In article <33339227.45873414@news.cinternet.net>, hult@cinternet.net says...
>On 19 Mar 1997 20:58:26 GMT, d_ruether@hotmail.com (Bob Neuman) wrote:
>>In article <3338d675.270431063@news.cinternet.net>, hult@cinternet.net says..
>>>On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 17:37:20 -0800, Mark
>>>>For Sale NIKON PB-4 Bellows, full movements like view camera. The best
>>>>bellows Nikon ever made & Nikon PS-4 slide attachment for bellows. Both
>>>>in original boxes in excellant condition. $375.00 plus ship for both. You
>>>>won't see a nicer unit.
>>>FWIW, a Nikon PB-4 bellows does not provide "full movements like a
>>>view camera". Of the conventional eight movements possible on a view
>>>camera with full movements (rise/fall, swing, tilt, shift -- each on
>>>front and rear standards), the PB-4 has only two which, relative to a
>>>horizontal composition, are shift and swing on the front standard
>>>only. If the camera, bellows and lens are rotated together for a
>>>vertical composition, these become rise/fall and tilt.
>>>Nonetheless, the PB-4 is a very useful contraption for special
>>>circumstances IMHO.
>>Hmmm, I guess, since the bayonette on the PB-4 rotates, one could
>>say that it does have rise/fall, swing, tilt, and shift (though only
>>on the front standard) - and they can be applied in any direction, since
>>it has what amounts to a rotating back as well. Sounds like pretty
>>complete view camera movements to me (though some are
>>relatively awkward to use...).
>>Hope This Helps
>Lessee .. a view camera with conventional "full movements" as
>previously defined, can move (ignoring the actual amount of movement
>which is a different specification) from the zero position to any of
>255 other combinations of front and rear movements ((4 squared x 4
>squared)-1). Of these 255, the PB-4 can manage only 3.
>
>A typical view camera can also rotate its back but this is not a
>substitute for movements unless only a square portion of the image is
>of interest, which is not usually the case in 35mm photography in my
>experience.
>
>Moreover, the PB-4 has no rear movements at all, so, for example, rear
>tilt for shape control is impossible. Moreover, front swing and tilt
>can not be done simultaneously, so a plane of arbitrary orientation
>cannot be brought into focus using movements, And so on.
>
>So the PB-4 has does not have "full movements" and a person buying one
>with the expectation that it does, or can that it can do the normal
>and customary tasks listed in the last paragraph that are easily done
>by a view camera with even limited (i.e., not "full") movements, may
>be disappointed.
>
>Note that in the original post, all that is needed is to delete the
>word "full" for all to be hunky-dory IMHO and for the original
>poster's (Mark
>I've used a PB-4 for years and appreciate its capabilities and
>limitations.
Hmmm, perhaps you did not see the significance of the rotating bayonette,
which, when combined with tipping the bellows on the tripod about its
axis, allows the tilt or shift to be applied in ANY direction (with any
film frame orientation)! (One *could* therefore, for instance, bring a
plane of arbitrary orientation into focus using the available movements
[I didn't say it would be convenient, just that the movements are
available to do it...;-].) As for shape control, one *can* tilt the rear
by tilting the whole works and then shifting the front to recenter the image...) - again, not convenient, but possible... Though I agree with
you (technically) that "full movements like view camera" may not be an appropriate description for the PB-4 bellows - but it is just maybe not (technically) inaccurate either...;-)
Hope This Helps