good for you, Mike, for getting ahead of the curve!"

Mike replies: I advocated in the 'nineties for letting the word "photography" and related words stand for old-fashioned optical-chemical photography as it was understood up until the digital era, saying we should use "digital imaging" and related words for the new technology. Alas, digital had low status in the beginning, which inevitably led to the co-optation of the word "photograph" for its results, the better to claim equal status for it. Now that it has more than equal status, it's too late to go back to terminology that makes the sensible distinction.

Comments

[Robison John]

The thing about view cameras. ( What an awful sentence.) Is that, in their most basic form, a monorail style base, they lend themselves well to small, one man production.
Over on Kickstarter, a platform that admittedly has it’s justified detractors, there was a couple of years ago just such a project ‘standard cameras 4x5’. At $320 for their kit it doesn’t sound too bad a price to get into the 4x5 format. At least this project creator was able to deliver the product almost on time.

[Lawrence Plummer]

Hi Mike, I thought you might be interested in a large format lens wrench I picked up (EBAY?) quite a few years ago, it works perfectly.

[Kenneth Wajda]

Wow, what a sweet setup. That rosewood is just gorgeous. You're going to make beautiful work with it, Mike. And if you want to reach out to people you don't know to photograph, let the camera be the attractor. As soon as you walk up with that open and in your hand, people light up enamored by the "old fashioned camera". It's your invitation to people photos.

[Crabby Umbo]

Far easier lens wrench to use from Toyo!

https://www.catlabs.info/product/toyo-large-format-lens-shutter-spanner-wrench

I used to use the multi-adjustable one like you show for years until I found this little beauty! Never slipped, or had the pins loosen up. I keep it in my actual lens case!

[PaulW]

Mike, I noticed the link you posted to Christopher's photo is an Instagram link. Without an Instagram account, which I don't need or want, I can't view the photo. Is there another way to see it?

[Peter Williams]

Mike wrote: "...I'm going to do more print crits soon, by the way."

I'd rather see you complete the long awaited
Baker's Dozen: At the Museum

Please.

[Gerard Geradts]

Your dog still seems alive. He might be old, but he is not of olden days, which you suggest by using “ancien” in stead of “vieux”. That is my school French telling me that.

[John London]

Mike, why do you have to use instagram to show pics? We who do not subscribe to it are being left out.

[Added! With thanks to Chris May. --Mike]

[Walter Glover]

The need for ultra precision with mounting a lens to a lens panel is comparatively negligible other than being flush on the plane of the panel itself. Some, but by no means all, camera systems do have areas of milled surfaces to ensure precise collimation (Linhof & Sinar come to mind) but on a camera with movements where all is in flux with a bellows and adjustable movements until those variables are locked in place subject to highly critical image assessment on the ground glass metal on metal (or wood/carbon fibre) positioning is perfectly adequate. I'd suggest that with both the Linhof (rangefinder calibration) and Sinar (critical focus plane calculation) there greater importance to lens and panel geometry for mechanical dictates.
Another point of immense importance is the internal positioning of the front and rear groups in relation to each other.
To this end if the front group is removed from the shutter great care must be taken not to lose or damage any fine brass shims that be present position all the components to set optical laboratory standards.

[Kenneth Tanaka]

Nice project. But don't forget the flash!

[I looked all over but there's no hot shoe on this camera for that flash. --Mike]

[Robert Roaldi]

Maybe they should call all that new-fangled sky-replaced and face-fixed stuff "fauxtography".

(I stole that idea, I didn't make it up.)

[Dori]

FYI, Zack Arias seems to be selling some supplies:

Hey 4x5 #film shooters. Anyone interested in some 2008 Neopan 100 quickload film and holder? Let me know!
https://twitter.com/zarias/status/1321135722645069824?s=20

Atlanta #film photographers. Anyone want this darkroom stuff? Any offer accepted.
https://twitter.com/zarias/status/1321136640375558153?s=20

[Crabby Umbo]

Rob De Loe and Mike,

I remember lamenting about how you can't tell if a lens is being designed well any more, so it's basically a crap shoot, and we may not have those coveted lenses in the future, because a lot of cameras correct all the chromatic ab.'s, and other stuff, in the actual camera process, even before it gets to a "photoshop" program!

My sister, who is an illustrator, illustration teacher, and had a past as an art director, and still does a lot of stuff "old school", responded: "Yeah, who cares about that crap anymore."

[Kodachromeguy]

Mike, I still use your terminology on my blog and other places. An scene recorded on a chemical based medium (glass or flexible film) is a photograph. Recorded via a CCD or CMOS device is digital image. It is really quite simple.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Ah, the precision needed is in the range I thought—but the clever designers didn't position relative to the lensboard. I should have seen that coming. The two critical parts mate directly, just sticking through the lensboard for physical support, thus leaving the parts that care in control of their own spacing.

Thanks to all for the clarifications, especially including the nice clear diagram!

[Bill Tyler]

About that flash - a close look at the shutter shows that it does indeed have flash sync terminals. What I can't see is which types of sync it supports: M, F, and/or X. I'd guess M at a minimum. FP sync would obviously be inappropriate with this shutter.

[Bear.]

I use the word ‘photography’ to denote the analogue or digital process of creating images with a camera and lens (or equivalent). What is produced are ‘images’ or prints of images, if viewed in a non-electronic format; a ‘photograph’ is a subset of prints implying an analogue stage in the process but not implying any necessary non-manipulation. Identifying film with non-manipulated images is erroneous, as negatives and prints have been manipulated since the earliest days of photography, including many famous photographs. E.g. Frank Hurley’s WW1 'An episode after the Battle of Zonnebeke' by ‘’photomontage’, or Dorothea Lange’s ‘Migrant Mother, by airbrush. I can’t believe that well over 100 years later it can be even suggested that images produced by photography are anything other than an artistic rendition of human visual intention. Yet here we are debating a lexicon to avoid conflating reality with subjective perceptions of it. Then again, maybe I shouldn’t be surprised, as the conflation of subjective opinion with objectively determinable reality seems to be something of a societal issue generally at the moment...

[Mark Sampson]

Let's see now... #8 yellow filter, lens hood, tripod, focusing cloth, focusing loupe, light meter, two cable releases, at least six film holders, quart ziplock bags to keep the dust off the holders, camel's hair brush to clean them, a box of Ilford FP4+, a few empty film boxes for exposed film, a notebook, and a bag to carry most of that in.

[Andrew Sheppard]

In the days when those flashes were current, convenience had yet to be invented. You know that you hold the stick - stop making excuses! :-)

[Michael J. Perini]

Manny older lenses are available in "Barrel Mounts" which is essentially the front and rear components of the lens assembled around an iris , making it independent of the shutter mechanism. "universal' shutters were available for mounting in front of the lens, behind the lens, or built into the camera or attached to the back of the lens board. Like the versatile Packard shutter (even available with x-synch) there were slightly more elaborate shutters like the Ilexpo which came in a wooden box that was essentially a large recessed lens board. Mine needs a 9"x9" front lens board opening like many Century view cameras.
The Packard shutters are available in smaller sizes.
The nice part of these is that they allow the use of barrel mount lenses which are available much more cheaply than the admittedly more convenient, shutter mounted lenses.

[Henry Rogers]

Hi Mike,
That's such a beautiful camera; it must be a joy to use it.

From the sublime to the cheap and cheerful, a few years ago I bought a self assembly kit for a simple 5x4 and had great fun putting it together and using it. You can see some of that at: https://pbase.com/hhmrogers/bulldog_4x5_camera

It makes a change from digital; I must get going with it again. Henry

[Rick in CO]

Mike, I do not believe that shutter manufacturers make an infinite variety of shutters with different specifications to fit the particular variety and numbers of lenses. Lens makers manufacture their screw-in mounts to the shutters specifications. If an older lens is swapped to a new shutter, say a pre-WWII dial-set compur to a post-WWII synchro-compur, it might simply require a spacer to get the correct focus. One can get lucky, a 180mm f6.3 Tessar from a barrel mount focuses perfectly in a modern Linhof shutter. And I do test my lenses. The biggest problem I have encountered is with lenses that were in non-standard sized shutters and/or shutter sizes that are now discontinued. They require adapters which can be expensive.

[Earl Dunbar]

Mike - I still think of photography as distinct from digital imaging, and I think it was you who planted that concept in my mind. I’m not religious about it - it’s not worth fretting over those who don’t make the distinction.

And I also use theToyo wrench for mounting lenses on lens boards. It’s small and light, no fuss, and takes up virtually no space or weigh in my pack.