Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Film Photography / Medium format / November 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

IR folder (sale)

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Paul Friday - 16 Nov 2006 21:12 GMT
Sorry guys - I'm going to punt this on eBay but I thought I'd mention it
here first. You at least might know what I'm talking about.

I have an Ensign Ranger II 6x9 folder adapted to use infra-red film.
It has a piece of Lee Filters no 87 IR filter fitted behind the lens.
This is optically-opaque and blocks anything shorter than 730nm.
I have been using it with Maco IR820c roll film, which has its
sensitivity peaking at, wait for it, 820nm.

The lens is an anastigmatic, 105mm f6.3. The shutter has three speeds:
1/25, 1/50 and 1/100. More to the point, it has a B and T setting.
Maco 820 works out at around 4 ISO in sunny conditions, so you stop down
and use the T setting. The lens stops down to f32, which helps.

Very basic flip-up viewfinder. Tripod sockets for landscape and portrait
orientation. Takes a cable release.

I have so far used it with the lens extended and the bellows wrapped in
cooking foil.

And before the conversion, it took cracking pics. Once you have seen a
sharp 6x9, the only next step is 4x5.

If anyone is interested, contact me off-list.
Signature

Paul Friday

j - 17 Nov 2006 02:27 GMT
> I have an Ensign Ranger II 6x9 folder adapted to use infra-red film.
> It has a piece of Lee Filters no 87 IR filter fitted behind the lens.

That's the worst place to put the filter.

> I have so far used it with the lens extended and the bellows wrapped
> in cooking foil.

Okay, now  that might be interesting if you include the foil cap for the guy
nutz enough to want a camera that won't fold anymore and looks like it's
ready for the oven.

> And before the conversion, it took cracking pics.

No Mary Jane pics?
Paul Friday - 19 Nov 2006 00:01 GMT
>That's the worst place to put the filter.
In theory. But it keeps my fumbling fingers off it. A Lee No. 87 filter
marks easily.

>> I have so far used it with the lens extended and the bellows wrapped
>> in cooking foil.
>Okay, now  that might be interesting if you include the foil cap for the guy
>nutz enough to want a camera that won't fold anymore and looks like it's
>ready for the oven.
Read the leaflet that comes with Maco IR film and you'd never take the
lens cap off. It took me ages to summon the courage to keep my eyes open
when I triggered the shutter. I've rather taken to the tinfoil
underpants, though.

>> And before the conversion, it took cracking pics.
>No Mary Jane pics?
Nope, just huge 3:2 negs that look like super-fine-grain in-your-dreams
35mm or a million pounds worth of digital.

Signature

Paul Friday

j - 19 Nov 2006 14:27 GMT
> Read the leaflet that comes with Maco IR film and you'd never take the
> lens cap off.

:)  I have used Maco IR, Paul and their warning about loading 120 only in
darkness is perfectly incorrect. I loaded it under a tree, and in the car on
bright days with absolutely no fogging at all.

I do _not_ know how impenetrable a bellows might be, however. (For that and
LF I use a completely non-fiberous bellows.)

> I've rather taken to the tinfoil underpants, though.

Damn! Great Idea! But it's just too late for Halloween!
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.