Plaubel Veriwide 100 with accessory finder
Photo courtesy of Claudio Bottari - Thanks!!

The Plaubel Veriwide 100 camera takes seven 2 1/4" x 3 1/2" (or 6x10cm, actually 56mm x 91mm+) exposures on 120 rollfilm. The "Veriwide 100" part of the Plaubel Veriwide 100 name refers to its very wide angle of coverage of 100 degrees! A Schneider super-angulon 47mm f/8 lens is used in a compur-synchro shutter featuring speeds from 1 second to 1/500th second, plus bulb). The camera provides either M or X synchronization, plus a self-timer.

One of the nicest features of the camera is its small size - only 4" x 6" x 1 1/2" (body) or 3" (with lens). The weight is only 34 ounces or just over 2 pounds (circa a kilogram). Bubble levels (3) are built into the camera, emphasizing the importance of holding the camera horizontally and in proper orientation to prevent converging vertical lines with such an ultrawide angle lens! The quality of the mechanics is such that the gearing is double sized and heavily constructed, making this camera very physically strong yet lightweight.

There is a pop-up wire frame bar (2x3 format) and eye viewing sight. An optional shoe with parallax adjustment is provided using the standard flash/Leica style foot mounting. There is a rare Leitz viewfinder for the Veriwide 100, but other more common viewfinders are often used. If the adjustable Leica 21mm lens finder is used, it has its own parallax correction mechanism. The actual Veriwide 100 coverage is closer to an 18mm lens on a 35mm SLR.

The camera was designed by Mr. Frank Rizzatti around the 47mm f/8 Schneider super angulon lens. The lens was manufactured by Joseph Schneider and Co. of Kreuznach, Germany. The Plaubel Feinmechanik und Optik corporation of Frankfurt, Germany, manufactured the completed camera. The camera was imported and sold by Burleigh Brooks Inc. (of Chicago, Los Angeles, and Englewood N.J.). A later and larger Brooks Veriwide camera featured interchangeable backs, with some variants having the larger f/5.6 47mm super angulon lens (see postings).

While some cameras use the 47mm Schneider super angulon to cover 6x12cm, the more modest 6x10cm (92mm or 3 1/2") dimensions of the Veriwide 100 was chosen to avoid vignetting and excessive corner darkening, regardless of chosen f/stop. The 47mm lens can be focused down to 2 1/2 feet. There are two click-stops at 20 feet and 6 feet on the focusing scale. At 20 foot point with the lens set at wide open f/8 setting, everything from ten feet to infinity will be in focus. Set at 6 foot click stop and f/22, everything from infinity to 3 feet will be in focus. At f/32, everything from infinity to 2 1/2 feet will be in focus! The potential for ultrawide angle (foreground dominance) effects are obviously great with such a lens!

Photo thanks to Timothy Francisco
Plaubel Veriwide 100 Camera - Front View
Note pop-up 2x3 wire frame, 2 front bubble levels, shutter cocking arm below lens

The 47mm super angulon on the 6x10cm format has very low distortion, even in the edges of the image. Images are clearly rectilinear. Using a 15X loupe, I can see fine details that suggest substantial cropping and enlargements won't be a problem either. The impact of the 6x10cm (circa 55+ x 92mm) images is equally great. I just wish I had a slide projector that could put these images up on a screen - a very large screen ;-).

The camera accepts Rolleiflex style neckstraps, along with having its own (n)everready case (big enough to hold the camera with the optional finder mounted). A cable release socket is on the shutter release. The resulting camera is also much smaller than its larger brethren, while still providing 100 degrees of coverage and the benefits of 120 rollfilm format. The seven shots per roll of 120 rollfilm is also a benefit compared to 6x12cm panoramics with lesser coverage.

If I had to describe the Veriwide 100, I would say it is physically similar to most lightweight but rugged 6x9cm viewfinder cameras, but has a 6x10cm format and an incredibly wide 100 degrees of coverage without vignetting. The camera features simple operation and ease of use too. The initial market was for press photographers, with some sample shots of the New York City skyline at night in the manual (Fritz Henle).

Photo thanks to Timothy Francisco
Plaubel Veriwide 100 Camera - Back View
Note slide up eye viewing point arm, top bubble level, finder view

The wire frame sight is easy to use. You just fold it up into position, and slide up the rear eye sight to a vertical position. You don't actually look through the rear eye sight. It is just there to ensure you position your eye at the proper height and centered position. Now you can look to either side and around the wire frame, seeing the 2 to 3 format image that will record on film. One advantage is that this setup is very fast in use, similar to a sportsfinder. The wire frame finder is also handy for letting you see if any subjects are about to move into your photograph from the top or edges (unlike bubble finders, which may block subjects beyond their angle of coverage).

There is a lever on the right side of the shoe mount which can be moved along a scale to adjust for parallax problems with closeup photos. The same adjustment works with the accessory 100 degree optical finder, designed especially for the veriwide 100 by E. Leitz of Wetzlar. This finder has a bright white frame outlining the picture area. You can elect to use a standard 35mm finder (also 2x3 or 24x36mm format) for 20mm (such as Leitz or russian rangefinder finders for their 20mm lenses). Some of these finders have accessory parallax corrections built-in, allowing them to swing downward to adjust for parallax with closer subjects. Obviously, you don't need both the built-in and the accessory viewfinder parallax corrections at the same time. I suggest using the accessory viewfinder parallax corrections if your viewfinder has them.

Personally, I find the accessory Leitz finder to be really handy for previsualizing the image, before removing and setting up the Veriwide 100 camera. Just pull it out of your shirt pocket, look through it, and pick the best vantage point to achieve the composition you desire. In fact, the viewfinder is so handy and small, that I suspect it may be pressed into service for use with my 18mm and 21mm ultrawide and very wide nikkors! Nifty!

The bottom of the camera has a standard 1/4" x 20 tripod socket (USA standard). The everyready case has a broader tripod mounting socket (3/8ths inch European) on the bottom, which screws into the 1/" x 20 tpi tripod socket in the camera's base. You can also use the beveled disk mounting of the Rolleifix or Zip-Grip style quick attach and remove mounting disks. This system is an early version of today's quick release tripod plates.

Actual use is very simple. Set desired shutter speed and f/stop based on the speed of the film loaded and handheld light meter reading. Keep in mind the great depth of field of the 47mm ultrawide lens. With the click stop set at 20 feet, everything will be in focus from infinity to 10 feet, even with the lens wide open (at f/8). At the 6 foot click stop, everything from infinity to 3 feet will be in focus (at f/22). At f/32, set the depth of field markers against infinity, and everything from infinity to minimum focusing distance of 2 1/2 feet will be in focus. As you can see, guess focusing by zones is pretty easy with such an ultrawide lens.

The film is advanced and loaded in the right side, advancing by turning the left side film winding crank clockwide. The film is advanced until the prominent arrows on the film channel match up with the red arrow on the 120 rollfilm. The back closes with a click, then advance film with the film wind knob until a "1" shows in the top of camera film counter. Set camera controls (focus, f/stop, shutter speed) to match film speed and subject zone focus distances desired.

The film advance is NOT coupled to the shutter, so you have to reach under the lens and gently push the shutter cocking arm clockwise to cock the shutter (about 75 degrees throw). Now trip the shutter by gently pressing on the shutter release on top of the camera.

Advance film and shoot until all seven (7) exposures have been made. The film can now be advanced until it is on the takeup spool, the camera back opened, and the film removed.

Front View of Brooks XL Veriwide (with Mamiya back)
Photo Courtesy of Vaughn Smith Camera - Visit Website

Other Models

According to McKeown's camera guide (see posting below), there were also at least two versions of the Brooks Veriwide cameras using interchangeable backs. One had the same f/8 47mm super angulon as the original Plaubel Veriwide 100. The second variant had the later f/5.6 47mm super-angulon lens. This lens is evidently different from an even later (current) f/5.6 47mm XL super angulon lens, with extended coverage. Naturally, the faster f/5.6 47mm super angulon lens variant was also physically larger than the compact f/8 lens on the Plaubel Veriwide 100 model.

Ralph Fuerbringer ([email protected]) custom modifies Brooks (XL) veriwide models to use alternative lenses, using the Mamiya backs. The result can be a shift lens camera, with 6x12cm format, and interchangeable backs. See Meehan's Panoramic Photography for a photo of this unique custom extreme wide angle medium format rollfilm camera. These custom cameras can use a number of apo-grandagon lenses, with the 45mm (cf. 47mm super angulon) being recommended. This amazing 45mm apo-grandagon lens is available from Mr. Fuerbringer at a discount price ($1,050) versus the $1,500+US price of the same optic at B&H Video's discounter prices.

Back View of Brooks XL Veriwide (with Mamiya back)
Photo Courtesy of Vaughn Smith Camera - Visit Website

Comparisons

The lens coverage calculations (above the postings below) let us compare the 47mm super angulon's coverage against 6x6cm lenses. The 47mm super angulon covers 88+ degrees horizontally, which is wider than a 30mm lens on 6x6cm. But 30mm lenses on 6x6cm such as the Arsat 30mm and Zeiss 30mm are fisheyes, rather than rectilinear optics like the 47mm super angulon!

My Kowa 35mm lens is one of the widest rectilinear lenses ever made for 6x6cm medium format SLRs, but even its 97 degrees of diagonal coverage is still less than the 47mm super angulon. Since much of the vertical coverage in the square format is cropped in making rectangular prints, the useful coverage of the 47mm super angulon when making rectangular prints is even greater when compared to a cropped 6x6cm (or equivalent 6x4.5cm) format.

The Fuji G617 105mm f/8 lens covers 24mm equivalent on 35mm versus 18mm equivalent for the 47mm f/8 super angulon on the Veriwide 100. So while the Fuji has the benefits of 6x17cm panoramic format, the 47mm super angulon on the Veriwide 100 will get more angular coverage on film. You can also get closer to the subject, a plus in some limited movement situations (church interiors..).

The 6x17cm format is a 2.83 to 1 ratio. Cropping the 6x10cm Veriwide 100 image by 42% to 3.5cm x 10cm also yields a 2.83:1 ratio. The 47mm lens on the Veriwide 100 takes in 67 degrees vertically. Cropping 42% of that 67 degrees out to make a 2.83:1 ratio (as with 6x17cm) yields 39 degrees of vertical coverage. Compare this coverage with the Fuji G617's vertical coverage of less than 30 degrees. Even after we crop the Plaubel Veriwide 100 6x10cm image to match the 2.83:1 long panoramic ratio of the G617, it still covers 9+ degrees (or 25%) more vertically and over 15 degrees (or 20%+) more horizontally [see calculations and links below above postings].

In other words, if you crop the Veriwide 100's negative to yield the same ratio long pan format as the 6x17cm Fuji G617 cameras (2.83 to 1), the Veriwide 100 negative still yields a wider angle of coverage by over 20% both vertically and horizontally! True, you have to enlarge the horizontal axis by 70% (and crop the vertical one by 42%, not the quality limiting factor). Most panoramic prints are highly limited by the available book or magazine format or print paper sizes available. If you are limited to standard 20x30 inch paper, the 6x17cm image needs about 4X enlargement versus 8X for the 6x10cm Veriwide one. But an 8X enlargement on medium format is rather conservative, even 16X is readily attainable (as with a 40x60 inch paper or five foot horizontal enlargement).

What I am suggesting is that there is an unexpected potential here. Thanks to the very wide angle of coverage of the Veriwide 100's 47mm super angulon lens, I can crop out an image that will be identical to that of the G617 with 105mm lens. Moreover, I can create an even wider panoramic shot, with up to 20 degrees or more coverage horizontally (or vertically), than the G617 can record with the standard 105mm lens. Even if we put a 90mm lens on the 6x17cm camera, the 47mm super angulon still has more coverage. If you could find a 75mm lens that could cover the 6x17 format, you would only beat the Veriwide 100's horizontal coverage by a mere 3.5 degrees. Surprise!

The Plaubel Veriwide 100 does not have shifts, as some panoramic cameras do. But as I have suggested above, you can crop from the top of the 6x10cm image and get a similar lens shift effect (see Benefits of Square Composition).

Compared to the 6x17cm G617's 29+ degrees of vertical coverage with the 105mm lens, the 47mm super angulon on the Veriwide offers 61+ degrees of vertical coverage. Split that extra coverage on the top and the bottom, and the Veriwide image has the equivalent of 15+ degrees "extra" coverage at the top on film. Recall that this 15+ degrees is over half the total vertical angle covered by the G617 (29+ degrees). So it would take a shift equal to one half the film width (or circa 56mm/2 = 23mm) to equal the Veriwide's image coverage.

The shift on most 6x17cm panoramics is typically only 15mm or so. Here again, the Plaubel Veriwide 100 image will cover more than even the 6x17cm with full +15mm shift. You simply have to select where you will crop to get this "built-in" shifting factor.

Similarly, the 6x12cm panoramic cameras are only slightly longer than the Plaubel Veriwide 100's 6x10cm format. So only a small enlargement factor is needed to offset the larger 6x12cm panoramic image size. Again, the 47mm Super Angulon on the Veriwide covers a much larger angle, so you can crop out a similar panoramic composition. The extra vertical lens coverage is equal to a very large shift that is larger than the shifts on the usual 6x12cm cameras (if any - e.g., +8mm fixed shift built into the Linhof 612).

Only a handful of custom panoramic cameras (like the Alpa 12 shift/wide angle) offer larger shifts and a wider lens than the Veriwide 100 - at a justifiably high price. A few non-shift lens 6x12cm ultrawide cameras using 35mm or 45mm APO-Grandagon lenses such as the Horseman SW612 can substantially exceed the Plaubel Veriwide 100 coverage, again at 5 to 10+ times the cost.

How does the Veriwide compare to the Hasselblad/Fuji Xpan with 30mm lens? The Xpan film is 24mm by 65mm in the panoramic format (or 24x36mm in 35mm format). With the 30mm lens, the coverage is 94.5 degrees horizontally (and 44 degrees vertically and 98 degrees diagonally). This horizontal coverage is similar to a 17mm ultrawide on 35mm SLRs. The diagonal coverage is nearly identical to the Veriwide's 47mm on the large film format (just under 98 degrees diagonally). So the Hasselblad/Fuji XPAN will cover just slightly more horizontally than the Veriwide 100. But the limited film area and 24mm film width limits the degree of enlargement you can get compared to the Veriwide's medium format 6x10cm area.

The Fuji rangefinder series is reasonably close in physical size and formats to the Plaubel Veriwide 100 (a viewfinder/zone focus setup), but very different in coverage. The GW670 and GW690 both use 90mm lenses, yielding roughly the equivalent of 45mm (GW670 on 6x7cm) and 38mm (GW690 on 6x9cm) respectively on a 35mm SLR. Even the wide angle GSW690 version has a 65mm lens that is roughly equivalent to a 28mm on a 35mm SLR (thanks to Roger - [email protected] for this MFD tip!). Many of us regard 45mm and 38mm as normal lenses, and 28mm is the beginning of a wide angle lens range. If your standard wide angle lenses are 24mm and 20mm Nikkors on 35mm, you can easily crop down the 6x10cm image from a Veriwide 100 to get these coverage effects. But you can't widen up the Fuji rangefinders coverage, leaving you stuck with a mere 28mm equivalent coverage on 6x9cm.

If you are a medium format very wide angle fan(atic), the Plaubel Veriwide 100 makes an excellent choice for the budget and weight conscious traveling photographer.

Conclusions

In short, the Veriwide 100 makes it more likely you will carry the camera with you, including in situations where weight is critical (travel..). Many of us have great collections of cameras and lenses, but when we actually venture forth to take photos, most get left behind. Chances are much greater that the Veriwide 100 will get taken along, thanks to its low weight and convenient and easily packed size. This camera also replaces a pricey ultrawide 100 degree coverage angle medium format camera lens, one that isn't available on most SLR/RF lines at any price.

While we have been emphasizing the panoramic aspects of the Plaubel Veriwide 100's features, regular 2x3 format full frame images are also easily made too. The camera can be used in limited spaces (interiors..) thanks to its ultrawide lens optics. Compared to the Fuji medium format rangefinders, only the GSW690 series has moderate wide angle coverage equivalent to a 28mm lens on a 35mm SLR. If your favorite wide angle lenses are 18mm, 20mm, or 24mm, even this wide angle Fuji rangefinder isn't wide enough to be a competitor to the Plaubel Veriwide 100.

In short, the Plaubel Veriwide 100 is a unique camera in many ways - compact size and light weight, 6x10cm format, 100 degree coverage angle, ease of use, depth of field, and panoramic cropping capabilities. Unfortunately, they just don't make them like they used too anymore. So now you can understand why the prices for such a unique camera are so high, even after 40 years of use!

Veriwide 100 Photos Courtesy of John ("topogon" on Ebay) and Steve Ryan - Thanks!
Note differences between 47mm f/8 lensed models, such as single bubble level at top etc.

Services and Resources

Custom printing from Veriwide 100 negatives (Custom Panoramic Labs)

Panoramic Photography Page links Veriwide 100 with Globus Wide and Gowland Wide cameras as a "extra wide angle camera".

Sample photos/book using a veriwide 100 among other cameras..

Brooks Veriwide 100 (47mm f/8 super angulon w/o finder) for $825 (E+) at Central Camera

47mm f/8 Super Angulon LH compur #00 with helicoid, for 6x9cm - [9.5] - $650 US

Leica 21mm bright line finder ($275 US from Don Chatterton..)

Veriwide finder on Ebay ($132 with 2 days to go!)

Panoramic Camera Time Line (says 1960 date, but gets Ploubel instead of Ploubel and 6x9cm instead of 2 1/4" x 3 1/2" etc..)

Coverage Angle Notes:

From Rui Salgueiro's field-of-view calculator

For the Veriwide 100 6x10cm *47mm case:

Width = 56 mm, Length = 92 mm, Diagonal = 107.703 mm

  f	  Hor       Vert      Diag       H/V  
 35.0	105.4672   77.3196  113.9576    1.3640
*47.0	 88.7679   61.5683   97.7732    1.4418
 65.0	 70.5735   46.6098   79.2826    1.5141
 75.0	 63.0444   40.9446   71.3584    1.5397
 90.0	 54.1442   34.5630   61.7885    1.5665

For the Fuji 6x17cm 105mm* lens (ratio 2.83:1) [film gate 55x156mm]:

Width = 55 mm, Length = 156 mm, Diagonal = 165.412 mm

  f	  Hor       Vert      Diag       H/V  
 35.0	131.6667   76.3145  134.1251    1.7253
 47.0	117.8567   60.6644  120.7827    1.9428
 65.0	100.3889   45.8642  103.6711    2.1888
 75.0	 92.2466   40.2726   95.5947    2.2906
 90.0	 81.8288   33.9816   85.1631    2.4080
105.0*	 73.2141   29.3528   76.4532    2.4943

And here are 6x6cm medium format wide angles:

Width = 56 mm, Length = 56 mm, Diagonal = 79.196 mm

  f	  Hor       Vert      Diag       H/V  
 19.0	111.6806  111.6806  128.7345    1.0000
 25.0	 96.4794   96.4794  115.4678    1.0000
 30.0	 86.0501   86.0501  105.7038    1.0000
 35.0	 77.3196   77.3196   97.0541    1.0000
 38.0	 72.7687   72.7687   92.3595    1.0000
 40.0	 69.9840   69.9840   89.4212    1.0000
 50.0	 58.4977   58.4977   76.7556    1.0000

And for 35mm SLR lenses to compare:

Width = 24 mm, Length = 36 mm, Diagonal = 43.2666 mm

  f	  Hor       Vert      Diag       H/V  
 14.0	104.2500   81.2026  114.1821    1.2838
 18.0	 90.0000   67.3801  100.4757    1.3357 
 20.0	 83.9744   61.9275   94.4932    1.3560
 24.0	 73.7398   53.1301   84.0622    1.3879
 28.0	 65.4705   46.3972   75.3806    1.4111
 35.0	 54.4322   37.8493   63.4400    1.4381
 50.0	 39.5978   26.9915   46.7930    1.4670

Notes:

From Modern Photography of August, 1959, p. 76, Modern Tests:

The Brooks Plaubel Veriwide uses a 6 element Schneider Kreuznach 47mm f/8 super angulon going to f/32 with a synchro-compur shutter. Price was $249.50 (in 1959); converting for inflation, that's about $1,500 in 1998 dollarettes. The camera takes 7 photos of 2 1/4" x 3 1/2" encompassing 100 degrees, or roughly the equivalent of a 35mm SLR with a 21mm lens yielding 92 degrees. The Compur shutter is by F. Deckel, and Frank Rizzatti of Burleigh Brooks did the main design. There is a Leitz finder ($34.50) and the body was by Plaubel of Germany. At six feet and f/16, 3 1/2 ft to 20 ft is in focus. At 20 ft and f/16, 6 ft to infinity is in focus.

We found the superangulon lens gives remarkable sharpness wide open at f/8 right down to f/32. However, f/16 proved to produced optimal results.

From our own Homebrew Camera pages...

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Which stereo camera is best to convert to 35x100 or so panoramic?

Thansk for all the suggestions.

I think I will do better to keep running 35mm film through my Brooks Plaubel Veriwide with 47mm S-Angulon: I already get 24x90mm exposures. I'll make a special mask to go inside the camera, and I'll just have to rewind the film in the dark to get it back into the 35mm cassette. I'll get 7 exp. on 24-exp. roll, without wasting too much film.

Or, I can go out and buy the new X-pan, but darn, only 65mm wide! That kinda bugs me! I really wish someone makes something wider than that.

How about the new Rodenstock Grandagon 35mm lens with focusing tube on a 35mm body, and see how wide you can get? Wow, wouldn't that be something. Anybody done that?????

From Our Own Press Camera pages (the Veriwide 100 manual commends it for press use..)

From: Alec Jones [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format,rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Graflok, grafloc, graphloc, graphlok?
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999

Actually, the order is this: the lens [Schneider] is attached to a focusing ring [Schneider], which is attached to the body which contains Brooks' name [not otherwise labeled], which is attached to a back panel [made by, and labeled Graflex] which is the part that actually accepts the four lug accessory. Graflex seems to have made the parts which actually lock together [for instance the Polaroid back contains a Graflex panel which has the four lugs attached].

There is no difference in coverage between the Veriwide and the XL roll film backs. The negative sizes are the same! In fact, other than the built in levels of the Veriwide, the XLSW is functionally the same body as the Veriwide. The body of either camera is nothing but a spacer between the lens and the back. I've heard the Veriwide backs were made by Mamiya.

Any back which attaches to a 23 Graflok will work with either camera. I would suggest that only the lever Graflex roll film backs be used because Graflex changed the design to include two rollers at the edge of the film plane for film flattening which the original, knob wind backs did not have. The two rollers definately make a positive difference.

Marv Soloff wrote:

> Mrtest wrote:
>
>> Marv Soloff  wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > The Graflex backs with the four pins (one at each corner) are
>> > specifically made
>> > for the XL series of Graflex cameras.  Won't fit any other
>> Graflex.
>> > More info can be had at http://www.graflex.org.
>>
>> Thanks, Marv.  I spent hours at the site. Very good information, but 
>>
>> not enough on the XLSW, which I think is almost the same as the
>> Brooks Veriwide (and absolutely different from the original
>> Veriwide 100.)
>>
>> ...which brings me to another question - the XL back is not
>> 6x9, but closer to 6x8 (rather 5.8 by 8).  Is it common for
>> manufacturers
>> to fudge like this?
>>
>> And are there 6x12 backs available for the XL?
>
>
> Re the Brooks Veriwide:  McKeown (10th Edition, page 104) says ..
> "wide angle
> camera using the Schneider Super Angulon 47mm lens [ f8 or f5.6
> versions ] on a    
> thin camera body compatible with the Graflex XL system.." It is not
> clear from his
> description that the body is the same body as theGraflex XL.  It might
> be of some
> interest to compare the bodies side by side to be sure.
>
> As to the standard Graflex roll-film backs, they were made in 6 x 6, 6
> x 7 and 6 x 9 formats (plus the 70mm RH-50 at  6 x 7).  McKeown lists
> only the 6 x 7 RH-10,
> the 6 x 7 RH-20 and the 6 x 7 RH-50 as for the XL series.  I would
> imaging,
> given that the Brooks Veriwide had a much different negative size,
> that neither the
> body nor the roll-film backs were made by Graflex.  A number of other
> manufacturers licensed the Graflex style roll-film back:  Horseman,
> Toyo and Cambo to name a few, so you are on your own as far as film
> backs other than the one that   
> came with the Veriwide.
>
> Glad you liked the Graflex site.  If you do solve the back mystery,
> please post it
> to the site.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marv

Related Postings:

it all depends on what you want to shoot. for example swing cameras like noblex do great on scenery including buildings at some distance. at closer distances buildings in a straight line have to be rearranged in a semi-circle to come out as you see them. I found that too time consuming fifty years ago. so i sold the best ever of this type the Panox to cinerama. it had speeds slow enough a model could move in sync w/lens : look sharp entering bank then blur to the teller window.

I now modify brooks xl veriwides w/apo-grandagons, 35,45,55mm on 6x12. optional shift subdues the foreground when you're stuck there. the 45mm on 6x12 is most versatile: vertical coverage of a 21mm on 35 format w/ 1/3 more on the horizontal the 35 apo on 612 has been figured out to be the equivalent of an 11.5 shift lens on 35 format where 24 is the widest , ican supply the 45 in factory focusing mt for $1050 ,about 500 less than b&h if you're handy at putting stuff together. if you can can get by with 35mm format the Fujiblad ressurects paramounts 3to1 vistavision motion picture high fidelity of fifty years ago knocked out by 70mm, 120 equivalent.

-- rof

....

From Leica Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999
From: Bernard [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: Plaubel Makina 67W

.....

> I know what you mean. Actually, if you were willing to drop to a 6x4.5
> format, the Fuji 645W is available for a lot less money and has a
> similarly excellent lens. 45mm lens. It's not a folder but it's only
> barely thicker than the standare 645 folder is when folded up. Last
> one I saw at a swap meet was asking price around $550/650 in mint
> shape. I've often though that would be a great "poor man's"
> SuperWide...

I don't have a problem with the 645 format, since I like to compose in-camera (the limits of the viewfinder are like an artistic tool to me), and my 6x6 negs get cropped to something rectangular anyway. For MF superwide I have a customized camera, which is essentially is a 47mm Schneider built onto a 6x9 Horseman back. This is amazingly compact. But then come the folder cameras into my life, and I feel I'm part of a magician's show: 'click', and the camera is.............. gone.

I'll keep my eyes open for that Fuji, though.

Bernard.

From Medium Format Digest:
Affordable Wide Angle?

I suggest you check out the wide-angle cameras of 1960s-70s vintage, especially the Brooks-Plauble Veriwide 100 and ithe later LARGER Brooks Veriwide (with Mamiya back). I have one of the earlier Veriwide 100s, cost is about your budget price with 21mm Leica finder. It produces 56x91mm negatives using a 47mm f8 Super Angulon. This is equivalent to an 18.5mm lens in 35mm camera terms. It is coat pocketable, hand holdable, and the negative is so large that I can just crop out the bottom on vertical shots. Its a lovely little gem that allows city architectural shots from the hip.

-- William F. Robinson, February 11, 1998

You might look for something with a 47mm Super Angulon and a roll film back (especially 6x9), whether a view camera, a tech, a modified press, a dedicated WA (like the Calumets), or other odd-balls and dedicated units made along the way. The adjustments of such a camera also help to ameliorate the negative effects of wide angle, such as trees leaning into or out of the scene. I have shot extensively with the 50 on the RB, and after that the 55 on the C330 really doesn't seem like enough. So I really know what you mean. Good luck and let me know what works, Mark.

-- Mark Hubbard, February 9, 1998

Thanks for all the suggestions. I was amazed at the number of emails I got with opinions and stories of what worked for you -- even an offer to sell a Brooks Veriwide if I was interested.

My local used camera store suggested that they could find a clean RB67 Pro and a non-C 50 lens in my price range; I think I'll save a little more money and try for an RB67 with a 50 C lens. Although sometimes that Brooks Veriwide looks awfully appealing too......

Decisions, decisions. Again, many thanks to all for your help.

-- Matt Orth, March 1, 1998

From Medium Format Digest:

Super Angulon 47mm thread

Does anybody know if a Schneider 47mm Super Angulon lens will work on a 2x3 Crown Graphic camera? The lens is designed to cover 2 1/2 x 3 1/2 in format and I can't imagine what camera this lens was designed for. If so does the camera door close without smashing the lens? Has anybody used this lens on a medium format system? If so on which camera? Any feedback here is certainly appreciated.

Regards, John Dorio

-- John Dorio, July 17, 1998

The 47mm Super Angulon lens was used on the Brooks Veriwide and the Plaubel Veriwide 100 cameras.And i am sure on others to.

-- Greg Vannasse, July 21, 1998

An update -- I just got a f/8 47mm SA; it fits perfectly on a Century Graphics (same size as 2x3 Crown), the door closes, and the regular lensboard works fine. Of course, neither the sports finder nor the optical viewfinder works (altho the latter with the wide angle extension comes close).

-- John Lehman, August 12, 1998

From Medium Format Digest:

Rollei SL66 Thread..

I have owned (not at once) perhaps 40 cameras in my photographic life and only one of them was purchased new and it's the one i liked the least, an ME Super in 1980 when i was but a sprout and new no better.

I lost money on only one and it was an old Brooks veriwide (5.6) that leaked light like a sieve. If you plan on buying used equipment you need to do your homework. Learn all that you can about what type (make, model, vintage) of camera suits your needs, then research the used market for price range and wait for the right deal to show up. Slow but steady wins the race.

...

-- tom meyer, September 2, 1998

From Ebay Sale

$1,000 US (March 25, 2000)

Description:

BROOKS VERIWIDE 100 MADE IN 1960.THIS CAMERA IS IN GOOD SHAPE I WOULD RATE FROM 1-10, 8+.THE SCHNEIDER SUPER-ANGULON F/8/47 MM IS PERFECT VERY SHARP AND CLEAR. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURES THE FINDER GLASS IS CRACKED BUT DOES NOT EFFECT THE VEIWING AT ALL. THIS IS A GREAT PANORAMIC CAMERA WITH 100 DEGREES OF VIEW. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS EMAIL ME AT [email protected].

Plaubel Veriwide 100 Front View
Photo courtesy of Harry Patterson

Veriwide 100

$659.99 US sold on April 2, 2000 Congrats!

Description:

Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide 100 camera with Schneider-Kreuznach 1:8/47 Super Angulon lens in Syncro-Compur shutter. Good condition cosmetically, I would rate it about a 7, all the leatherette covering is intact, slight corrosion to some metal parts. Lens is equipped with a Vivitar skylight filter so the optics are in mint condition, and the shutter speeds all sound good. Shutter has X-sync and shutter speeds from B to 1/500. Flip up rear sight has an adjustable lever for setting distances.

On Mar-26-00 at 13:19:39 PST, seller added the following information:

PS - Camera is nicer than it appears in the photo!

Brooks XL veriwide

Sold April 4, 2000 for $750 US

Description:
Brooks-Veriwide Camera w/47mm f8 Lens (see photos above in Other Models section)

This Ultra Wide Camera comes with a 47mm f8 Super-Angulon lens, optical viewfinder and a 6x9 roll back. This outfit is in 8 out of 10 cosmetically. Shutter and glass are perfect. 90 day warranty.

From Medium Format Digest: Date: Wed, 2 Jun 93
Subject: Wide-angle medium-format options

Brian Segal wrote in Vol.2 no. 31 from Canada:

> Sure...until last week I used my Hasselblad SWC/M 38mm quite a bit for
> landscapes and a lot for interiors. That was before I acquired the Sinar
> Handy (yes, folks, I got it), which requires a trade of the SWC/M in order
> to finance the deal.
>
> Anyhow, I have done some tests with the Handy on both b&w and color neg
> film, and am happy to report that it is FABULOUS! The 47mm Super-Angulon
> gives me essentially the same coverage on 6x7 as the SWC/M gives on 6x6,
> [ ...]

I called Sinar Bron in New Jersey again only to find that they do not distribute Sinar Handy in the U.S. any more. I guess that most professionals are just using 45 fields or monorails for the professional landscape work. And the manufacturers do not find markets for handy 69cm wide-angle cameras any more. So the remaining options for me as an amateur are

Less than $1000:

1. New/used Fuji GSW 690 II or III with its fixed 65mm/f5.6 (6 element, not wide enough)

2. Mamiya Press with a used 50mm/f6.3 (bulky. No idea how good the lens is) How old is this lens? B&H sells only 75mm/f6.3 as new.

3. Used Graflex XLRF with 58mm/f5.6 Gradagon (maybe not multi-coated) How old is this lens?

4. Used Graflex XLSW with 47mm unknown lens. ( Hard to find.)

$1000-$2000

5. Used Linhof Baby Technica IV with 65mm Angulon in a recessed lens-board (hard to find) Again not wide enough. And I do not know whether it is multicoated.

6. Used Plaubel Makina 67W with its fixed Nikkor 55/f4.5 (good lens. Hard to find)

7. New Cambo Wide45 with 47 mm/f5.6 Super Angulon (kind'a expensive for me)

8. Used Sinar Handy 45 with 47mm/f5.6 Super Angulon. Hard to find. Kind'a expensive.

Over $2000! I can't afford one.

9. Horseman VH, VHR

10. Arca Swiss 69?

11. Plaubel Pro 69 Shift with 47 mm/f5.6 Super Angulon.

12. Finally a bulky wide-angle retrofocus lens for a medium-format SLR. Is the lens quality really inferior to the symmetrically-designed lens?

I am leaning toward Option 3 (or 4 if I can find one) under the condition that the lens is of modern design and multicoated.

Any comment? Any related information? What is

Thanks.

Hugh

From: "John Stafford" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Four Formats
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000

Robert Monaghan [email protected] wrote

> [snip good article] . I've been
> very taken by a lightweight (2 lb) 6x10cm panoramic camera with 47mm  super
> angulon lens (pricey but incredible contrasty sharp images) called a
> veriwide - see http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/veriwide.html - Nifty! ;-)

Nice article. I owned that model Veriwide years ago, and now have the Brooks Veriwide (47mm F5.6). A note to others - a Brooks Veriwide is almost altogether different from the Plaubel Veriwide. For one, the Brooks is not really 6x9, but more like 6x8, which was a disappointment to me. Gads, they made the darned camera body and film transport large enough, but didn't carry though to true 6x9!

[Ed. note: Thanks to John Stafford for sharing this direct comparison of his two Veriwide negative measurements, confirming change in format sizes!]
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000
From: johnstafford [email protected]
To: Robert Monaghan [email protected]
Subject: FINALLY - Veriwide (actual format size)

While packing to move, I came across some of my old favorite negatives from the Veriwide I used in the early Seventies, and as promised, I measured the actual negative size.

My *Original Veriwide: 57mm X 90mm
My current Brooks Veriwide negative size is: 56mm X 80mm

So, by my experience the old Veriwide is nominally a 6x10 if we accept the convention of Brooks who calls their Veriwide a 6x9. (In reality, both are short 1cm on the horizontal.)

Perhaps yours is yet another variant? Real 6x10?

*Original Veriwide - the one I refer to above is the one-unit body that came with the Leitz-made 'Veriwide' finder, 47mm SA F8, one bubble-level in top. (I have no clue when the other so-called Plaubel versions got all those extra levels.) I really wish I had that camera back...and what a trip finding those old negatives. It's almost like looking at another person's work.

Take care, Bob

jjs

...

[Ed. note: Mr. Ralph Fuerbringer is an expert on these Veriwide cameras, offering a custom Vistashift 612 ultrawide panoramic camera with shifts based on these cameras...]
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000
From: ralph fuerbringer [email protected]
To: Robert Monaghan [email protected]
Subject: plaubel 100

Some notes on your plaubel. The f8 47 covers just 6x10, the current 5.6 just the 612. The original 5.6 was smaller, flatter front, lanthanum glass and covered 6x11. The current version w/o the lanthanum glass the Schott works used to supply is optically inferior but does cover the 6x12, though with considerable barrel distortion at the edges (I have bent flagpoles at the famous radio city skating rink). While you are happy with your f8 lens in 1960 I was looking for something closer to the micro-contrast of the biogon.

And I needed a faster f-stop as the color neg I used a lot was c. 50. The only way to get high speeds was to process high speed ektachrome as a neg and you had no mask.

I went to professional camera the citadel of camera repair where the 3 gurus all said they didn't think the 5.6 could be fitted. Predicted I would lose the lens and camera. The 5.6 was out further than the f8 and the back element was bigger than the helical. It would have to become part of the focusing mt. The cost was to be $250 or about $1500 in 2000 loot.

I mentioned it to a friend who knew the chief of the Hasselblad repair department. He offered to do the job at home at that price with the assurance that if it didn't work lens and camera would be ok. A significant number of plaubels were so upgraded. The downside came later as these 5.6 cameras invariably got screwed up when the average plumber adjusted shutter, etc..

The original had only a bubble on the top. I wrote suggesting 3 levels would allow perfect vertical as well as ceiling or straight down shots. Ordinarily the germans take no suggestions but they or frank rizzotti did and called the model the 100L.

They sent me 3 levels and screws. The 5.6 was out further than the f8. As a failsafe camera double exposures were originally not possible. Hackers however were soon at work with rube goldberg levers in the top, often messing up normal operation. For those who needed such a feature I had my mechanic install a cable release in the shutter. This was independent of the wind and the double exposure mechanism.

One of these days I'll shoot and send you a shot of the plaubel next to a canon a2 with a 20mm-35 zoom, a larger camera with 1/ 5 the image area of the 610.

Possibly the plaubel's greatest day came 30 years ago in Washington DC. A building was to be demolished and a friend of mine was to shoot the demolition from a cherrypicker with a his assistant. They had 4 bronicas with them. As they knew they would only get at most six shots off during the explosion, they decided to make sure the cameras were working ok. All 5 jammed.

I had loaned my 5.6 plaubel to my friend to take some shots around town. Though the veriwide covered several times the required area they were able to enlarge sections so easily that nobody ever knew the story. He was able to get off three shots with the veriwide during the demolition itself. They printed one the entire 6x10 w/all the surroundings. That was a bonus and the hit of the job. The client had a 40 ft mural made from it.

Viva veriwide!

ralph

Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 47mm Super Angulon

"Robert Durn" [email protected] wrote:

> f5.6 Sorry!

Okay. Well, there are a couple different F5.6 47mm Super Angulons that I know of, and one is an early model. I'm not trying to cast aspersions on this lens or Schneider, but I am not confident that the earlier Super Angulons are all up to par. I have an early F5.6 SA that came on a Brooks Veriwide, and I really think it's a bit of a stretch to call it an F5.6. Perhaps therein lies the problem. It's not a true F5.6?

Oh, it is a good lens. I even built a 4x5 to use the 47mm to create 90x120 images. But for most MF work, I've gone back to the Hasselblad SWC.

[Ed. note: check date 1/1/2001, for potential buyers a New Year's Bargain!]
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001
From: ralph fuerbringer [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: liquidating suberb rectilinear panoramas

anyone interested in a graflex-xl superwide or a brooks veriwide? with 6x9 back and 47mm lens these cameras equal the panorama coverage of the 90mm on fuji, linhof 617. with the option to selecting a 3 to 1 format from double the vertical coverage (equivalent of a rising front). for years i've collected these versatile cameras, originally to add 6x12 backs for1/2 again as much horizontal as those 617's. When the 35 to 55mm apo-grandagons arrived I added shifts to exploit their 612 coverage (full 45 as well w/ 55mm). I am liquidating overstock of original equipment. it is obvious w/o tweaking these cameras shoot impressive panoramas with their lanthanam glass ( no longer available). with color neg and digital overtaking transparencies in many applications these compact shooters offer potential advantage over the cumbersome 617: size, price and backs including polaroid interchangeable with groundglass at any time.

each camera includes a graflok back frame with choice of 67 or 69 rollfilm back. they accept polaroid back or groundglass in same film plane(both available).

prices and specs:

graflex xl superwide w/47mm f8 super angulon,frame finder $700. w/1" spacer(available)this camera accepts all graflex xl lenses inc 58mm grandagon, 80 heligon and planar, 100 tessar& planar, 150 sonnar,etc in same focusing mount in same plane.

brooks veriwide w/47mm f8 super angulon,optical finder,levels,$950 , $1300 with new mc 47mmf5.6 super angulon or $1850 with new 45 apo-grandagon. the f5.6 47 will cover 612 back (available), the 45apo 612 w/shift.

lenses alone are 1/2 the price of a complete camera:$350 for47mmf8, $650 47f5.6mc new,45mmf4.5 apo-grandagon $925 also new & way below b&h.

in addition to the above i'm offering the following lenses:
210mm sinar angulon f6.8 in compound-x shutter; 24" goerz red dot artar in ilex-5 $800;
goerz wide angle formula computars: 150mmf9 $500, 210mmf9 $700.

for questions or more info about the cameras or possible tweaking, please contact me off list : [email protected] or phone 212-629-4813 ( new york). ralph

[Ed. note: possible ultawide for 1/3rd the price of a veriwide?...]
From Leica Mailing List:
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001
From: Jem Kime [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: OT MF RF

Cheap and portable ways into 6x9 were what I sought too.

I found a Voigtlander Bessa, then a Bessa II, both with cracking (good, not ruined!) lenses and both for less than 25 UKP each. YMMV ;-)

Then for the w/a bit I discovered a British camera called the Envoy Wide Angle, very compact, with a 64mm F6.8 (!!!) Taylor Hobson lens and a wire frame finder. Generally available under 100 UKP, sometimes much less.

Excellent quality - for the price.

Jem

[Ed. note: Thanks to Bert McClure for supplying these observations and tips!!!]
Date: 22 Mar 2001
From: Bert MC-CLURE [email protected]
To: rmonagha [email protected] Cc: rof [email protected]
Subject: 6x12 on Brooks

Information above on the Brooks is not entirely exact. The original Brooks had a film release cable mounted on the right hand side of the body (mine still does). You can clearly see the bracket on the camera front. Tripping shutter doesn't have to involve groping around under the lens.

This page didn't exist when I became interested in Brooks about 10-12 years ago. After a bit of muddling along with my first Brooks in its standard format, I encountered Ralph FUERBRINGER (mentioned above) who was a great help in setting me off in the right direction. In my experience, ultra-wide panoramics are Ralph's specialty - his assistance is invaluable, his products are just what you need and no more.

Ralph has been a great help in solving various problems as my vision gradually widened. I went from a 21mm Contarex biogon mounted on a Minolta CLE (and now a M6) to a Brooks f8/47mm - the coverage of the two is virtually the same with only the format changing. Then came a f5,6/47mm conversion to the Brooks (really simple) and a 6x12mm back for same, (with a Silvestri thrown in for good measure at one point). I also have an excellent, drop-dead sharp f8/47mm on a tatty Plaubel 100; the shutter was just overhauled - a real pleasure to use.

First the Brooks

For those who feel frustrated in knowing that there is lots of light available inside their BROOKS which is not falling on a film plane, you can add a graflex plate to a horseman 6x12 back; your eye will now be pretty far back from the viewer and you can guess the price. For the rest of us, there is hope; a relatively simple solution does exist! After discussing the problem with Ralph and getting a standard Brooks "Mamiya" back from him, I had a machinist make me a new film transport plate which he opened to give me a double square negative : 56mm x 112mm. The job is delicate (involves cutting back the front support to allow the wider angle) but relatively straight forward. If you want one done let me know - I might be able to talk the guy into modifying another one. Ralph used to modify 545 polaroid backs for the Brooks. This is a cheap and fun solution; you have some rounding in the corners but the images are fantastic.

56mm x 120mm might be possible but certain metal sections around the edge of the support base would start to get real thin.

My fall off is not too dramatic with a 5,6/47, with a center filter it is virtually nil.

The only real drawback is that the film counter no longer corresponds to the opening size !

The easist solution consists of trying to estimate proper location of frames on the basis of counter-wheel positions; this is pure folly - I tried.

The second solution consists of placing a new counter wheel (white disk) over the existing one and marking the appropriate spot on the basis of frames marked on a sacrificial roll. This empirical system (which I currently use) works reasonably well but you have to stop the winder - there is no physical stop as with the existing winder.

The third solution consists of placing a bit larger counter wheel over the existing one (I can give you the approx. dia.) so that the counter stops will now work on a larger format. This appears to require opening a small window in the back and placing a small "light trap" protruberance over it ; this will allow the larger counter wheel to move outward with the increasing diameter of the film wind-on spool as film advances. Again, this is not open heart surgery but does require a lot of thought and simple, careful execution.

6x12cm on the 5,6/47mm Brooks is a very economical way to get stunning panoramics. Ralph's modified Brooks and simple shift system works splendidly and is highly cost effective. I currently have one of Ralph's 55mm grandagon set ups I use a lot on 4"x5" polaroid and film envelope exposures. The system is rustic, sturdy and your money is where it ought to be - in the lens (the rest is literature). I would like to have the 35mm Fuerbringer as well but cannot afford both, so if anyone is interested in the 55mm or in swapping a 35mm for a 55mm (about the same value) let me know.

The Plaubel Verywide 100

A fellow Plaubel owner and I have been talking about putting a 5,6/47 in the place of the 8/47 on the Verywide. We discussed the project with Ralph who assured us that at least a couple of his acquaintances had suceeded in getting this done. The job looks easier than it actually is. As my friend has two Verywides, he bought a 5,6/47 from Ralph and had one modified ; the operated one is currently in Post-op and should be out shooting this weekend. The modification is simple but very delicate - very, very delicate.

Miscellaneous

This same friend, last weekend, bought a one-off camera made for a press photographer which consists of a 5,6/47XL mounted on a 4x5 back. No frills, no nothing. Lens, ramp, 4x5 back all in at around 2 lbs (a lot of the weight must be glass!). The photograher used the camera as a point and shoot and cropped back to what he wanted. Hardly bothered to aim.

Just thought I'd add my bit.

bert mcclure
[email protected]

From Leica Mailing List;
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001
From: Peter Miller [email protected]
Subject: [Leica] Formats...was 6x9/6x7/6x4.5..

Vermont People, my first photo book, photographed between 1960 and 1998, was mostly shot with a 6x7 Pentax and 6x9 Plaubel Veriwide. I can recall about four Leica photos.

People of the Great Plains, photographed between 1993 and 1995, was a mix of 6x6 Mamiya rangefinder and 6x17 Fuji. The reason for the larger format was more detail in the faces and of course the panoramic was the only way to capture the expanse of the Plains. There were also about four Leica photos in the book. The M6 was usually fitted with a 21mm and I used it for grab shots. I sold the Mamiya after the project as I needed the money and I didn't really like the square format.

The First Time I Saw Paris photographs , taken in the mid-fifties, were taken with a Leica and a Rolleiflex. The book was published in 1998.

Looking through these books, which are all black and white, I found the photographs with the most intimacy and revelation were captured by the Leica. The camera is non-intrusive and so quick to use and you can take a close-range portrait and not scare the subject to death, as you do with the Pentax 6x7 or the Nikon F5 (just sold that camera. Too damned big, expensive and complicated.

I am now doing a book on Vermont Farm Women. I do one portrait with the 6x7 or 6x9 Plaubel. I do one panoramic with the 6x17. The rest are with the Leica. The photographs with the most emotion so far have been with the M6. Some of the 6x7 portraits are strong but they are more formal.

I have another project I call Robert Frost's Vermont. I read his poems and then go out and shoot them. So far all but one or two were shot with the Leica. I picked the Leica because it more often than not produces photographs that are personal and intimate. There's more poetry in that camera.

I would say the best photographs I take, as far as content and response, are with the Leica. I started with Leica, moved away, and now am moving back. Yet I have another project to do that mixes color and black and white. The color will be shot with 6x7 and 6x17. The portraits will be black and white and now I am wondering whether I will shoot the portraits with 35mm, for the intimate look, or a larger format, say the 5x7, for a formal response. The book is a perspective of Vermont land and the people who care for it. It is history and the larger format may be the best way to go.

If I had only one camera, it would be the Leica.

- --

Vermont People, People of the Great Plains, and The First Time I Saw Paris, books by Peter Miller, can be viewed at http://www.silverprintpress.com. Peter Miller's stock photography can be searched at http://www.yankeeimage.com.

Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001
From: Bert McCLURE <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Bringing Brooks' focus up to spec.

bob,

Thought others might face the same predicament as I have recently so I
am sending enclosed note.

It would have saved me a bit of anguish.

I don't have easy access to shims and already knew about the Brooks xl
method, though no on explained it to me 15 years ago when I did my first
one. I was gratified to find that the VW100 and the Vistashift don't
need shims either; however, I did do an anxious bit of creative
de-construction before understanding how each process worked. 

You've got a fine page.

regards
bert

[Ed. note: see disclaimer below]

Bringing the f8 and f5,6 47mm Brooks family up to Spec.

Adjusting infinity-focus to get best possible performance

by Bert McClure

If you change backs frequently or go through a bunch of old Brooks and similar cameras looking for the best one, you may be missing something - spot-on infinity focus. You should be aware that many of these cameras could profit from a bit of focus-adjustment - and that this is not rocket science. These are exceptional lenses in spite (because?) of their age and the results of a bit of adjustment often turn a camera from from acceptable to spectacular.

Using an inexpensive 30x microscope, I recently noticed that one Brooks camera gave remarkably better results than a couple of others - even though, at 10x, little difference was apparent. After checking results from several lenses in other, similar cameras, I found that several were close but not, indeed, spot-on.

So, about bringing them up to spec... this apparently forbidding operation is relatively easy to accomplish by persons with a bit of a mechanical bent and a lot of patience.

These adjustments also have the distinct advantage of not requiring the use of shims ! A commonly used, non-mechanical and more difficult way out.

First, check for sharpness
- this traditional technique for checking focus was given to me by good friend Ralph Fuerbringer -

You will need a fine-grained 6x9 ground-glass plate (gg) and a powerful pocket magnifier in the 10x to 30x range (available on the net for a reasonable price). Brooks xl and Plaubel models require a very slim screw driver (less than 1mm), while the more modern ramp for the Vistashift requires the smallest " allen (hexagonal) wrench ".

Set up camera with focus ring at a realtively close focus (3ft to 1,8m) so that the image of a magazine page with large and fine type is at exactly the distance indicated from the film plane, centered and very well lit. Set shutter speed at B, open aperture, cock and shoot using a blocked cable release so that shutter stays open! (For Brooks VW-100 do this with back closed and open after tripping, for instance).

Tape ground glass very carefully and precisely in the film passage trough - mat side closest to lens.

Now move the focus back and forth until the fine print becomes readable; do this several times to get the hang of it and check the reading. If the distance is the same as the camera film plane to object distance, don�t touch anything, you are in luck. " If it ain�t broke... "

If you are not sure, you�ve now got and idea of what the lens should deliver. So, now check infinity focus at 500 yds or so; you should quite clearly see fine details such as crane cables, antennae... on the gg.

Think you�ve found best focus before infinity or feel that you�re not quite there ?

Need to operate? Read on.

Brooks XL (Mamiya and Graflok XL backs)

This operation could be of special interest for those blessed with a f8/47mmBrooks xl wanting to move up to f5,6/47mm to gain a diaph, to get even better definition (!) or to open the back to a true 6x9, 6x10 or even 6x12. The focusing operation below is very straight forward.

For either model camera - f5,6 or f8/47mm mounted on a helical ramp - the type of lens doesn�t change operation. Even though the infinity focus distance for the two is not the same, the Brooks mount offers considerable adjustment, more than adequate for passing from one to the other lens, without shims.

1. Camera is on tripod, gg in place, focusing image with fine detail is in far distance - say the moon. If you are " long " - sharp focus before infinity - focus right down to your best point and note the position on the distance scale. Do this several times to be sure of point.
2. When satisfied, WITHOUT TOUCHING FOCUSING RING, take camera off tripod and put it on its back.
3. Very carefully, without turning the focusing ring, unloosen three tiny screws on the focusing ring and put them in a safe place at hand.
4. Very carefully, without turning the focusing ring, lift the lens and focusing ring straight up to just clear the internal aluminum-focusing-ring on the helicoidal ramp.
   ( Note : The external focusing ring rests on this internal ring; when you go too short, mount will block - resting instead on the helical-threaded tube. )
5. NOW, turn focusing ring on lens assembly to infinity and keep it in place while putting assembly back on the camera. This is delicate as you have to match lateral runners that keep the lens from turning with internal slots - keep assembly centered, absolutely vertical and proceed very slowly - without turning focusing ring. It often takes several tries, even with practice.
6. Most important step
   replace and tighten the three tiny screws in the following manner :
   As you put screws in place, delicately turn each screw until it just touches the internal focusing ring.
   Then go back and give each one a bit more of a turn - perhaps a quarter-turn. Contact should be firm but not hard.
   
   This requires a sense of feel you have to develop as degree of tightening is very important ; to be certain you�ve got it right don�t turn focus ring right away but put camera back on tripod, gg in place and check focus - you shoud be spot-on now. Then try moving focusing ring just a tad.

• if screws are too tight, the internal aluminum ring will seize on ramp and make focusing difficult; back-off screws completely and try again with less pressure in the final adjustment.
• If screws are too loose, ext. focusing ring will not contact internal ring and spin giving little or no focus adjustment at all. Put ring at infinity : if still in focus, tighten screws a just a bit more, test again. If you�ve lost focus, no problem : slack off screws, come back to inffinity, tighten screws and go back to step one.

This is not a major adjustment but does give some tweeking margin.

1. Put camera on tripod facing some distant object, back closed, cable release in place; use film advance to liberate shutter, place speed on B, cock and trip shutter, blocking cable release. Open back and tape gg in place. Open diaphragm - train camera (gg center) on some detailed object - construction crane, moon....
2. Put lens at closest focus - maximum extension.
3. Remove four miniscule screws located every 90� at the base of the lens assembly (don�t touch two over-under screws).
4. Now, turn lens completely past close-focus position - as if you wanted to get even closer. Barrel held by the four screws will also turn with focusing ring.
5. Holding barrel with the 4 screw-holes firmly in place, turn focusing ring back back until it just comes into contact with the infinity focus stop. Focus click-stops sometimes bring barrel back when turning back - you don�t want this.
6. Now, while carefully observing the gg with 20x to 30x pocket microscope, turn focusing ring past infinity - 4-screw barrel turns as well, thus progressively shortening infinity focus distance. You can do operations 4-6 several times if you are not certain.
7. When you�ve got maximum definition, stop turning and reintroduce the four screws and tighten. These do not play the same role as in the Brooks xl and should be firm but not over-tightened.

This system is nothing more than a revised version of the Brooks xl set-up ! While adjustment potential is of the order of a couple of mm, say, adjustment itself is a bit more problematic than the straightforward Brooks xl.

If your infinity focus is short - you can see better focus before infinity on the scale - you are in luck; go directly to step 7.

If infinity focus is long - you can�t get there - proceed as follows.

1. Put ramp at infinity focus; tape it there.
2. Unscrew rear lens element taking care not to lose any small washers or shims - they are there for a purpose. Put element out of harm�s way.
3. Now unscrew shutter assembly from the ramp. You may have to block retaining ring inside the helical mount to do so. Put front element and shutter to one side.
4. Now, carefully inspect upper focusing ring. You will see three very small allen-screws - about 0,8 or 0,9mm - located on the first bevel in from the outside (ie under the shutter when it is in place). These are the same three screws as for the Brooks xl mount but facing out - they got Back the three screws right out and put them to one side.
5. Untape focusing ring and carefully lift off vertically; when clear of mount turn to, say, 5m position and then put back in place without turning once in place. Replace three allen-screws and tighten to " firm but not hard " pressure. Make sure focusing ring turs without a problem.
6. Screw front element back in place taking care to get the whole thing correctly centered; then replace the rear element. Put the camera on the tripod with the gg in place.
7. With the lens extended a bit, bring focus down to sharpest point several times and note to make certain. Once quite certain, tape lens mount at this position.
8. Unscrew rear lens element taking care not to lose any small washers or shims. Put element out of harm�s way.
9. Now unscrew front element and shutter assembly from the ramp. You may have to block retaining ring inside the helical mount to do so. Put front element and shutter to one side.
10. Now, carefully locate three very small allen-screws - - located on top, on the first-bevel-in from the outside of the focusing ring (ie under the shutter when it is in place). These serve the same purpose as the three screws on the Brooks xl mount but face out . Back the three screws right out and put them to one side.
11. Untape focusing ring and carefully lift it off vertically; when clear of mount carefully turn focusing ring right to the infinity position and then put it back in place without turning it once in place. This is delicate and may require several attempts. Remount three allen-screws and tighten to " firm but not hard " pressure. Make sure focusing ring turns without a problem.
12. Screw the front element and shutter assembly back in place taking care to get the whole thing correctly centered; then remount the rear element.
13. You should now be in business.

Hope this helps others get all the potential of these fabulous cameras and have as much satisfaction (and fun) as I.

As I mentioned in an earlier post - once you�ve tasted 6x12 transparencies made with the f5,6/47mm lenses (on a Brooks xl no less) you�ll never be the same.

Fine tuning focus offers that much more.

bert mcclure

Disclaimer:

"If not exactly rocket-science, these adjustments require eye and hand coordination corresponding to the skill, for example, of an acomplished model airplane or boat builder. And, of course, realize that you undertake these adjustments at your own risk.

If you do not have the required skill and patience, no problem - just do the focus check, note the results and give a peek at infinity focus depending on the results. You might be surprised.

Any necessary adjustments should then be carried out by someone with the necessary competence and experience. You should be pleased with the results and should re-do the focus check just to be certain.

You should also remember that these were originally press cameras and that film travel through the Brooks might not have been carried out to a very high standard. Obviously, if you are still shooting b+w for press use at 65dpi you shouldn't have much of problem even if you are slightly off 'dead-on' focus."
 
 

Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 
From: Bert McCLURE <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Converting Veriwide 100 from f8 to f5,6 47mm 

The f8 to f5,6 conversion on a Verywide 100, threatened on an earlier post, was finally carried out using a f5,6 47mm from a separate "00" mount. In theory, all that is done is to switch front and back elements and open the aperture slot to 5,6. There is one delicate moment which requires fixing the rear element to the shutter and focusing mount. After a few scares the operation was a success but came in at over $650, lens, parts and labor.

We set up tripod and shot test exposures on the modified Veriwide 100 and on two f8 47mm unmodified cameras.

The f5,6 lens does give a marginally sharper image and less fall-off than the better of the two f8's - but only just!

Is it worth it ?

That extra diaph. costs $6-700, probably about the price of a non-mint Verywide. As much as I love the little Verywide and take it with me on many trips, the Brooks XL often already comes in the 5,6 flavor or can take the same modification much more easily. And, while the XL is definitely larger, it still remains very light and the back can be easily opened to 56mm x 92mm image if that is your aim. In fact, I alternate between the two cameras Veriwide 100 and Brooks XL.

However, if you still want one done, I might be able to find   
you the person to do it, but be warned that he lives in France.
 
bert

Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rangefinder
From: Bob Shell [email protected]>
To: [email protected]>


> From: "Julian Thomas" [email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 
> To: [email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rangefinder
> 
> I had a play with a friend's Plaubel Makina W - nikon lens I think, very
> nice.


Wonderful cameras, but sadly parts dried up long ago so if you break one you
are in trouble.  The scissors struts are a known weak point and the best
advice is not to fold the camera.

Bob

From: [email protected] (John Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Plaubel Proshift W69 (was Plaubel-Makina 67)
Date: 20 Jan 2002 

"Jerry Fusselman" [email protected]> wrote 
 
> By "Veriwide," I meant the Brooks, the one you introduced.  In my
> posts, I never discussed a Plaubel Veriwide.  By "original Veriwide,"
> I meant the original Brooks Veriwide, with the f/8 lens.  By "easier
> to carry," I was comparing the size and weight of the Brooks Veriwide
> to the Plaubel Proshift.  I was comparing the Proshift to the Brooks
> Veriwide because you were.
> [...]
> Hmm. Do I have the following four facts right?
> [...]

Sorry for the confusion, and now I must admit that I am confused!

I know of only two Veriwides: the old chrome-colored  one with the
integrated film transport, and I call it the Plaubel Veriwide (which
in later years might have a Brooks label). Then there is the Brooks
which had the Mamiya(?) rollfilm back, and a detachable lens board. I
had the earlier one and now have the later.

The old "Plaubel"  film format has a 9cm horizontal dimension while
the Brooks (I speak of)  has a 8cm horizontal dimension.

Finally, the "Plaubel" had the F8 47mm SA and my Brooks came with the
F5.6 version, but others had the F8. Dunno how that happened.

Thus ends my knowledge. Again, my apologies for jumping in
half-cocked.


From: "Michael K. Davis" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Plaubel-Makina 67
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 

Hi Steve,

I no longer have a Plaubel Makina 67, but here goes...

Steve King [email protected]> wrote:

: Hey folks -- a family member was nice enough to loan
: me his Plaubel 67. For those that are familiar with
: it, I have a couple of questions....

: First, what are the "extra" framelines in the VF?

The little tick marks within the outer brightline frame show you how to
frame the shot when you are focused at 1 meter instead of at Infinity.

: Second, I notice a *lot* of resistance on the film
: advance lever; is this normal? It's significantly
: harder to wind than, say, a manual 35mm SLR.

Yes - it's normal to feel a lot of resistance and it's normal for that
resistance to be *jerky* or uneven.  Be careful not to apply excessive
pressure at the END of a stroke - you can strip the soft brass gears
inside - these cameras are notorious for that, but there's no need for
concern as long as you proceed gently when advancing the film.  Also: It's
my belief that you should never fire the shutter nor cock it with the
camera collapsed.  The shutter release cable (and the light meter ribbon
cable) travel within the scissors and makes their tightest radius turns
when the camera is folded.  On the subject of the scissors, do not allow
the lens standard to slam home under force of gravity nor with a flick of
the wrist (like people tend to do with revolvers) when folding or
unfolding the camera.  Doing this on closing the camera can pinch
the cables (many a Plaubel Makina no longer has a functioning light
meter) and doing it on opening the camera can cause the lens
standard to lose it's parallelness with the film plane.  Handle it with
care and you'll find this camera is quite robust.  That's not an oxymoron.  

: Finally, what sort of batteries does the meter
: use? Are they stored in lens housing?

It uses Silver Oxide SR44's loaded into a compartment on the right side of
bottom of the lens standard.  The meter is a ten-degree angle of view spot
meter which coincides with the rangefinder rectangle in the center of the
viewfinder. Press and hold the button on the rear, near the frame advance
and make adjustments until both LED's are lit.  ISO speed is set via the
very skinny, knurled ring that is adjusted from underneath the lens.

: Thanks, y'all. This appears to be a neat camera!

The 80mm Nikkor f/2.8 lens is legendary.  I especially love the bokeh it
has. Try this experiment:

Set the focus at 1 meter - its closet focus.  Use a tripod and a tape
measure to set the front element exactly 20 inches from the nearest
subject, a flower for example, but make sure the background includes
subjects at least 1000 feet away.  Set the aperture at f/22 and use
whatever shutter speed is necessary for the conditions using a very fine
grain film like Provia 100F or TMAX 100 if you prefer B&W.

Now have a 16x20 print made and get a load of how nice the background
looks.  Is it out of focus?  Yes, but there's something magical about the
quality of it.  It is simply wonderful.

Depth of Field is certainly identical from one manufacturer's 80mm lens to
the next, but this lens bestows a very pallatable, exceptionally appealing
look to defocused areas - like no other lens I've worked with.  

I sold my PM 67 to buy a second Mamiya 7 II for doing MF stereography.  I
would say the Mamiya 7 lenses lack this bokeh.  In fact, their bokeh is so
*mechanical* and *unnatural* that I find any hint of defocus to be
repulsive with these lenses.  I avoid selective focus shots now.  
Fortunately, I also find the Mamiya 7 lenses to be sharper, just barely,
than the PM 67's 80mm Nikkor AND they are interchangeable, of course.

Enjoy it!

Mike Davis



From: "Alec Jones" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Pick your Santa carefully
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 

Joe, no matter what you do, that lens isn't going to cover 4x5 adequately,
much less with movements.  I love mine, the 5.6 version, on a Brooks
VeriWide, but that's 6x9.  Even that XL model Schneider offers doesn't
REALLY cover 4x5 adequately.  Your expectations are simply too high.  Don't
waste your time.


From: "John Stafford" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Plaubel Proshift W69 (was Plaubel-Makina 67)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 


"Jerry Fusselman" [email protected]> wrote 
> > Aw, that ain't nothin but a Brooks Veriwide with a loose lens board.
> >
>
> Yes, except the Veriwide is wider and easier to carry, and the original
> Veriwide had more depth of field wide open.

????  The Plaubel Veriwide is "wider" only because the film format all of
the Plaubel is all of 1cm wider. (6x9 as opposed to 6x8 on the Brooks
(Mamiya?) back). It's lens is the old 47mm SA F8, while _some_ Brooks
Veriwides have the 47mm SA F5.6 (the rest have F8). Stopping down one stop
equalizes the Brooks as a far as DOF is concerned.  Further, the film
transport on the Brooks (Mamiya?) back encourages a flatter film.  So,
except for the extra centimeter of horizontal coverage, I see no particular
advantage to the Plaubel version.

But the Plaubel version is easier to carry. I grant that.



From: [email protected] (John Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Finest wide angle lens for 6x9 no movements
Date: 24 Dec 2001 

Stuart [email protected]> wrote 

> I am considering contructing my own camera.  I am looking at the
> Schneider Super Angulon 47mm 5.6 non XL.

Maybe Bob M has the charts. Dunno. The 47mm SA is not an impressive
lens in terms of contrast at any stop nor in resolution at small stops
compared to my favorite, the 38mm Biogon. But the non XL SA does have
a circle of coverage adequate to 10cm.

Here's a handmade that uses the very lens you mention:
  http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/sandwich-4x5/sandwich.html

Yes, it's on a 4x5 and not what you are looking for (MF), so to
address your concerns ...

The lens in the photo came from a Brooks Veriwide I have. I have also
owned the F8 version on the Plaubel Veriwide.  (6x8, 6x9cm formats,
respectively) . One good thing about the lens is the focusing mount.
If you can find one mounted (or afford a separate focusing mount),
then adapting to another body is fairly easy. I saw a Zeiss Ikon
folder (sans cover) converted to use the 47mm/in-focus mount. Rather
impressive, compact camera.


From: [email protected] (John Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: scoop on 6x9cm was Re: 56mm x 82mm = 6x9?
Date: 24 Jan 2002 

[email protected] (Robert Monaghan) wrote 
> [ snip ]
> Bottom line: There are NO 6x9 cameras except those that use European 6x9 
> sheet film and the English size is 2.5" x 3.5". 

IMHO you are wrong. 3.5" is just short of 9cm, and besides I doubt the
sheet film holder gives you the whole sheet for exposure, so in the
end, it's is even shorter of the 6x9 goal. The early Plaubel is,
indeed, a true 9cm wide, and as tall as a rollfilm 2.25" can be.

I have owned both the Veriwides. I have the negatives in my darkroom,
and I measured them to settle this a year or so ago with Bob.  Plaubel
== 90cm (or 91 if you count the ultra edge of exposure, and the later
Brooks(Mamiya-Graflex) is 82cm (or so) wide.l



From: "Pat Perez" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Second hand medium format for landscape work
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 


I purchased a Veriwide last year that probably would suit your needs. It
shoots 120 only, has a 47mm Schneider Super Angulon lens, and it is the
earlier version, which was 56x92mm. It was available in a few different
styles, mine is the second version of the first style. It uses a sport
finder (wire frame) or accessory viewfinder (parallax adjustment is built in
to the shoe) and it looks like an old 6x9 folder (except, of course, it
doesn't fold). The second generation was marketed as a Brooks Veriwide, and
used interchangeable backs, FWIW. I'm happy with mine (mine has the three
levels, the first version only had a single bubble level on top). My only
complaint is with the effort it takes to properly use the format/angle of
view, which is obviously my own problem.  The lens is a little slow, at f8,
so keep in mind you'll need generally higher speed film. I should mention
that there is no interlock between wind and shutter. That is, you wind film,
cock shutter, set speed, set focus, then click. Not a grab shot camera, but
it sounds like it is suitable for your needs.

As to cost, your budget would easily accommodate the purchase of a Veriwide.

Another option open to you is the Fuji 690 GSW, which is 6/9 format and has
a 65mm lens, but that's closer to 28mm in 35 format.

Pat
...
> I'm looking for a medium format camera for landscape work.  It's going to
> have to be second hand, and i'll be looking for a lens with a similar angle
> of view to a wide angle 35mm format lens (say somewhere in the 20mm to 35mm
> in 35mm format terms).
...


[Ed. note: prices are going up, and this is for an older f/8 model with leitz finder!]
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 
From: "[email protected]" [email protected]
To: 'Robert Monaghan' [email protected]
Subject: RE: Broken link & panoramic

Have a look at this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1348025478

It started so low, now it's > USD 1,100...

Jason 

 Robert Monaghan [SMTP:[email protected]] wrote:
> I agree with you on excess sky in 6x6cm square ultrawide shots, which is
> why I like the 6x9+cm veriwide 100 so much (see mf/veriwide.html)




From: John Stafford [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: What is the brand and model roll film holder that willdeliver
        the best on-film resolution (due to relative film flatness) fromthe
        Schneider 47mm f8.0 SuperAngulon lens mounted on a Graflex XLSW body?
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002

 Graphic at [email protected] wrote:
> I stand corrected on my statement from memory ...actually I had shot the 47
> SuperAngulon one stop down from the max aperture, so it was f11....the newer
> (better)  47mm Schneider SA's are f5.6 hence my confusion over the actual
> aperture that I shot at.

Actually, there was a f5.6 47mm SA. I have one on my Brooks Veriwide, and
also made this camera to fit it:

http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/sandwich-4x5/


[Ed. note: special thanks to Bert McClure for sharing these tips and observations!!!]
Date: 26 Mar 2001 
From: Bert MC-CLURE [email protected]
To: rmonagha [email protected]
Subject: 6x12 on Brooks

Thanks for the note. A lot of credit must go to Ralph for pushing me in the
right direction.

I think the 47's attractiveness must come from the angle of view as much as
from the optics. My first contact with ultra-wide photography occurred when I
dumped all my Nikon gear on the counter in exchange for a Contarex full set.
The 2 backs, the metering system and the 21mm biogon's symmetrical design
almost touching the film plane were more than I could resist. That was before
the Contarex had become a collectable and I was doing an architectural guide to
Paris; my Nikon 20 bannana-ed seriously - so the 21 was a god-send. The 21mm
biogon's vertical format on 24x36 just covers most Paris fa�ades from across
the street - same vertical coverage as a shifted 24mmPC Nikon. No perceptible
deformation, high contrast who wouldn't be hooked? I've successfully used both
lenses (21mm biogon and 47mm SA) for archival photography of large plans I've
made in my work as an architect/city-planner.

To come back to the angle, I was not too surprised to be pleased with the
Brooks; the Brooks 47mm on 6x9 already corresponds to my 21 biogon on 24x36.
For me the included angle contains what I see - optics aside, there is no other
reason I can think of. To really perform, however, both lenses need to get
"inside" the composition; both are my standard lens for architecture and
markets, street scenes, store displays, etc... I've seen Ralph's bent
flag-poles so he's right about barrel distortion on his 47, but I also have
similar shots of interiors with a 47mm SA on which the verticals are dead
straight. My verticals were not, however, only a couple of feet away from the
lens. So who knows?


The 55mm ApoG I have is great and I've seen Ralph's really impressive 35mm
Apo-Grandagon shots but the 47 is the one I wouldn't consider parting with.

Other fronts :

I took a Hasselblad X-pan to Prague last year and loved the results, the
metering... but there are times when you want the foreground as well as the
width. I tried to find a reasonable 20-21 to retro-fit to the X-pan for 24x36
to no avail - the chamber is too restrictive. I also used a 16mm Hologon for a
year or so before selling on to a collector; the hologon is a great lens for
hand held interiors - in restaurants you get the plates, the participants, the
ceiling, everything - but it really is a limited-use lens. For the price
difference, I can make do with the 15mm Heliar and will try the 12mm when they
start to show up used.

On the MF side, I did use a SWC 38mm Biogon and a fabulous Rollei Wide (55mm)
at one time or another. They are both exceptional lenses that friends of mine
do wonders with. I had some nice architectural shots with both but soon had to
admit that I am not really a square format person but a double- or
triple-squarer. No-one is perfect.

I've been thinking about getting a 35mm mask made for the Brooks - 47mm on
24x112; quadruple-square - now there is an interesting format for landscapes
and gardens.

Thanks for the site - and the tips.

bert mcclure
[email protected]


From: "Pat Perez" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 6x9 camera with 47mm schneider
Date: Tue, 07 May 2002


Sounds like the Plaubel Veriwide 100. Bob Monaghan has a page devoted to it
(where I first learned of it) at:

http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/veriwide.html

I have what is probably the second iteration of it (the first being the one
you describe with the bubble level; mine has three levels). It was later
morphed into the Brooks Veriwide, which differed in using interchangeable
backs, and though more flexible in format, became less convenient. It looks
like a 6x9 folder (though it doesn't need to fold). Also, the Plaubel
versions create an image approx 57x92mm, where the Brooks version does
57x82. This may or may not be important. It does equate to one more shot per
roll of 120.

I only got mine back in December, and have not yet had the opportunity to
shoot much with it. It is by far the widest angle of view I've ever worked
with, and as such really demands concentration on properly framing shots so
as to avoid expanses of nothingness. But when a shot is properly composed,
it can provide a stunning perspective one can seemingly 'step into'.


Pat

"Lear" [email protected] wrote...
> Hi
> I remember ther was a 120 camera 6x9 (could be 6x7) that had a fixed
> 47mm super angulon schneider lens. with a circular level on one side,
> gestimating focos.
>
> Anyone remember what camera is that? I cant remember de name.
>
> Diego K.


From rangefinder mailing list:
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 
From: Pat Perez [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RF List] Medium format RFs

I *think* the outfit that specializes in this is
called Photography on Bald Mountain. I read about the
process in Robert Monaghan's medium format megasite
section devoted to the Kodak Medalists. The lens on
the Medalist 2 is considered one of the sharpest ever
put to a medium format camera. As to cost, I think it
is a few hundred dollars.

And as to the original poster's query, another non
folder is the Brooks/Plaubel Veriwide. Mine is the
early model that has a fixed back and is no larger
than a folder, but the lens (a 47mm Schneider Super
Angulon) sits basically flush on the body. It has the
advantages of a folder (small size) without the actual
extension of a bellows system. It shoots 56x92mm
images, which is wiiiiide (100 degree field of view).
No meter, unless you mount one in the flash shoe).
This camera is a viewfinder, not rangefinder, but like
the Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa-L, the lack of viewfinder
is not critical, since it is so wide *everything* in
front of you is in the frame {g}. A terrific camera
when used well.

Pat


[Ed. note: thanks to Burt McClure for sharing these tips with us!]
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 
From: Bert McCLURE [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Plaubel ProShift focus adjustment

Hello Bob,

I just found a pretty used ProShift, glass intact, at a reasonable price
and snapped it up.

When I checked the focus, the ramp was over focus at infinity (infinity
a couple of degrees before the stop) which was quite easy to see with
the 35x scope.

The set up - three little screws on the focusing collar - reminded me of
the Brooks Xl set up. I backed them out and, lo and behold, it is the
same and just looks a bit more modern. Only change - the Brook XL's
aluminum collar, which insures lens travel, is in brass on the ProShift.

I suppose this means a longer ramp life, less wobble, whatever.

The good news is that the ProShift focus adjustment (wobble
correction...) is very simple and exactly the same as for the Brooks
Veriwide XL mentioned in the article I sent you. I had the ProShift
optimized in about 10'.

You might want to add this fact to the article or shift the analysis and
Brooks Veriwide focusing information to some more appropriate location -
changing B VW XL to Plaubel ProShift.

Has the article helped anyone ar has it just been another "letter in a
bottle" ?

best regards,

Bert


from leica mailing list:
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 
From:  Sonny Carter [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Leica] Decisions, decisions: Brooks Veriwide vs. RF 21mm vs. ?

I have a Brooks Veriwide, and if you can get it with the Leitz finder that
belongs to it, (same as the 21mm finder, just marked differently) you'll
have a fine piece of gear.   I don't use it too much, but it is not much
more to deal with in size and weight than an M.

Remarkable camera, there is a later model of it than mine that has a
renovable roll film back, and can use polaroid as well, I think.   I do not
have any reference material here, so I can't give details.

Sonny



From leica mailing list:
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 
From: "Don Dory" [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Leica] Decisions, decisions: Brooks Veriwide vs. RF 21mm vs. ?

Dante, for me that is a no brainer.  The 21 ASPH on a Leica:  up to 11X on a
100 speed film stock your results will be better than the old 47mm.  You
gain four stops of speed as the 47 really needs to be stopped down to F11 or
preferably smaller.

As to the SLR lens, the quality issue in the edges near wide open goes to
the Leica.  Framing is rarely that exact that a viewfinder won't get you
close enough.  And I do have 20-21 in Canon, Nikon, and Leica so have some
basis for comparison.

Reasons I would change my mind?  Work that frequently goes beyond 16X,
semi-macro work where exact framing and DOF really matter.  For that I would
re-phrase the question and put some of the newer glass(35-58mm) on a 6X9
Technika which would give me movements, through the lens viewing, and access
to all the backs and gizmo's that have been made for Technika's.  This would
include Polaroid and digital capability.  Oh yes, I understand that the
front cover would go and movements are extremely limited.  Other options
would be the 6X9 Arca.

In its day the Brooks was a formidable performer but now is best seen as a
collectable.

Just my humble opinion.

Don
[email protected]



Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 18:57:06 -0800
From: "Pat Perez" 
Subject: Re: [Leica] Decisions, decisions: Brooks Veriwide vs. RF 21mm  vs. ?
Message-ID: <001101c28540$3176ddf0$6401a8c0@banzai>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>

If I recall correctly, when the Veriwide switched from f8 to f5.6, the image
size changed. The f8 original version negative is 56x92mm, the later version
is 56x82 (or maybe 84). Since most 6x9 negative carriers are closer to the
latter size, this becomes less important.

The lens does exhibit quite noticeable light falloff at the edges until
about f16. Obviously, corner darkness can be used to effect, so that may or
may not be a big issue. Although the Leitz VF is the factory original, I
just can't see paying the premium to get a Veriwide with it. Mine came with
a more than adequate Russian VF that even handles parallax correction
(although the viewfinder shoe does this anyways). I really think over $1500
is too much for the Brooks, even with the Leitz finder. I saw a beautiful
sample sell about a week ago for about $1300. I got mine for much less a
year ago. If you had a Veriwide available to you for $500, I'd say that is a
very favorable (buying) price, if it functions properly.

Pat


from leica mailing list:
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 
From: Henning Wulff [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Leica] Decisions, decisions: Brooks Veriwide vs. RF 21mm vs. ?

>???
>
>Not hypothetical; assuming that they cost the same, would you buy
>
>(a)    A 21mm lens for use on a Leica-style rangefinder;
>(b)    A user Brooks Veriwide 100 (6x9, 47mm f/8 Super-Angulon); or
>(c)    A 21/2.8 SLR lens
>
>Assume that I have enlargers to cover all of them, and bodies to fit
>each of the accessory lenses.

Depends on what you want to do with them. In the street, for fast
shooting, a) wins, especially if you might be carrying other RF
stuff. If you are carrying SLR stuff anyway, and would like precise
composition and framing, c) wins. If you want to make large prints,
don't mind the additional film and processing costs, small number of
prints per roll, slow lens (the SA 47/8 needs to be stopped down to
f/16 for good coverage and performance) and possible purchase of a
center filter to cure the light falloff, get b). I have all three
options, and none wins all the time.

For the same money you could also get a rotating lens panoramic in
35mm. Ease of use, film costs, enlargeability etc all in between b)
and the other two.

If, as another poster has mentioned, the cost of the Veriwide is
around $1500 then there are a lot more options, and the Veriwide
doesn't make sense as a shooter.

Henning J. Wulff
http://www.archiphoto.com