Challenge: How to use the amazing 14 5/8 oz Globus 4"x5" Camera shell for today's photography!

[Asher Kelman]

There was a surprise revelation that ~40 unsold brand new original 16 year old stock of the legendary lightweight stainless steel Globus 4x5 camera suddenly available. The warehouse was being sold and everything had to be sold or dumped. The link to this madness is here.

Right now there are just two units left and one with a lens, both brand new!

I purchased one with a lens and one without. My idea is to use one for lightweight street focus, hoping the push-pull focus control is accurate. I can always use the ground glass and a viewer, but I am betting on being able to learn to use the weird focus mechanism and get sharp pictures. I'll need a viewfinder and I'll be set.

5 film holders would give me 10 shots and that's a lot of pictures and not to bulky.

The one with no lens I can make into a pinhole of zone plate camera.

I'll keep you informed my my progress and hopefully others will add their own uses too.

Asher

[Ben Rubinstein]

Just when I was musing, yet again, about LF film and how much I missed the glorious Type 55.. :-)

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Ben Rubinstein

Just when I was musing, yet again, about LF film and how much I missed the glorious Type 55.. :-)

I am having a love affair with film. It means less pictures but more thought and it's restful.

The advantage of the Globuscope 4x5 is its lightweight thin steel construction. The users right side of the camera has a built in solid aluminum bar which holds the tripod mount and could be used for a leather handle. That shape is reminiscent of some chef's kitchen, someone remarked. I wonder how this unique form of the Glubus 4x5 actually came about?

An interesting find on Ebay is a camera that looks like a wooden copy of the 4x5 Globuscope!

Wooden 4x5 Camera $1369 4x5 Wide Angle Camera w/65mm f4.5 Rodenstock Grandagon

So the price of $900 for a brand-new lightweight original is very attractive! I wonder which camera came first. This or the Globus Brother's version?

Asher

[Grant Kernan]

First some history:
I first saw an ad in Shutter Bug late 1984 months after I started a small photo business. I was shooting interiors and I wanted the large negative and the extreme ease of use. It turns out that I was the first person to purchase this Beautiful little camera. I have serial # 005 shipped early 1985. $1358 Canadian plus shipping and tax landed the camera at my door. The three Globus brothers and a family member got the first 4 cameras. They did design the camera late in 1980 but it took them a couple of years to make all the parts. They tooled up and made somewhere around 100-150 bodies. No one seems to know an exact number. Each body cost Globus over $100 before they began to engrave The Globus 4X5 Logo and each individual serial number. Today it would cost 2-3 times that to retool and stamp out all the parts. After all the bodies sold someone asked me why someone would't make some more.
Price. They would cost more than what people are willing to pay.

Who knew that I would stumble on over 40 cameras in 2011. I had used it for 15 years and then it sat looking cool collecting dust on top of a cabinet. I modified the mounting block to take a Sinar Zoom Back but by 2005 I had pretty much switched to digital with a Betterlight Super6K HS USB2.

I contacted Marty Roberts at JMLOptical on January 05 2007 to find out about the lens design. They sent me a design PDF and also a bit of background information.
Their part # 58960. They sold 50 pcs of that to Globus in 1982. This was a 6 element lens with a Copal 0 shutter. I have an outline drawing of this lens. JML would need $2500 for each lens if they were to make singles. The design is unique in that the large element is inside the camera. This equates to a smaller front element for light to strike. I might add that this sharp wide lens has such little light fall off that it requires only a bit of dodging and burning to make stunning 20X24 prints.

Early summer 2011 I was exploring using Medium Format lenses on a Sinar Norma and a Betterlight Pano Adapter for panoramic landscapes. I presented this idea at the 2011 Betterlight conference.
Mark VanderSys of Pixel Light Digital Imaging had seen the list of topics and he contacted me to help him outfit his Linhof Field camera before the conference. He planted the seed to come up with a black plastic box camera to lighten our load. On the way home the light bulb went off. I had a GLOBUSCOPE 4X5 sitting on a shelf. I immediately went to work modifying a lens mount and the Globuscope 645 Super 6K panoramic camera was born. I contacted the Globus Studios to inquire about getting a lens mount made. Not only did they find the parts they found a couple spare camera bodies. Mark bought a Camera and for awhile we had the only two "Modified Medium Format Globuscopes" for use with the Betterlight scanning backs. Then Gerard [the machinist] phoned me up to say that he had found another 40 bodies. We have offered them up for sale. And so now You Know...

All the bodies will start shipping after the cheques arrive at Globus. Each camera will have its own serial # so we will be able to get a better idea how many are really out there. It would be good to see how high the serial # actually go...

[Asher Kelman]

Thanks Grant for tracking down all this interesting background to this unique and lightweight 4x5 camera. For myself, the camera with the JML 65 mm lens is going with me to Europe for handheld and tripod photography in Paris, Florence and hopefully London too.

So how practical might it be to carry around the Globuscope film camera? Of course, it can't be slipped into even a jacket pocket, but at least the weight is going to be within reason for a photographer used to carrying a Canon body and at least one lens.

The Canon 5DII is 1.8lb, the 14 mm lens adds 1.42 while a Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II is 1.4lb, the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Lens is jusy 1.05 lb. If we use the lightest lens, the EF 17-40mm, then the total weight for the Canon ultrawide angle lens is at least 2.95 lb. So, assuming 1.5 lb for the JML lens, the 4x5 film camera would come in at ~ 2.3lb. With a film holder, that still lighter than the Canon digital camera with any lens!

Still, the 4x5 film camera could do with a handle! So that's my first task! Next a viewfinder and the Fotoman viewfinder with a mask seems a good bet. I'll need to train myself in focusing, first with the ground glass and the with with the scale on the lens. This is push-pull so it might be a challenge.

Asher

[Ben Rubinstein]

You up for travelling with a single (and extremely wide) focal length?

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Ben Rubinstein

You up for travelling with a single (and extremely wide) focal length?

Hi Ben,

I love extremely wide focal lengths and with digital cameras, spend a lot of effort to stitch overlapping frames so as to go even wider. The ultrawide view is replacement for being able to turn one's head or move one's eyes from side to side to build up the gestalt of the place. Sometimes, this experience is apt.

Having one focal length is really for handheld and light tripod work. If I can get away with it, I'll also take my 8x10 and then it's a big question of what lens to take with. I have small light 240mm and 300 mm lenses in Copal shutters that would work. The longest lenses are being equipped with adapter rings for a Packard shutter, (~1/30 second), and that includes 450mm, 600mm for the 8lb Chamonix 8x10, (and then 760 and 1200 mm for my stay at home camera obscura).

In Florence, we're near the one bridge I am obsessed with and that's the Ponte Vecchio. At sunset I'd like to have my 8x10 with the 150mm Super Symmar XL. However, the 65mm on the Globus may be just fine. I know everyone photographs this landmark, but then, I'm romantic and love the place!

In the end I may just take the Globus camera if it arrives in time, and then the GXR with the 50mm Macro lens and if I splurge the 28mm module too, both APS C size sensors. I just need to have used it and processed the film before going to Europe. It has no handle, so I have to rig something up to defeat the cold metal. MAybe just gaffer's tape.

Asher

[Jerome Marot]

Would you post some pictures of the camera itself so that we know what you are talking about? The link to the large format photography forum requires registration.

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Jerome Marot

Would you post some pictures of the camera itself so that we know what you are talking about? The link to the large format photography forum requires registration.

Thanks for your interest.

OK here's the camera:

Asher Kelman: The camera upside down, held by the side for inserting 4x5 film holders. The threaded mount seen
here is not a tripod mount. OK for a light handle, or the spirit level designed for the camera. I may remove it.





Asher Kelman: The back with a 4x5 loaded film holder. Notice the Fotoman optical viewer with a mask inserted.





Asher Kelman: Side by side with a Canon 5D and a 50 1.8 lens



Asher Kelman: Side by side with a Canon 5D and a 50 1.8 lens

[Asher Kelman]

The big thing about this camera is that one is carrying around a 19mm or 20 mm 50-800 M Pixels camera if you scan the film.

My idea is to also have the GXR 50mm and hopefully that will be manageable. I can have 5 film holders in my special photography vest and a light tripod plus cable release.


For reference here are the weights:


Ricoh GXR 50mm f 2.5, my walk around camera 1lb 1/8 oz

5D II 50mm 1.8 lens and RRS L Bracket 2lb 9 3/4 oz

5D 50mm 1.4 2lb 10 1/4 oz

Globuscope Camera no lens 14 5/8 oz

Globuscope Camera 65 mm lens 1lb 12 1/4 oz

Globuscope Camera 65 mm lens + loaded 4x5 film holder 2lb 4 1/2 oz


Oh, I forgot, we must add on the weight of the Hoodman Tonopah-dusty viewer, (minus larriette, which that wouldn't stay on). One can, if one wishes, simply hold up the rubber hoodman ground glass viewer to the Glbus ground glass and it works fine for checking focus.

I'll discuss focus shortly. Any questions?

Asher

[Jerome Marot]

Thanks, now I understand better. You don't plan to use the camera on a tripod?

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Jerome Marot

Thanks, now I understand better. You don't plan to use the camera on a tripod?

Hi Jerome,

Thanks for following my quest for WA LF. Yes, on a tripod when shooting the Ponte Vecchio again in Florence. I'm obsessed with the sight. Lambrettas, Vespas, BMW's, Mopto Marinis, Veloteq Sorrentos and more, buzzing like swarms of bees over the bridge near my hotel up river from the famous bridge. And then there are lovers on the stone columns supporting the road and bridge and lone guys strumming to themselves on guitars and ahead, the dark sparkling waters and beyond that the ancient bridge I keep returning too. So this is a place for shooting with the Globuscope with film for the WA view and then with the GXR 50 mm for the people. I'm hoping to get pictures of a swarm of Italian scooters rounding the corner.

Otherwise the camera will be handheld. So I'll have to try it out here in Los Angeles and see if my technique is up to it. I will try some transparencies but think I'll really need negative film or else I'll be in trouble with dynamic range.

Grant Kernan: Mark Vander Bracket on globuscope Camera with Betterlight Scanning Back inserted instead of 4x5 film holder

The tripod mount will be arriving shortly from Mark Vander. It's a beautiful L bracket that mounts for the right hand and gives a place I can add a wooden handle for cold days or just some rubber hot water pipe pipe insulation split to open and fit over it. The L bracket will allow for mounting a tripod in landscape mode.

Asher

[Asher Kelman]

Fitting the Fotoman optical viewer. This little 2 0z critter is made of plastic with some nice WA front lens and a much smaller rear optic. There's a diopter adjustment. Not Zeiss or Leica optics but it's adequate and bright. The provided masks gets one roughly to the format you want. They slide in from the side as if they were Waterhouse stops.

The foot of the viewfinder is metal and painted. That makes it a very tight fit for the flash shoe of the camera. So I first tried some silicon oil, but it hardly worked. Then I sanded the paint off the foot of the Fotoman viewer and finally gently increased the acceptance height of the slot in the flash mount of the Globuscope. Now the Fototman slides in and is snug and still secure.

I think one can use the ground glass for focus handheld with the Hoodman rubber ground glass viewer against the ground glass. One might have to be aware that the ground glass is actually plastic and so one should not push in with the viewer, but rather rest it on the surface. I may still check the flatness of the plastic surface, but it might be that the exact distance is not so critical with this focal length of 65mm.

I plan to focus both with the ground glass and on a tripod and then aiming freehand using the hyperfocal distance and the Fotoman viewer.

Asher

[Mark Hampton]

asher,

very cool... looking forward to checking oot what this puppy can do.

cheers

Originally Posted by Asher Kelman

Thanks for your interest.

OK here's the camera:

Asher Kelman: The camera upside down, held by the side for inserting 4x5 film holders. The threaded mount seen
here is not a tripod mount. OK for a light handle, or the spirit level designed for the camera. I may remove it.





Asher Kelman: The back with a 4x5 loaded film holder. Notice the Fotoman optical viewer with a mask inserted.





Asher Kelman: Side by side with a Canon 5D and a 50 1.8 lens



Asher Kelman: Side by side with a Canon 5D and a 50 1.8 lens

[Ben Rubinstein]

Remarkeably small!

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Asher,

Nifty rig.

Originally Posted by Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman: The camera upside down, held by the side for inserting 4x5 film holders. The threaded mount seen here is not a tripod mount. OK for a light handle, or the spirit level designed for the camera. I may remove it.

Is it just too feeble for that?

Best regards,

Doug

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Doug Kerr

Hi, Asher,

Nifty rig.

Well, there's only 150 or so on this planet! I have two. One is just the shell with no lens. I may use it fro a pinhole camera!

Originally Posted by Doug Kerr

Is it just too feeble for that?

It's only fixed at one point to the stainless steel body from the inside with what amounts to a single rivet. So I worry that any torsion will distort the metal and eventually fatigue it. OTOH there's a solid block of aluminum on the back, right side, opposite where the film holders are inserted. That has threaded holes and I'll use that instead but with an L bracket.

Asher

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Asher,

Originally Posted by Asher Kelman

It's only fixed at one point to the stainless steel body from the inside with what amounts to a single rivet. So I worry that any torsion will distort the metal and eventually fatigue it. OTOH there's a solid block of aluminum on the back, right side, opposite where the film holders are inserted. That has threaded holes and I'll use that instead but with an L bracket.

Makes sense to me. You have a really nice setup underway there.

As an editorial aside (le crayon rouge ne dort jamais), it is always disconcerting to see what I think I would call a "viewfinder" called a "viewer" (although of course that might well be the manufacturer's terminology - I havn't looked).

Congratulations on your fabulous project.

Best regards,

Doug

[Asher Kelman]

So while waiting for the "official" L bracket, I attached one from ReallyRightStuff.com meant for a Bronica SQ, (I believe, it has no markings).

So here's the L bracket mounted on the Globuscope!

Asher Kelman: Using a MF L bracket from RRS as a grip and tripod mount for the Globuscope

As you can see, the L bracket makes a great handle. However, for cold weather, this would need to be covered.


Asher

[Asher Kelman]

A problem arises in using such a lightweight camera and a viewfinder at one's eye. I thought that I might be tilting the camera upwards. So I asked my friend, Yeney to hold the camera for composing a picture. She thought it weighed nothing.

Well, I was right! In putting the viewfinder to the eye, there seems to be a tendency to tilt the featherweight camera upward. Just something to be careful about when using the camera handheld.

Asher

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Asher,

Well, any excuse to show us a real cute girl. Good work!

But seriously, it looks as though it might be better for the lookenpeeper to be a little bit aft.

Best regards,

Doug

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Doug Kerr

Hi, Asher,

Well, any excuse to show us a real cute girl. Good work!

Well, we'll share more then!

Originally Posted by Doug Kerr

But seriously, it looks as though it might be better for the lookenpeeper to be a little bit aft.

Great idea, Doug. But again, we have to be aware of the leverage issue on the thin steel. /i'll try to get a rear extension rigged.

[scott bye]

Hi Asher,

I have the other Globuscope w/the JML. I noticed in your picture that it looks like the GG has a bow inward like mine does. Did you test it with film to see if it causes a focusing issue? I was thinking about replacing mine with a Maxwell Brightscreen, but it might be very costly. I noticed with this lens it is difficult to see the image on the gg indoors.

Are you going to buy a center filter for the camera? Do you know which type of center filter to buy?

Scott

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by scott bye

Hi Asher,

I have the other Globuscope w/the JML. I noticed in your picture that it looks like the GG has a bow inward like mine does. Did you test it with film to see if it causes a focusing issue? I was thinking about replacing mine with a Maxwell Brightscreen, but it might be very costly. I noticed with this lens it is difficult to see the image on the gg indoors.

Are you going to buy a center filter for the camera? Do you know which type of center filter to buy?

Scott

Hi Scott,

Congrats on your new Globuscope!

Yes, the GG does seem to bow in. I need to remove it and put it on the table and see if it's indeed warped. I have sent one body with no lens to SK Grimes to evaluate for any replacement or inserting a cone for a 90mm lens.

Did you get a price on the Maxwell Brightscreen?

I have tried focusing with a Hoodman rubber viewer and it looks pretty good. A dark cloth might br better. However, that's for copying an 85" x56" painting at about 15 feet. Exact focus becomes less important for scenes at a greater distance.

I wish there was a helical focus adaption possible of that lens and that's what Adam of SK Grimes will tell us. However, it may not be needed. We just need to take the pictures.

Are you going to do some test shots?

Asher

[scott bye]

Hi Asher,

Yes I might try it out this weekend, I am waiting for the snow to fall here in Michigan. Nothing too scenic to take near Detroit/Ann Arbor Area.

I did have a Maxwell brightscreen and sold it for 75.00 on ebay, wish I never sold it. They go for about 400.00 new. Here is the website if you want to contact Bill Maxwell for more info. I might be interested but I really don't want to spend 400.00 again.

Scott

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Scott,

Originally Posted by scott bye

Are you going to buy a center filter for the camera? Do you know which type of center filter to buy?

What is a center filter? Sounds like it could be something to compensate for natural vignetting.

Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Doug Kerr

Hi, Scott,



What is a center filter? Sounds like it could be something to compensate for natural vignetting.

Exactly! However, if the film is scanned or otherwise one gets a digital file, vignetting can be corrected by a nifty program for Windows and Mac called CornerFix. You just need to take a reference picture of a white/grey neutral surface in the light for that lens and focal length and focus distance. Correction is automatic. However, be warned that you could be introducing noise in the corners according to what corrections need to be made.

Asher

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Originally Posted by Doug Kerr

What is a center filter? Sounds like it could be something to compensate for natural vignetting.

Hi Doug,

Yes, that's correct. The filter is specifically matched to the lens to compensate for the vignetting / fall-off characteristics of the lens. The filter is darker in the center, and more transparent towards the corners, thus ensuring that the sensor/film gets more uniformly exposed. This prevents underexposed corners, which may otherwise get more noisy in digital systems due to a relatively low photon count.

Of course the amount of vignetting varies with aperture, whereas the fall-off is more constant due to the corner rays striking at a more oblique angle. So it is only a partial (vignetting) solution, but better than nothing.

Cheers,
Bart

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Asher,

Originally Posted by Asher Kelman

.....vignetting can be corrected by a nifty program for Windows and Mac called CornerFix. You just need to take a reference picture of a white/grey neutral surface in the light for that lens and focal length and focus distance. Correction is automatic.

Capture One Pro does that too. Following Bart's advice, I have bought two pieces of opaline glass (15x15 cm) and I have sandwiched them together with a mm distance between the two layers. This I use (by holding it against the lens as a filter and by taking a picture of the sky or a diffuse light source) in order to take evenly illluminated neutral images which I can then use in C1Pro to correct vignetting and also any dust bunnies automatically. But I must admit that I did not try it with scanned tif files but only with raw files so I am not certain if it works with tif files. Will check and report back later....

[scott bye]

Well instead of doing all of this I would rather buy the center filter, any recommendations?