Large Format photography group - From "zero to hero!"

Does it make a significant difference if a lens is in a Seiko (or Seikosha) shutter rather than Copal? I was thinking in the context of the Chroma... I've been looking at Fujinon LF lenses on fleabay and almost all are (a) from Japan and (b) not with Copal shutters!

Hi Steve,

Being in a similar boat to you (new to LF and the Chroma), I've also been looking at Fujinon lenses and had been getting quite confused as to exactly which model/version is which, as they seem to have a somewhat erratic labelling mechanism.

One site I've found really useful is this with a comprehensive list of Fujinon LF lenses which detail the differences between the versions of each lens.
It's particularly helpful in aiding the identification of the multi-coated variants. The link to the list detailing them all by focal length is perhaps the most useful part.
One of the simpler identifying factors seems to be that the latest models tend to have the labelling around the outside of the barrel near the lens, so is visible from the side. The earlier ones tend to have labelling on the front around the front element inside the filter ring, and so is visible from the front.

Strangely I seem to have found one or two of the latest versions of some of the Fujinon lenses with Copal shutters, which also do come from Japan, and although cheaper than I've seen from the UK, the latest versions do seem to hold a reasonably high price.

Regarding Seiko shutters, in line with what others have said, I've also only come across good reports of Seiko. The only shutters I've heard reported issues with have been Compur ones.


Having spent quite a long time looking at the various options, to start with I have gone for a CM Fujinon W 135mm f5.6, which comes with a Copal shutter, and is now somewhere on its journey from Japan.
I'm thinking ultimately of going for a 75mm, a 135mm, and maybe a 250mm, which seem well spread, and given the Chroma can apparently take from 65mm (with recessed lens board) up to 280mm, I figured that staying a little inside the maximum range (75mm, 135mm, 250mm inside 65mm-280mm maximum) would possibly be fairly sensible.

Pictures of my first LF lens (from the eBay ad):

f135_1 by conradsphotos, on Flickr

f135_3 by conradsphotos, on Flickr

f135_2 by conradsphotos, on Flickr
 
By all accounts, the Fuji CM-W lenses are excellent. As I've mentioned before somewhere in the deep dark depths of TP F&C, had I not gone for a schneider first, I'd certainly have got the Fuji 125mm CM-W.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C&C
I have a further question about Copal shutters (I've tried searching the forum, and wider via Google, but not found anything really).

Basically, the 135mm Fujinon lens above came with a Copal 0 shutter - max speed 1/500th second.

Another lens I was looking at (a Fujinon 75mm as it happens) also comes with a Copal 0 shutter - same max shutter speed.

The shutter on the 135mm lens is labelled on the side as a "79" whereas the one on the 75mm lens is labelled as a "56".

The only difference I can see really appears to be that the flash sync socket on the "79" is oriented straight out of the side of the lens so is at 90 degrees to the lens axis, whereas the "56" is right-angled so the socket is parallel to the axis of the lens. Is this to accommodate fitting the lens on a recessed lens board?

The only other reference I could find to model numbers on Copal 0 shutters was an unanswered question on a forum some 11 years ago where the question was about the difference between a model 44 and model 45 Copal 0 shutter.

Is there any appreciable difference between the models, and is there a resource somewhere on the web listing the different variants?

...or should I just not worry about it?
 
Last edited:
The sizes of the apertures differ according to focal length. If both stop down to, say, f45, then the size of the minimum opening for a 75mm lens will be smaller than that for a 150mm lens. So, if I was to guess, I'd say that the model numbers indicate what range of openings a shutter has. They don't denote focal lengths because a shutter that provides, say, f5.6 to f45 for a 75mm lens would provide f8 to f64 for a 150mm lens. Once you've decided what focal length lens is to be fitted, you stick on an f-stop scale to suit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C&C
The sizes of the apertures differ according to focal length. If both stop down to, say, f45, then the size of the minimum opening for a 75mm lens will be smaller than that for a 150mm lens. So, if I was to guess, I'd say that the model numbers indicate what range of openings a shutter has. They don't denote focal lengths because a shutter that provides, say, f5.6 to f45 for a 75mm lens would provide f8 to f64 for a 150mm lens. Once you've decided what focal length lens is to be fitted, you stick on an f-stop scale to suit.

Thanks so much for the clear explanation.

Looking at the pictures of the lenses, it's clear that the outer scale is screwed on, so could easily be replaced, and the "56" or "79" is indeed on the same bit of scale as the aperture markings.

Of course it makes complete sense that the same shutter attached to different focal length lenses would need different sized apertures for the same F stop (or T stop), but I hadn't really considered this which is one of the basics about lenses (should have realised having studied physics many years ago)!

Thank you for pointing this out - much appreciated! :)
 
I've just had an email from Stearman Press (SP-445 5x4 developing tank) which contains among other information the news that they hope to be testing a 3D printed prototype of a new 10x8 tank next week. 2 sheets of 10x8 in 750mm of solution, inversion agitation. They say that they'll probably put it on Kickstarter, but it's too soon yet for a production schedule. Estimated price is $147.
 
Last edited:
To be fair, they did try a 10x8 tank on Kickstarter before (a scaled up SP-445 if I remember correctly) which failed to get enough backers. So there's no guarantee that they'll do any better this time round, though I do wonder if the number of new 10x8 photographers created by Intrepid will make it viable. Last time, the question was how many people currently developing 10x8 would want to try a new method; this time there may be enough people new to 10x8 to make it a going proposition.

What they may find they are in competition with is the CatLabs 10x8 insert, which works like a scaled-up MOD54 and fits a Jobo tank (also inversion agitation, but requires more chemicals).
 
Hope it is one of those fancy big Minis that you're driving. :whistle:
 
Something's just started bugging me. The larger the format, the narrower the depth of field for a given angle of view, is that right? How do you work out what the depth of field will be for a particular shot on a 4x5 camera? I'm guessing that if you stop down to the taking aperture, the image on the ground glass would be pretty hard to see, even with a dark cloth and a loupe? Is this one of those "it'll be ok after the first 10,000 shots" things?:D
 
The longer focal lengths mean less depth of field, but the larger negative means less enlargement is needed. If you use a 4x loupe on the ground glass, anything that's sharp will be sharp on a 20x16 print. I use a Rodenstock loupe which has a black collar so with the loupe on the ground glass and my eye right up to the loupe, there's no extraneous light and checking visually isn't too difficult. N.B. I don't generally stop down beyond f/16.
 
Mm, well of course the chances are that i'm doing it wrong however my usual routine is to set up with lens at its largest aperture, generally f5.6 with my lenses, compose the shot and focus with a loupe under the dark cloth, then take my meter readings and adjust lens settings as necessary. For landscapes I'm usually at f22 or above so at this point the ground glas is pretty dark but it doesn't matter as I've already done all thats needed.
 
My approach is the same as @Andysnap 's, with the addition of checking multiple areas of the scene with the aperture stopped down to somewhere between f/22 ad f/32, depending on how I've composed and on what lens. I find that unless it's really dark, it's usually possible to pick out some contrast on the ground glass to check for sharp focus. My loupe is a 4x also, branded jessops (what ever that means), and works fine. Metering is done from then, etc.
 
Thanks folks that's very helpful and puts my mind at ease. Meanwhile, we wait!
 
So, loupes again. There's a thing called Warwickshire Open Studios going on at the moment, and as part of that I had an excellent free workshop last evening with John Whitmore, who is a professional film photographer just out of Coventry. He shoots 35mm, but mainly MF and LF. There was an old 4x5 on the desk, and an absolutely yuge Intrepid 8x10! I gather he's also got an early Chroma order in, too. He agreed to show/help (mainly show) me how to make a proper silver halide 8x10 print of a favourite black and white negative (it's a long story, sorry, but I'm getting there). Anyway, as part of this we were looking at my negatives through his loupe. He could see them clearly with the loupe on the light table, but I found I had to lift the loupe a couple of mm above the light table to get focus, This is presumably because of yet another body part that's gradually failing, in this case my eyes needing a dioptre or two help. I imagine that having to check focus while holding a loupe the right distance away from the ground glass would be crazy hard!

To the question: do loupes have focus adjustability? Do I have to look for a special one?

(Oddly, I use the dioptre adjustment on my Pentax LX viewfinder, but seem to be able to focus pretty well with the MX where the viewfinder has no adjustment, though I probably spend more time tracking back and forth on the MX.)

John is on twitter as @thedarkshed and I have tried to persuade him to join us here; he seemed pretty interested....
 
Short answer - good question. I'd never considered it as a general question. My loupe has a dioptre correction, but I suspect cheap ones don't. I'll have to dig out my Jessops own brand one and take a look at it.
 
Last edited:
I have a very cheap 8x loupe with no dioptre correction and I can only use it with glasses off. Im not sure what this adds to the conversation if anything but I just wanted to be involved. :D
 
So, loupes again. There's a thing called Warwickshire Open Studios going on at the moment, and as part of that I had an excellent free workshop last evening with John Whitmore, who is a professional film photographer just out of Coventry. He shoots 35mm, but mainly MF and LF. There was an old 4x5 on the desk, and an absolutely yuge Intrepid 8x10! I gather he's also got an early Chroma order in, too. He agreed to show/help (mainly show) me how to make a proper silver halide 8x10 print of a favourite black and white negative (it's a long story, sorry, but I'm getting there). Anyway, as part of this we were looking at my negatives through his loupe. He could see them clearly with the loupe on the light table, but I found I had to lift the loupe a couple of mm above the light table to get focus, This is presumably because of yet another body part that's gradually failing, in this case my eyes needing a dioptre or two help. I imagine that having to check focus while holding a loupe the right distance away from the ground glass would be crazy hard!

To the question: do loupes have focus adjustability? Do I have to look for a special one?

(Oddly, I use the dioptre adjustment on my Pentax LX viewfinder, but seem to be able to focus pretty well with the MX where the viewfinder has no adjustment, though I probably spend more time tracking back and forth on the MX.)

John is on twitter as @thedarkshed and I have tried to persuade him to join us here; he seemed pretty interested....

I’ve been chatting to John about his Chroma. As one of the first 10 backers, he’s having his engraved and we’ve also been talking about the shows he’s attending (including the one you met him at). He kindly offered to include Chroma flyers with his packs that he gives out so I’m currently drawing up some to be engraved on acrylic (you know I like to be different!). He told me about the photowalks he runs and I’m hoping to be able to go along to one at some point this year if I can make it.
 
I’ve been chatting to John about his Chroma. As one of the first 10 backers, he’s having his engraved and we’ve also been talking about the shows he’s attending (including the one you met him at). He kindly offered to include Chroma flyers with his packs that he gives out so I’m currently drawing up some to be engraved on acrylic (you know I like to be different!). He told me about the photowalks he runs and I’m hoping to be able to go along to one at some point this year if I can make it.

John @thedarkshed told me on twitter that he's joined the forum, although don't expect him to be active until the Open Studios thing ends after next week. Even then it'll take him time to read through all the relevant threads!

(Note to self, at an appropriate point Andy's thread needs a revival so he can be sure to know what a load of p1sstakers we all are!)
 
I have a very cheap 8x loupe with no dioptre correction and I can only use it with glasses off. Im not sure what this adds to the conversation if anything but I just wanted to be involved. :D

Actually Andy that IS helpful, it tells me to avoid the cheapest and to ask the question when I'm buying one, thanks...
 
I have a very cheap 8x loupe with no dioptre correction and I can only use it with glasses off.

Good point. The "glasses off" part strikes a chord. I wear contact lenses, but with increasing age I can't focus on something as close as the ground glass without using reading glasses, I therefore put on a (strong) pair of reading glasses to let me see the screen for composition, but take them off to actually use the loupe when only focusing remains. I have a cord attached, so I can just let them fall when removed. So in my case, having to remove glasses to use the loupe has become second nature and not something I think about.
 
John @thedarkshed told me on twitter that he's joined the forum, although don't expect him to be active until the Open Studios thing ends after next week. Even then it'll take him time to read through all the relevant threads!

(Note to self, at an appropriate point Andy's thread needs a revival so he can be sure to know what a load of p1sstakers we all are!)

I'm here! Hello everyone, and thanks for the invite @ChrisR , this seems like a fun place to be! :)


Anyway, as part of this we were looking at my negatives through his loupe. He could see them clearly with the loupe on the light table, but I found I had to lift the loupe a couple of mm above the light table to get focus, This is presumably because of yet another body part that's gradually failing, in this case my eyes needing a dioptre or two help. I imagine that having to check focus while holding a loupe the right distance away from the ground glass would be crazy hard!

The loupe you used was the Gaoersi 8x (I think I got it from Student Photo Store) - it is adjustable but I believe I was unscrewing the wrong part the other night...

I’ve been chatting to John about his Chroma. As one of the first 10 backers, he’s having his engraved and we’ve also been talking about the shows he’s attending (including the one you met him at). He kindly offered to include Chroma flyers with his packs that he gives out so I’m currently drawing up some to be engraved on acrylic (you know I like to be different!). He told me about the photowalks he runs and I’m hoping to be able to go along to one at some point this year if I can make it.

Hey Steve, nice to meet you in another context - one day it will be in real life!
 
I'm here! Hello everyone, and thanks for the invite @ChrisR , this seems like a fun place to be! :)




The loupe you used was the Gaoersi 8x (I think I got it from Student Photo Store) - it is adjustable but I believe I was unscrewing the wrong part the other night...



Hey Steve, nice to meet you in another context - one day it will be in real life!

Hi John. Welcome to the best part of the Internet [emoji6]
 
So, I was looking at this Fujinon-W 135mm lens on the evil bay, minly because it's cheap. It is described as "non-ring". Ignoring for a moment the "light fog on the rear element, no effect on taking pictures" bit, is non-ring a no-no?
 
As far as I know, the W series with the Seiko shutters means its almost certainly the first iteration of that lens, and will be a single coated lens. This in itself is not 'bad', it's just that certain aspects of the image (such as flair handling or colour contrast) may not be as good as the latest models.

For that price though, I'd snap it up.
 
Yeah, the link above that @C&C posted has a lot of useful info on how to tell what version of a lens it is. I think 'non-ring' would refer to the retaining ring that you use to fix the lens to a board since I can't see it in the photos.
 
Yeah, the link above that @C&C posted has a lot of useful info on how to tell what version of a lens it is. I think 'non-ring' would refer to the retaining ring that you use to fix the lens to a board since I can't see it in the photos.

So, um, without the ring, how would I fix it to the board? :)
 
Use one from another lens of the same size? I suppose given that they are only (how much is concealed in that little word "only") a ring with a screw thread, they ought to be simple to replace. Never tried either option though - and it won't help if this is the only lens you have of that size.
 
As far as I know, the W series with the Seiko shutters means its almost certainly the first iteration of that lens, and will be a single coated lens. This in itself is not 'bad', it's just that certain aspects of the image (such as flair handling or colour contrast) may not be as good as the latest models.

For that price though, I'd snap it up.

Most of the latest variants I've seen are £300 or close to it. I've found a few other Ws around that price, mostly with admitted faults. There are quite a few W lenses at around £150 or so, and having looked at the list of Fujinon lenses it seems likely that a minority of them are NW lenses, with Seiko shutters and lettering around the outside of the lens barrel. These have EBC coating , and I might just stretch for one of those!
 

Thanks Richard. I think the lens may have gone, but there's some other interesting suff there as well, including what looks like a reasonable dark cloth.
 
How many double dark slides does the team think is a reasonable number? I'm wondering if I have enough - and I also think that possibly "enough" in this context is not the same as "enough" in the context of having enough cameras :D
 
Back
Top