hey we was talking some with Peter about using other lens & lens scales
so I got out some of my scales I have scales for most all my standared
lens and then for 90mm 203mm AND ONE I JUST DON'T KNOW!!
as it is not marked!! I though it mite be a 65mm
SO to day I gave it a good try!!
I try a 45mm lens
a 50mm lens
a 65mm lens
a 75mm lens
and a 80mm lens

AT Infinity and 25' it works with any of thoes lens
BUT that it ! not at 15' or 10'
BUT with any of thoes lens Infinity to 25' is ONLY 1 mm of movment
of the Rail
I set up with the city warter tower for Infinity @ some 372 yards
then @ a target 150', 100', 50', 25', 15', 10'', & 5'

I also did it for my Tele-Arton 180mm as I am going to make a
scale for & my 240mm Tele-Arton

But anyway we where trying to telling Peter how to use his ranger finder
and scale then take that reading to the other scales for the other lens
he is wonting to use so that he did not have to always use the ground glass to use other lens

WILL HELL when it comes to lens say under 90mm it not much help
as Infinity to 25' is ONLY 1 mm of movment of the Rail
and Infinity to 5' aint 5 mm of movment of the Rail
the scales aint much help!!!

Thanks for the verification!

Yep.. I to, gave it a quick try.. and could see that if I wanted the accuracy, I would have to use the ground class..

Although the aperture setting would help somewhat with the scales, and bring the image in, but often in landscape, that doesn't become an option, when your in sunlight and shade.

Ha.. We sometimes make a bigger deal out of convenience, then whats necessary.
It's not like I'm shooting sports.. the fastest anything is normally moving, outside of birds, may be the water in the creek. Or if not at the creek, the clouds when we have them.

So how much time are we really talking about in changing backs?
Or the lens?
I've noticed for a quick simple lookie lo, before changing lenses, that the standard mask, that I use for the 135mm, works also well for the image that 120 roll film back, will make on the negative when using the wide angle 90mm.

So, it takes time, not instant gratification, to look at the sight, get familiar with it, and I've found, not always what you thought was the shot, is the shot taken. Heck with the 35mm, I've waited for the sun to hit a certain location, to make it a focus statement of the photo. And will proubally do the same with the speed as I get more familiar with all its ins and outs.

Yep.. one of the reasons I like the large format, although with the 3x4 I'm just on that edge, there are just so many possibilities. Not just with lenses, any lens that will fit within your focal plane of your bellows.. , but the scope of the negative.

Months ago got a shot, during spring with the green foliage coming on, bright, against the back drop of shadows. B&W, of the creek, shot a 3x4, with what I thought was the shot. But after development, saw that cropping it to a third of what it originally was, was even better. More focused for the scene.
Have been there done that with 35mm, but... not enough 'left' to be able to print it out as an 8x10.

So the large format gives you freedom with equipment and creativity, and by this forum learning more ins, tight to what that is.

Thanks guys for all your time and help.

Peter, if you have the infinity stops set for the 135mm and are sliding the front standard to them then switching to a longer focal length and gg focusing by moving the rails forward then resetting the infinity stops for the longer focal length, recalibrating the RF for the longer lens, then make focusing scales and infinity point indexes for the shorter focal lengths you might get better results.

The Kalart RF instructions are on the home page under Technical Information.

Ah yes I thought of that.. to adjust the RF for the 180mm, and your saying that the scales then may become more accurate.
How much of change of course would be the question, until done.

Yet it defeats the immediate need... shooting 120 roll film adapter, for the wide angle 90mm and 135mm.

The 180mm, up to this time, has only been used for long shots, and I have a mark, that I had put on the rail, a month or so ago, that correlates that lens with infinity. With the distance to the subject and generally f16- f32, that has worked well.

So that leaves the 90 and 135.. yet I don't think the difference would be that much.
Even if I got a 4x5 Century, I would still have to switch backs for one of these two lenses, as the RF can only be adjusted for one lens. Just as I have now and would have to do.

Also, I adjusted the RF last year... and though interesting, ... enough for a while.. its accurate now .. ;-), and rather honestly would change the backs so as to focus, what ever the lens, then go through that again. Although the second time would be easier, as I wouldn't have to replace the mirror.

So I rest back to the old adage.. if ain't broke, don't fix it.