Littman 45 Single/110 Polaroid question

Discussion in 'Large Format' started by adrian_morgan, Nov 6, 2003.

  1. I've come across this camera on the web, and I'm sure quite a few
    people have already seen it http://www.littman45single.com/.

    What i don't get is why it is US$2350. An excellent Polaroid 110
    might go for US$100, CLA maybe another $150, new back - $400? - So
    what do you get for the rest of the money? The big claim to fame
    seems to be it is a portable, hand held, accurate rangefinder 4x5.
    Is this the only camera to do this?

    Also, If you just attach a 4x5 back to the Polaroid, and adjust the
    rangefinder, surely then it is also an accurate rangefinder - I mean,
    they worked in the first place, didnt they?

    has anyone actually bought and used one of these, and can give some
    real life experiences?

    (Please note, I am not trying to slander this camera, but am trying
    to understand what makes it so special)
     
  2. Adrian,

    "Special", like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

    The Littmann is a pretty camera, but if your budget doesn't go quite that high, you'll find that there are other folks who build similar cameras for more reasonable prices.

    This was covered recently, so a quick search of the archives should turn up what you're looking for.

    Regards, David
     
  3. Adrian,you have an excellent point,and I trully understand what you express,the Littman 45 single value does not originate on the factthat it is aconverted Polaroid , first because what is the point of converting anything when great 4x5cameras have existed for years,and a mere conversion of these cameras is moreexpensive than a ussed linhoff
    technica with fewer
    features, that is why we do not even offer mere conversions.

    the littman 45 single is the only camera in the world with coupled rangefinder/parallax for the 4x5format and rated most responsive easiest to use and price has been validatedby Popular fotography who is the mostactive watchdog on behalf of the photographic consumer.

    if you consider
    that most owners ofsuch camera have replaced their otherequipmentwith it, that it is endorsed by the most respected shooters,and among the clientelle are also foto assistants which insist it is also the funnest camera they have owned.

    If you do not need coupled parallax and coupled rangefinder forthis format to aid in capturing spontaneity,you do not need this camera,

    If you cannot get pastthe fact that some old components are utilized
    to achieve the final product,you also dont need this camera,

    butmost of all if you consider it is rated as having exceeded all others in its class in history and it is not the mostexpensive in itsclass, thatwould help.

    if money is the issue buy a used linhoff,because converting isnt the issue with my camera, the issue with my camera is the summation of its conveniences.

    a conversion ofthese cameras without my propietary improvements will not offer cropping which will be diagonally of center and inacurate,

    largerfilm offers more resolution but depth of field is lost unless
    lens is stopped down , so when shooting wide open the tolerances in rf system when using a 3x4tessar lens mustbe improved if film is 4x5
     
  4. Thank you, William, for your most eloquent response. <p>Clearly the enormous, unprecedented value of the confluence of your design elements cannot be overstated.<p>The fact that the price has been validated by "Popular fotography", a publication with unassailable journalistic integrity, is all I need to know.<p>Where do I send the check?
     
  5. So essentially the difference between the Littman and the Polaroid with a grafted back (like the others that have been made) is the accurate focussing, and a CLA. Better tolerances for focussing have been achieved.

    Not sure what "a conversion ofthese cameras without my propietary improvements will not offer cropping which will be diagonally of center and inacurate, " actually means? Are you saying the cropping of the image is better, because the rangefinder is better?

    Does anyone else have instructions on adding a 4x5 back to the Polaroid cameras? Any instructions would be handy. maybe if I am not satisfied with the results I get by making my own, I can start saving for one of the Littman singles.
     
  6. Why not buy the NPC 195 for $750, and you get three free packs of film.
     
  7. Mr. Littman,
    "the littman 45 single is the only camera in the world with coupled rangefinder/parallax for the 4x5format"

    Far from me the idea to disparage your products, they are an outstanding alternative to 4x5" cameras.

    But I have been using a Linhof Master Technika for several years, and the double (non-coupled) sight (right side of the camera for focusing, top for composition) is not a drawback for me and even is an advantage in photographic process.

    Explanation : when I move my eye from the rangefinder to the finder, my brain carries out another function.
    IMO, the focusing step is more technical, and the composition action more artistic. When the first step is over, and I know that my photo is in focus, I can concentrate on the more creative part, I mean the composition of my photo.
    On a Leica, or another coupled rangefinder/composition system, I would be almost distracted by the bright-line frames when focusing or the split-image or double-image central area when composing.

    Your cameras are very attractive, full of advantages and disadvantages.
    One drawback is that the lens can't be changed, another one is that they are very expensive ;>))
    On another part, they are hand-holdable, and, as weight is a great problem, carrying them is not a hassle like carrying a field camera.
    They look beautiful and the conversion seems well manufactured.
    As you can notice, I hesitate...
    Regards
    JLL
     
  8. Oui Jean Louis
    (vous etes correct) you are right again, the littman 45 single is not a view camera or a field camera,

    what I wanted to have is a 4x5snapshot camera that would be operated
    much as a leica 35 and seeing that for example some fuji 6x7/ 6x6/ 6x9 or the makina 6x7 cameras also dont have interchangeable lenses, and their owners dont seem to mind.

    When i was a photo assistant i had a 35mm camera with one lens and made great pictures, then in time when i started to shoot for Vogue and Baazar i bought many lenses only to find that I was using
    my old lens the most and when I used the other ones the pictures were not of my liking,

    I began a study into point of view and realized that just as the human eye has only one focal length and you manage quite fine, the apparatus intended to capture your ideas and reflect your own point of view shoold be a tool which has acomprable focal lenghth to the human eye, then i know that in comercial photography you need tricks llike telephoto etc etc, but the best pictures ever are all shot with normal to slightly wide lenses.

    then I reiterate that this camera is intended for those who wish a accurate snapshot 4x5 which allows shooting of moving subjects and moving photographer simultaneously to up to 1 shot per second while mantaining accurate focus and composition.

    I understand your zen aproach to focusing with a linhoff and im quite familiar with it since my camera is so novel and before i had such option i used the linhoff for years and still do when i need complicated tilts and shifts.

    this reminds me of when i had a discussion with Nicolas Nixon who can shoot 8x10 hand held without any finder or
    ground glass focusing, but most people could not/ would not / and choose not.

    The idea of the Littman is that you are more able to work arround a subject and creativity rather that as you insist
    dedicate your focus to inner brain consultations because the camera doesnt compute the parallax,and while from my own experience I agree it can be done, I am certain It cannot be done as fast and it cannot be considered
    anything other than a distraction unless you enjoy the process more than the result or you come to realize that
    spontaneity and a snapshot camera are not what you seek


    You know what is really crazy? I couldnt agree with you more Im the first to insist that my camera isnt for everyone, it is only for those who wish to have a big neg snapshots without the hassles of a big neg camera
    after all most pictures are snapshots and 4x5 at this point is is usefull for increased resolution in creative pictures
    for proffesional use or dedicated amateur or craft applications such as platinum paladium or commercial photography.

    While digital photography is the future, and a large portion of the present, there are many who work or create on a regular basis who do not wish to have to go back to school and learn all the tricks and treats of the computer as they are quite pleased with using film, and while you insist my camera is expensive it allows for better results than digital systems which cost much much more and then as I can tell you from my own experience, siting behind a computer screen for hours to enhance/edit etc has its value, merit ,etc but Id rather take the pictureand have it be outstsnding than have to artificially enhance it.

    Then I agree that you do not need 4x5, 4x5 is a matter of choice , when you can push/pull a neg several stops without noticeable grain or cross process without grain your canvas is a better one, when you are not distracted by the weight of the camera which weighs as a nikon 35 with drive and booster,youre in better
    shape , when you can see the focus and composition simultaneously while life is happening you can capture it rather than having to tell it to stop because you are fiddling with the camera so than in turn you can capture something but whatever that may be will not be what is a reflection of life but a( still life).

    I am concious that the L45s has not been arround for long and that 4x5 has not been presented before as an option for snapshots as if you would approach them with a smaller camera and therefore your considerations
    of its value as a tool and price when comparing it to tools which do not offer this versatility are justified.
    the L45s is not versatile per se , it allows the user to be versatile when shooting, it is whether you preffer to capture life as it happens or to halt it because the camera cannot allow you to catch up with it, and my friend that is priceless to my clientelle, I applaud that you can take what most people would consider a disadvantage in a focusing system and see the bright side, most people would preffer to focus on what a subject is doing rather than
    mentally compensating fora camera.


    And regarding the disadvantage of lack of lens interchangeability I insist it is not a disadvantage at all,
    I will continue to use linhoff for tricks and like most of my customers I will use my camera for snapshots.

    there are outstanding alternatives to 4x5 products, most of which i love to some degree, keep in mind that only
    (160 )L45 s exist and due to its recognition and standing I believe its value to be worth double of what I sell them for ,so I believe it can be considered pricey but not expensive as it is an amazing investment to own , while most owners insist its an amazing investment to enjoy. i just checked the site of the biggest internet photography outlet and a \ pro-nikon with drive booster and lens costs more than my basic camera , gives you a neg many times smaller, millions may exist, and everybody can have one and no one will even consider the price issue,

    so all that matters is that there are creative people out there who want a big neg, dont care about periferal tricks
    and are willing to buy something for its performance .


    The final comment is that i have a swiss army knife which is usefull to some limited degree in many applications but when I want do a good job on a specific task I use the proper tool , my camera is the right tool for capturing spontaneity while enjoying the benefits of a big neg.

    That is all it is and that is all it will ever be, that is hardly a disadvantage since snapshots make up for 95% of photography ,

    Popular Photography is not the only Publication to have reviewed the L45s and AMERICAN photo gave it the 2003 editors choice award , PDN gave it a positive review and the most famous fashion photograhers in the world have done the same, in countless publications for free and with pride, if someone asks why not buy the NPC 195 FOR 750.00 i have to reply,why not buy the Polaroid 195 for a couple of hundred,of in the case of a 4x5 why not buy as i first explained a speed grafic
    for a couple of hundred and any lens.the answer again is while my camera is clearly not for everyone , it is clearly an advantage for
    its intended use, and the best of my peers seem to agree, this discussion was initiated with the question if anyone had heard of its results in the field, and the replies to that question which exist go as follows;" Sweet" (Bruce Weber)"the smartest thing |I´ve seen in a long time" (Patrick Demarchelier), "the funnest camera i have owned"
    (Sebastian Kim assistant to Steven Meisel).

    So If a particular publication isnt enough there is the comments by the owners which due to their standing should be considered useful.

    then there are the endless expresions of gratitude from the amateur owners .

    I will not conduct commerce in a discussion forum or advertise my website as it is inapropiate.



     
  9. Yeah, but $2350?...
     
  10. The price of the camera has not changed since january 2001
    and one and a half years later the L45s was awarded a patent,
    The Owners of the L45s, insist that its performance as a tool which aids their creativity exceeds anything they have previously used.

    the shortcut below will take you to a published interview with an accomplished fashion photographer who narrates his experience with the L45 s over 2 years.

    http://www.photoworkshop.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=8&num=408
     
  11. Yep - Read the article, and saw the author - How come I can't find a truly independent review of this product?
     
  12. I would say that the review by Popular Photography which has the largest circulation of any photography magazine , is truly independent because at the time they made it in December of 2002
    I wasn't an advertiser while many 4x5 manufacturers were, since then I have only placed an 2 inch ad in July of 2003 , and in 12/1/02 they said
    " for our money
    its the easiest to use , lightest weight and most responsive Lfer yet" they didn't have to validate the L45 s price its conveniences or insist its the most responsive large format camera yet. then the most accomplished photographers in the world have taken their time to participate in reviews for free such as Bruce Weber which was published by American Photo in 2001 in 3 full Pages with photographs, again American Photo rarely reviews equipment much less take 3 full pages to do so .

    you will also find that the photographers who have endorsed the L45s are not only the most established but have not been compensated for doing so, If then you consider that they have never previously endorsed anything else, I would say it is truly independent.

    Then American photo gave the L45 s the 2003 editors choice award for the 4x5 hand held category.

    Below are the comments by some of the owners again who do not need to insist it is better than what it is;

    Hello! My name is Pavel Ulianov I'm from Russia. I think I am a single owner of Littman 45 in Russia. I bought it from previous owner, (I'm a designer and engineer of optical systems). I’ve read all chapters of your site before I wrote first message. I think that you made main important think - you have shown the direction of developing LF cameras to the world.
    Pavel Ulianov, Russia
    Hello Mr. Littman, I am fortunate enough to own one of your cameras, in fact I recived it this morning. I just want to let you know that I'm very pleased.
    Piyatat Hematat, Photography Student, London, UK

    Hello Mr. Littman, Now that I have had time to use the 45 Single I am in love with it. I have made images with it that no other camera I have ever used could capture with such detail and resolution. The range finder makes it almost as convenient as a Leica. The handling of the 45 Single is surprisingly fast with its light weight and quick focusing. I have shot so many street portraits with the Single that would not be possible with a routine 4x5 camera. I was at an air show last weekend and while I originally was shooting the skydivers with my Nikon F5, I decided to pull out the 45 Single and see what I could do. I was able to get these fast moving subjects, with the camera held by hand and vertical. The attached image is one from last weekend's air show. No other 4x5 on this planet would have captured this image on film. Your camera is the best thing ever to come along for the moving photographer who wants the best possible image. Great job!!! I plan on buying another by years end; maybe with a 150 mm lens, although the Tessar I have is a great piece of glass that performs wonders. The other image I have sent along is one taken with available light, handheld with this tessar lens.
    Henry Hill, CO

    William, I’m very happy with the camera
    Christophe Rouxel, France

    William, I love the camera, I’m shooting landscapes, still life and portraits.
    Jesse Harris, NYC

    Hi - The camera has worked well when I have had the opportunity to use it. I am interested in the Grafmatic 6 sheet holder??
    Rodney Charters, CA

    I was originally introduced to the Littman 45 camera through the American Photography magazine article last year and decided after reading the reports and seeing some of the pictures that this is what I have been looking for. A few years ago I actually bought a Graphlex 4x5 camera to take large format street photographs but it never worked out because the camera is heavy, bulky and conspicuous in public places. I ordered a Littman 45 through William Littman in November, 2002 and received it in less than the 60 days advertised. Right now it is the only camera I have been using for my personal photography, it is everything I wanted in a hand-hold able 4x5
    Bob Mosher, Arlington, VA

    Thank you, I miss NY. The 45 Single is great.
    Hans Karlsson, Sweden

    Hello William, how are you doing? It's Monday night and I just got home from today’s shoot. We used your camera and it worked great. The Director loved it and is very happy with his purchase. Thank you again for everything.
    J. C. Dektor Films, Hollywood, CA

    William, I purchased a 45 w/ the 127 on it about a year ago. I shoot mostly action, but the 45 has replaced all others in my lifestyle and portraiture.
    Chris Owen, OR

    Dear William, Hi long time no talk, it's fantastic that your camera is doing so well, the more I use mine the less that comes as a surprise to me as it is a fantastic tool yielding such an incredible quality image. So much so that I want another one.
    Tom Craig, London, UK

    I love the camera. I shot some fantastic images in Hawaii from a helicopter. I am thoroughly engaged.
    Mike Toth, MA

    Upon receipt of his camera Alban Christ, NYC wrote...
    Hi William.How are you??? I want to thank you again for what you did, this camera is a pleasure and genius thinking.
    A year later he wrote...
    Hi William, It’s nice to hear from you. I will be ready this summer to order a new 4x5. I will keep you posted. Talk to you later.
    Alban Christ, NYC

    From Steven Jaspal in ref to his L45s 135mm body...
    Subject: Wow. I am speechless: This morning I went and shot some windsurfers getting ready at daybreak using your camera. I was moving around like I had my Pentax 67 with me, incredible!! Shot a cartridge of 8 sheets using the Fuji Quickchange cartridge system (these are a perfect match for your camera). Just developed the film and I am blown away. I know a good thing when I see it. I will be spending a few months in India next year so I am going to need a backup. The version with the standard Rodenstock-Ysarex 127
    When he received the second camera he wrote...
    Hi William, The camera arrived today and has tested well. I have fallen in love with this 127 lens, I love the feel it gives to a picture.
    Steven Jaspal, UK

    William; I now use only your camera for all my work, and I would like a second one as a backup.
    Jean Pierre Khazem, Paris, FR

    Camera is a wonderful piece of art – It worked out great at the olympics – Thanks again for getting it to me by the opening ceremony.
    Scott Duncan, IA

    I´m also thinking of ordering an extra camera now.
    Patrik Sehlstedt, Sweden

    Subject: Some camera – William, that thing is great. Thanx !!
    Peter Ginter, Hamburg, Germany

    Dear William, how are you? I will pass this message to my boss and he like so much your camera. Thank you so much. Keep in touch,
    Janet, Hong Kong, China

    William, The first time I used it, everything worked great. I'll send you some tearsheets after publication.
    Nat Butler (NBA), NJ

    Dear William I am writing you to tell you what a wonderful job you have done with the camera the range finder specifically calibrated i got very sharp tranies and i am really exited on using it to shoot all my work from now on thank you again for giving us photographers such a wonderful and useful camera.
    Bengy Toda, Phillipines

    Hello William! Thanks for keeping me in mind. I have just started using my camera. it's great! I hope you sell tons of them. Have a great 2003, William!
    Sonny Williams, Atlanta

    Hey William, sorry I lost contact with you but i have just been going non-stop. I love the camera and am really happy with everything I have produced so far and I am actually trying to use it more than my other equipment. Take care and I'll stay in contact, Peace.
    Jack Thompson, Houston, TX

    William, Since I got the Littman 45 Single, last year that is all I use for my work.
    Xavier Muniz, Photographer and former assistant to Annie Leibovitz.

    "The smartest thing I have seen in a long time."
    Patrick Demarchelier

    "Sweet"
    Bruce Weber

    I love my camera, I use it a lot.
    Henry Leutweiler, NYC

    "I love my camera."
    Paul Gillmore, first assistant to Annie Leibovitz

    "My clients freak out when they see the big polaroid’s, I love my camera"
    Gerald Forster

    "I love my camera"
    Alex Chatelain, NYC

    Bob Thomas comments on his first L45S: Dear Bill, I had a particularly successful shoot with one of your cameras last week. It was a set up shot of a soccer goalkeeper in action. I am so pleased with the results that I wanted to let you know what a brilliant camera it is (although you already know that). As a result of this success, shot on fuji provia single shot sheets using the polaroid film holder, I now want to obtain some 'real film backs' to enable me to use other emulsions that may not be available in single shot form. Please can you give me any advice on this? Can you supply these film backs/holders?
    Six Months Later Bob Wrote:
    Hi William, Many thanks for your email. I continue to use the 45 single for my sports work, among other things, and it continues to produce the 'wow' factor! I had been thinking about getting a spare camera, so your message was timely. I would like to order one 45SSWRF100% APOS150 and one 45SSWRF100% YSAR127. I think that's $5,300. Please let me have your bank details and I'll arrange payment. Before you finally stop making these things I'll probably want to re-equip again in about 18 months.
    Bob Thomas, Overtone, UK

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    Mr Morgan i do not know what you consider indepandant, most people value the opinion of those who have succeeded professionally, Publications with a track record,

    and finally the comments of those who own a product, after which I must insist that wasn't invited to this discussion and after I provided the answers you insist in belittling reviews which most products would dream to receive after years of paid advertising, when I received the reviews I wasn't an advertiser, so im afraid they could not be more independent,

    I have reviewed your comments and the " alleged " reason for initiating this discussion and I must say again that the answers you allegedly seek were available by simply doing a search with " littman 45 single", if that didn't work, you could have contacted me and tried to get answers from the source, then I came here uninvited after noticing an intention to disrupt in your original words, I said nothing but after all necessary sources have been provided to you and you don't wish to believe Publications ( the best) photographers ( the best) and owners of the product.

    You didn't initiate this thread to find the truth but to belittle it, the truth is in black and white,and from all walks of life ,If you do not trust successful people to review a product , tech data from the source, or the worlds leading publications it is not that you cant find an independent review,

    you initiated this thread to create such appearance and you have failed, but please keep it up because it has boosted my sales enormously, as most people love the reviews which are excellent




     
  13. Mr Littman,

    I did not come here to belittle your product, nor increase your sales (although if that has happened, then congratulations), nor distort the truth. I asked a couple of direct questions, which have not been answered as yet.

    1. Is the main difference between the littman 45s and any other polaroid with a 4x5 back grafted onto it, the accurate rangefinder focussing?

    2. What causes the increase in costs? I mean it is not like you are creating a whole new camera. The lens and body are already in existence. I can understand you are making a profit etc, and charging what the market will bear, but it just seems exhorbitant, when you consider there are other options that offer a polaroid 4x5 back conversion for US$600 - and they offer the coupled rangefinder etc. Does it cost that much extra to get a more accurate rangefinder?

    3. The original Polaroid your camera is based on - is the focussing so inaccurate as to make it useless for 4x5?

    simple yes or no, removing the marketing speak would be nice.

    As to the comment, I could find out what I wanted by searching for Littman 45, I did do that search, and found your site. I couldn't find a comparison of your Littman 45S and any other Polaroid with a 4x5 back (the obvious competition to your product).

    I accept the findings of Popular Photography, and have read Bruce Weber's comments. He loves the camera obviously. I wonder if Bruce has used any of your competition? If this camera was US$600 then I would queue to buy one.

    I look forward to your response
     
  14. Adrian,

    You may also find that a Crown Graphic, although larger, would meet your needs as well. It's the original 4x5 hand-held camera. You can find them for $200 - $300. A Polaroid film holder might be an additional $100.

    Regards, David
     
  15. Pardon my ignorance; I wonder when the last time was that Bob Weber and Patrick Demarchelier used one on any fashion editorial or campaign.
     
  16. Mr Anatole;
    Bruce has two cameras which according to his assitant have been used on jobs regularly since january of 2001 , i was at their studio last summer and had a chance to converse extensively on the subject,

    W chin just ordered 3 and i visited him on the set of italian vogue where he was shooting an actress for a fashion editorial using only my camera and the film looked incredible.

    i could go on for days.

    Ok Mr. Morgan;

    David is right and I have said the same thing earlier ,if you do not value coupled parallax correction you dont even need to spend 600.00, but perhaps another 4x5 that is in that price range has to at least have a dedicated cam to the specific lens if you hope to rely on the rf with lens wide open .

    Some time ago there was another discussion and participants who are " competitors " as you refer to them because you insist that my camera is a conversion but i have explained why the shell is not its merit, anyway these people had an open interest in undermining my patent , but in the end your friend who started the threads admited I had a legal patent and it had to be respected.

    They insisted that I was unreasonable, in the end I gave in to the pressure in the hopes of finding a better coexistence with what you call the "other options" and agreed to limit my patent to accommodate an alleged prior effort on a limited conversion , hoping that by doing that I would not find myself again having to explain the differences in the products and with the willingness to trust that the so called competition would have the willingness to do so, sufficiently well so I wouldn't have to.

    So after the treads ended I went to see my attorneys to proceed and they told me that without valid proof of a prior effort / art ,I was in the same place as last April or actually worse because the stakes were raised by these forums, and the whole matter of their approach had become highly questionable, and the fact that after so much racket valid evidence did not surface raised many more questions, then a month went by and you started this thread which puts me again in the position of having to divert my time to answer questions or face the prospect that the value of my product is undermined. in other words, a" loose- loose" situation .

    After that discussion ended I did a little research of my own and I am now convinced that such allegations of a prior conversion are not true.

    The person who claims to have priority on a mere conversion can submit such evidence to the USPTO and have it considered, I am not the patent office nor the jubilee department, I wasted 6 months trying to have such evidence submitted to my attorneys , and up to last month in the previous discussion the person replied "that it wasn't his duty " to cooperate, so finally after the forum I tried to do it myself only
    that after my patent has been issued , and that now the doubt factor has been increased by their words while the alleged evidence is still to be seen, its out of my hands.

    Therefore all aspects of my camera are Patented whether it includes parallax correction or not if it has coupled rf, on a 110 Polaroid model listed in the patent such conversion is patented if it meets just one the claims allowed.

    my patent # is US 6608971 and other patent applications are pending in Us and also in Australia .
    ----------
    "The original Polaroid your camera is based on - is the focusing so
    inaccurate as to make it useless for 4x5?"

    ( yes)Absolutely and I can prove it, unless all improvements which I have patented are present simultaneously that will be the case.
    a) the original cam in camera has a parabolic curvature for 3x4 and requires modification for 4x5( patented) ,the mechanisms which transmit the lens movement to the rf have play and require modification( patented) the mirror systems in the finders and secondary mirrors have play and require modification ( patented).and better affixing tech( patented).

    --------------------
    "I couldn't find a comparison of
    your Littman 45S and any other Polaroid with a 4x5 back "

    As stated above the Pro's compare my camera to the best " known" large format camera products of any format in history such as a linhoff technika, the products you refer to are recent versions which surfaced after mine and as the person who claims to have priority on a limited conversion insited in a forum that he offered his product for sale on an auction last april because he had learned of mine and offered it to see what would happen and such conversions which are heavy have no parallax correction and I neither believe in their technical merit nor am I convinced they are legal. and it is not my duty to have to explain what another offers.
    ------------------------
    "I mean it is not like you are creating
    a whole new camera. The lens and body are already in existence"


    I am creating a whole new camera even if some of the parts are from an old 110 these are all entirely modified for the new use.
    even the lens is which by the way the original 127 ysarex isn't a 4x5
    lens, I use it for a special application using a special secret formula I invented which isn't even in my patent so that it gives a lot of sharpness at center and soft edges for portraiture. (it will do that anyway) but I improve sharpness at centerpoint
    but in any event such lens requires a very accurate rf because it isn't a 4x5 lens to begin with .

    such lens had an entire different effect on 3x4 and the entire image was sharp, just that is evidence that validates my tech comments.

    It works great in my camera as 1 of 4 options strictly to create an old time portraiture effect which is possible because the coupled parallax enables the user to locate the subject in the proper place which is absolutely necessary if you intend to benefit from the inevitable selective focus of such lens when used on 4x5 wide open ,

    The rest of the options I offer are the opposite end of the spectrum being the latest edition Schneider apo symmar L lenses which are apo corrected and have
    coverage up to 5x7 and I even use a 8x10 lens for 4x5 in the super symmar apo aspheric xl so that the entire frame is shot with the center of the barrel.
    ------------------------"-I accept the findings of Popular Photography,"

    well then/,since they insist that; for their money its the easiest to use lightest weight and most responsive lfer yet ,they are not comparing it to another 4x5 Polaroid conversion ,first because by December of 2002 no one knew of "another conversion" which makes you wonder why??and second if they insist it exceeds all large format cameras not only 4x5 is surely exceeds a mere conversion since to have a 4x5 camera without parallax correction you have to convert nothing as they are available in piles all over , if you accept their findings , then the issue should have been settled.


    "and have read Bruce Weber's
    comments. He loves the camera obviously. I wonder if Bruce has used any of
    your competition?"

    Very good question, as stated earlier the first cameras I made had neither coupled parallax correction nor accurate rf because I hadn't instituted the gradual improvements that I eventually submitted with my patent application, to overcome these difficulties laser beams were attached to a camera thru welds in 26 different internal and external points, and the camera was fixed on a camera stand that was bolted to the floor to assure continuity of the research.

    And in this manner I was able to document that the displacements of the parts and mechanisms were different every time you focused, and by a process of elimination I ended having to tighten the whole rig, to do so I first have to tear it apart and start over, and to make 1 unit I use up to 5 old ones because many of the old parts are stamped and when you pull out the caliper you want to cry, so you have to compensate to a degree by modifying them, none of them are standard for such tolerance specifications of 10.000 in or less so they all require modification in one way or another, this is a set up in which each part has to do 100% of its job and you cannot compensate errors by adjusting calibration screws which in the end can only secure a setting but do nothing to correct a false interpretation of ;lens displacement or its optical properties which would apply to the cam. ,


    The problem is that the modification required is mostly due to the fact that many of the parts were stamped and not originally machined and so the modification required has to be judged by me in each case and different in each case, and this limits the amount of units that can be made, to be precise, only 160 units have been made since mid march of 2000.

    And when you look at the cost of research over 5 years, the cost of patent applications and the cost of all the peripheral jobs I have to farm out the profit is less than you may think. when I have spent the last 6 months diverted from my work with these requirements to have to explain myself because others don't explain their product I have to insist I'm really tired.

    let me insist that the original cameras were great for 3x4 some reliance issues with calibration could use improvement mainly because when the cameras were made some materials which are available today did not exist, but beyond this the tolerances in the unit are very good for 3x4.

    To make a great 4x5 rf assisted camera you cannot think of making 1 you need to make at least several dozen at a time you cannot do a cut and paste job with whatever you find in the cheapo department and make a great camera, that is in what refers to assembly for continuity purposes and for tolerance purposes at least 100 parts of the same have to be prepared simultaneously,just think that whether metric or inches all measurements are considered as a part of a unit such as a meter , and if a part is perfect on its own then you do not need comparisons or continuity control but in this case it is essential that it exists even if you only make 1 camera you need to have an overview of what the perfect part is and how it will react over time when installed for the specific application , the machine shop which cuts my bodies with a computerized counter utilizes a degree of accuracy which would be impossible if doing a unit at a time, when they did I had to go back with a hand file and a caliper to correct minute errors which I can not tolerate .

    I have to prepare 100 bodies at a time even if I never use them , all these requirements increase my costs , many smaller parts have to be made from scratch because the old ones cannot be modified for the new use, and again quantity is an issue on all these aspects.


    It is regrettable that I haven't the time nor should this have to turn into a thesis to explain better why the larger the lateral magnification, the smaller the depth of field but by the laws of physics it can be demonstrated by pulling a rubber band from opposite sides, if you increase the size one way you decrease the size on the other end, its a simplistic answer but 100% true, contrary to what you think, I was hoping that a mere conversion would have worked because I could have made several in a day and made more money than with my camera both because it would have been cheaper to make buy and sell,


    Unfortunately it didn't work at all, mainly as I explained because there are great cameras which I have mentioned ( like a used linhoff)and because of their age and because unless coupled parallax is present, many people are starting to park their 4x5 cameras and use other options,so the clientele either wants a more convenient 4x5 snapshot camera which is the L45s or they will buy the other great existing 4x5 cameras such as a used linhoff for the same price or less than a mere conversion.

    The resurgence created by the L45s was because it is light ( patented) , it has coupled parallax for 4x5 on all focal lengths(patented) both for the coupled parallax and the different lens options (patented), and because the rf is accurate at all distances ( improvements patented)and the cam is dedicated to the specific lens(patented) and the synergy created ( patented) is what is convenient.the mere conversion aspect is patented as well.

    Bruce himself came later than the initial prototype stage, but several famous photographers already owned the first cameras which by the way weren't called littman 45 single but(II0 Polaroid series converted to 4x5), let me just say that when two laser beams don't align in projection, something is wrong, , and when I fixed all the problems the beams would align in all cases and the degree of failure was "0" , we would subject the units to impact, heat and stress and the settings would hold , while before the settings would fail by just focusing the camera, to me and to my clientele it was worth it.

    The only point I expect you to agree with is what is a given in photographic terms which is that if you rattle that a mere conversion weighing almost as much as a linhoff ( 5.5-6-7 pounds) that is the case because if it is ever proven that prior alleged conversion is valid all who wish to make one would have the right to duplicate the prior effort and nothing else. and such camera has no movements and a 3x4 lens and no parallax is available for 600.00 I tell you buy a used linhoff which will cost no more, because the person who insists to have the right to make such conversion sent me an email In April insisting that a Linhoff was better than his camera and his camera was nothing more than a 110B with a 4x5 flange on the back, which is a really cute comment except that I wish he would tell that to you and the rest of the public in a forthright manner so I don't have to be put in this situation, ( get it?)and as I agree with the evaluation that is what I have reiterated here so once we get to that point I tell you the following,

    *) most of my clients have either owned, used a Linhoff or they still do and choose to use mine instead for hand held snapshots. so if the choose mine over the best 4x5 in the planet your insistance of comparing my camera to a mere conversion is settled,
    .
    In one of your first responses you mentioned (better C.L.A?) and that isn't the case with my camera ;cleaning, lubricating and adjusting is only 3 out of 70 operations which go into making my camera and are some of the least important operations in the process because the point is also that what I do is not a( re- pair) which means to again put together as it was because first it isn't so ,and if it was it wouldn't work to justify the expenditure on film sheets which cost 2-4 usd by the time they are developed.

    My original intention when I was talking with Polaroid OEM in 2000 was to make the first units with the old Polaroid's and then make a mold to make the body out of Abs or similar to save time, eventually I discovered that the biggest labor and cost isn't in the body, the lens (regardless of make) or the back but in the time I need to invest after assembly to merge all technologies to create perfect synergy , to be more specific I'm now certain that it takes me twice the time to complete a camera once its fully assembled to just make it work well, than to assemble it.

    this would be different if all parts were standard to 4x5 specs but that would require another type of investment and it would cost more to produce than what it could sell for ,that is why a fully modern or older version has not been previously attempted , I have conversed with the right sources and verified it to be the case.

    Someone else here raised the issue that many great alternatives exist to 4x5 and I agreed and the fact is that a 6x7 camera will produce better results than a 4x5 if the 4x5 is not focused perfectly with the lens wide open , if you focus thru ground glass that wont be the case but if you do you can forget about capturing spontaneity,

    If you have a budget of 600.00 I have given you a suggestion which most pros would back up which is to buy a used lingo it is a great multipurpose camera and has many features and doesn't need any converting to be what it is.

    there are many variables involved in this and I regret it cannot be condensed into a yes or no answer and on one side you expect me to substantiate the validity and on the other you ask me to cut to the chase ,

    You have so intensely raised the issue of independent review of my product and I point out that I achieved the standing of most responsive large format camera in history for the L45s without piggy back on the Polaroid name in my brand or Logo
    beyond insisting or describing what I have to do to the parts and that I use the parts and by the same token I expect that if someone wishes to compete ( and legal) that they manage to offer their products in a way that it doesn't create a need for what you have done here, last month I emailed the " other" options you refer to and told the one in charge of the pack that I was willing to look the other way provided that I would never again find myself In the position of having to clarify these matters on their behalf and that what had happened should serve as a building block after which they would be willing to disclose camera weight, the no parallax issue, the rf shortcomings so I wouldn't have to again find myself in this situation.

    A product which is offered as a conversion of an existing product and using the original brand name such as Polaroid and the camera model name, has the duty to disclose that the original properties of the product are lost in the process such as parallax correction, weight restrictions ( due to existing patent) not to mention that the 127 lens on the camera is not a 4x5 lens and if they offer it as a 4x5 camera they are obligated to disclose that or at least not insist that it covers 4x5 by posting pictures
    shot on a tripod with the lens stopped down, i disclose what the lens can do and i show its characteristics on my site by posting only pictures shot with lens wide open
    otherwise what is the point of showing the efficiency of an rf if the lens is stopped down all will be in focus even if you use a bottle as a lens. or a pinhole.

    I use such lens on some cameras to create a funky effect which is great but i dont conceal its coverture issues nor insist it is a 4x5 lens, i regret that i have to come here to do someone elses homework and not by choice but because i am left no choice, and it is I who is presented as being unreasonable.
    ,

    I have a patent, I'm a Polaroid OEM assigned to this project, I have an established product , I am licensed, insured bonded etc etc. what I had to prove I already have, both legally and in the reliance of the product, and while I'm amazed that disruptive situations boost sales , Its not an ambiance which I wish to embrace.because I have no time to work , or enjoy the fruits of my labor.

    I made it very clear to them that I would allow them to proceed , which I did even though some of them went on to then offer and sell versions insisting that they had coupled parallax correction for 4x5 etc.

    This new thread you have started shows that the cooperation I could expect from their offers in clarification has not occurred, your questions prove it, and your responses ratify it , the ensuing relentless insistences that I should reply to specific related issues or validate you making your own camera, then asking the public to provide you with a map for doing so???

    Like mentioned earlier ,and if you observe carefully you insist that my price is exorbitant and it is my duty to justify my product comparing it to theirs , trust that it was their duty to properly disclose theirs,, you have proven that you are informed of their offers and that proper disclosure has not occurred because you are asking me to do it on their behalf, and in a way that feels like gunpoint, on a yes or no basis, telling me to cut the " marketing speak"perhaps you think I shouldn't be so sensitive, let me just say that the guy who initiated the last threads told me to take a vacation, and I did, and last week when I got to the tropics to visit my family after 5 years I received an email from a client alarmed that a new disruptive thread had been initiated on photo.net ,


    its come to the point where its really ridiculous and unbearable, on your initial comment as to why you initiated the thread you had to clarify that you didn't intend to slander the product, fine ,but it is still disruptive and all your actions instigate or criticize my modus opreandi, you even thought so and had to clarify it, not a situation I need to find myself in , and the answers you seek ,again in public , should have been provided by them ,cooperation is a 2 way st, it hasn't worked out, so in my book and from now on ,My camera is legal while the " rest" is "?",

    I was hoping that you would not insist in pushing me and pushing me to such subject so that I could avoid the inevitable and continue to look the other way, you could have easily proceeded to buy whatever specially since its clear you have no intention of buying mine but when you leave me no choice and you insist that I should answer what is not my business, that is where things need to stop.

    You can tell by the way I responded originally that I gave you my opinion and experience on the mere conversion and left it up to you to do as you please, but when I find that people will not find that sufficient and I have to be in a tough spot every month I say basta. "finita la comedia" the person who initiated the threads last month ended them by stating that I had a legal patent and it had to be respected, at this point that includes all aspects of the product, after what has happened last month I cannot change that myself without valid proof of partial priority, I tried but it is out of my hands . after what has happened here I am drawing a line in the sand .

    Should that change in the future( I seriously doubt it) I will be the first to notify everyone,in the meantime I expect to be able to proceed without further disruption and that if someone has a priority right they should proceed in a lawful manner to establish it with the proper authority which is the USPTO , and instead of forcing me to disrupt my schedule or have to justify my product because they don't properly explain theirs perhaps they will change their tactics in the future if it is found that they have the right to proceed.

    It is very clear since no answer I could provide to you was sufficient,and since my tolerance of what I have no proof is legal was also not sufficient that on top I have to come here to justify my product?, forget it, not worth it.nothing has changed except that I'm over the whole thing and I ask that this discussion be considered closed .

    You are from Australia just as your friend who initiated last months threads in which he summarized his actions and words in those threads at closing of the discussion as "instigation"

    this thread is again nothing but instigation, because i provided all the answers you required from all walks of life but the only answer which will satisfy you is to corner me into validating what i do not approve of , and this thread arrived almost at aniversary date from end of last threads.I didnt want to answer 2 of your questions because if I did I could no longer look the other way, you left me no choice.



    Im sure people can put their weekends to better use . i will certainly hope that these
    things don't continue , so I can do just that, thank you very much .

    all best W



     
  17. William,

    Easy there, big fellow! It's an internet forum - price of admission was free, as I recall - there's no need to call your lawyers just because a few folks here don't understand your product. Lawyers love your money; whether you win or lose they still get paid. Leica doesn't issue a four page response to every question about M7 rangefinder flare, do they? And their product is an even worse value than yours: for $2,500 you don't even get a lens with your shiny new M7.

    Just 'cause somebody's from Australia doesn't make them an 'instigator'. It's a big place; I've seen it on my map. Is this how you address a potential customer? Bet you didn't learn that in Marketing 101.

    Anyway, the key difference is this: The high-end fashion guys who like your camera aren't going to be seen dead using a Polaroid with a welded-on Grafloc back, and the rest of us aren't likely to mortgage the house for yours when so many other options are available.

    You should enjoy your niche, and let others enjoy theirs. Oh yeah, and maybe go easy on the caffeine?

    Regards, David
     
  18. Mr Littman.
    Firstly. Twice you mentioned "my friend". Let me assure you I have seen the gentlemens site you are referring to, yet he is not my friend (not meant in a negative way). To assume I know him, is like assuming you are a friend of President Bush's.

    Secondly, thankyou for finally answering my questions re the rangefinder accuracy. If you are essentially recreating the rangefinder (as I beleive you are suggesting) for all of these cameras I can understand the cost increase over other products I have seen.

    Thirdly. You mention you saw this question posted after a "client alarmed that a new disruptive thread had been initiated on photo.net" I fail to see what was disruptive about my original questions. It is the same as asking how can Leica justify $4000 for an all manual body? People weigh in on these type of questions, justifying their purchase, or have an understanding of what makes it so special. I fail to see what is 'disruptive'. The only reason there could be to see it as being 'disruptive' is, if the questions I was asking were going to reveal some sort of secret that would destroy your possibility of sales. By you answering my questions with the clear and level honesty you have demonstrated, you show you have nothing to hide, and thus increase the credibility of the product.

    I would love to hear from you client as to how he/she likes your product, and how easy it is to use, including any irritants they have with it.

    Thanks.
     
  19. Mr Morgan

    i understand that a big expenditure by you requires a big research, what you may not have known is that i have a patent and that i trully do not believe that someone else has rights that would permit such conversion which you are interested in so being that a short while back I was very disrupted and I agreed to look the other way
    i find it is disruptive to a situation that was hanging bya thread
    that you put me in the position of validating it when im merely tolerating it and i do not believe in its merit nor that it is legal.

    I have nothing against you I am upset that as a result of poor representations by others i have to find myself In a situation which you have confirmed is just as i had insited since april and the reason why I needed to find a just balance by lerning what was permissible, i also couldnt answer you for legal reasons until finaly you left me no choice, i have no beef with you, i have an issue about the standing of my product, the so called competition is either going to get with the program and properly present their products and not cause me to have to clarify it myself in comparison to mine or they are going to have to go away.

    Sorry David; and not a critizism to Mr morgan whom i dont know,
    but to the tone or the aproach which isnt acceptable i have nothing against anybody yet in the end i have a right to proceed in harmony and what i consider potential customers are those who have the willingness to respect the value of my product,not those who make a dedicated effort to establish the opposite, those who allow me to do my work in peace , those who do not post requests for maps to making their own cameras , those who do not tell me to " remove the marketing speak" when i am taking my time to provide a responsible answer and then tell me to answer " yes or no".

    My product is available for those who have the willingness to adress me as i am accostomed ,otherwise there is nothing to discuss, I feel I deserve to be adressed with respect , what that respect is i have experienced over 3 years from all my customers, and all thruout my photographic trajectory, so i know what i can expect, i get it all the time, and thats the end of that.

    If someone feels that the price or anything else requires them to ignore that then I cant proceed,and i dont mean to sell a camera, but to communicate period , I have no interest in anything else, i dont need it, I dont want it, and i wont have it.

    Im not a chain store or a licencee of a product, I have a product which i make at great effort and sacrifice and to which i have exclusivity, and more demand than what I can produce, Im not upset with him I am upset that because i offer something people assume
    that there are no limits and that they can adress me in whichever way they choose , and have no regard for what their words do to my product,

    I agreed to allow others to proceed, and i have , and that should have given me the chance to enjoy what you call my niche, but it hasnt , as a month after the last thread I find myself in the same spot.

    there are plenty of talented people who have no quarrel paying the price of my camera and I get upset when people go to great effort to say" yes , great review but... I wonder if such person saw or used the " other" instead, , who cares ,if you dont accept the words of the most established or mine buy the knock offs very quietly, accept i have a patent or fight it, but dont ask me to validate them or compare mine to that because Its not appropiate.

    I tried it i gave in and this is the result to which on top Im told to cut the caffeine.

    The scale is very well balanced, on one side there is the reliance, the justified price, the reviews the comments from owners etc, and on the other side of the scale there is the patent, both sides make for a very good reason that i dont need to have everything i say be disputed or everything the valid sources have said presented as questionable .

    When i explain in detail why i believe that a mere conversion is not merited and that is not sufficient, i trust it is time to consider that my imput is not being accepted when im instigated to either answer on behalf of competitors or appear to not have contributed it is then that I insist that i have looked the other way but i am not being allowed to.

    My customers are not all rich most are middle class many are just assistants and some are famous, i also found an effort to presnt my customers as buying it because they are famous and rich which is not the case, maybe 20 are and the rest are not, these relentless half truths are not welcome either as it again aims to present the price as being valid only to a select few, when that is a lie.

    my customers all have one thing in common, they adress me with kindness in all instances , i need nothing else and i will accept nothing else .

    I get many emails which read ( how much????) and Im not interested so im clearly less interested in making cameras for those who dispute all i have to offer.all i have to say

    Last month when the thread was really harsh many apologized to me and went on to place orders , thats fine I can turn the page and move on , the problem is that if Im not being allowed to and i have had it .

    Money is only good if it is handed over with apreciation and recognition, so I didnt come here expecting any, I came here first because my product was being disputed, as claim to fame due to "better cla and other nonsense "and let me be clear that if a customer doesnt contact me first and grant me the chance to answer his questions or doesnt trust me to begin with I dont need his buisness and I dont want his buisness,

    I would have to be crazy to accept that after i have the willingness
    to make myself available to respond questions and even reccomend
    other products when mine isnt the right choice, my answers and those of others are not acceptable because all that maters is highlighting a mere conversion, after pages and pages of explanation my words are rated as" marketing speak" so fine i will,take it easy and I will simply.

    A) my product has been validated by the best in the proffesion
    B) my product is owned and validated by people of all different finatial backgrounds who email me on a regular basis with notes of gratitude.
    C) It is available to those who have the willingness to work arround me.
    D) it is patented
    E) It is my duty to make sure Im not diverted from where My product stands or where Im at.

    thank you for insisting that i should enjoy my niche but at the same time that is being undermined here when after i have looked the other way as i agreed yet Im instigated to justify my niche based on another niche ????,


    I dont have to call any lawyers My patent has already been Issued , and the very initiator of the last threads insisted it should be respected, I agree, that is why I obtained it.

    That is why using a familiar word it is ludicrous that I am forced
    to make reference to such other products because the person who initiated this thread insists that he cannot tell the difference between mine and theirs , let me be clear Im not insisting it is his fault, it is the fault of the competition, and as what they offer is covered by my patent even thogh i dont believe it is merited they are obligated to correct this,

    and i apologize but that is very serious legaly because it demonstrates what i have insited all along which is that the have made no effort to limit their presentations or make them in such a way as to not confuse the market in my detriment after is clear that I created the market.and it justifies all my previous complaints that while im willing to look the other way to accomodate others I have been constantly disrupted
    from my work and my product has suffered as well.

    The problem is that the truth is not what you state my customers are not all high end fashion guys but people like you who respect that
    the price is validated and then have verified so themselves and that is why if Im asked to look the other way , a minimum of tact is expected in return by not attacking what you call my niche as you refer to my product. if these situations continue I have to consider my patent, if tact is the route of choice and people dont trash my product to justify knock offs I can live with it, but if i will not be able to proceed confortably either way problems will be inevitable.

    Ask me to coexist and i will , I have done so after i agreed to, I also expect something in return which is the respect I have earned and to not again find myself in these situations without a choice.

    I will continue my commitment to my clients and the product, i thank you for the opportunity to participate in this thread, what i could contribute I already have , now I have buisness to take care of, commitements and a life .

     
  20. Mr Littman,

    Could I offer the following alternative when asked about your product?

    If faced with the above questions - ie an attempt to question your charge for the camera, you could say the following:

    "Yes it is true there are other products out there with a 4x5 back, however with the Littman 45s, you will find I have rebuilt the rangefinder with newly contructed parts. I found that adding a 4x5 back to a camera designed for a 3x4 back, meant the lens would not cover the whole of the 4x5 back image area (without stopping down or using a pinhole). If you want to shoot wide open or any other in between f-stop (as I do) there are a number of modifications that need to be made, based around the rangefinder, that go beyond simple calibration and adjustment (in fact beyond the available ranges for adjustment!). Essentially I have manufactured the parts used for focussing the rangefinder and adapted the camera to use these parts, as well as grafting the new 4x5 back. All of these changes made (70 in total) mean the camera handles a lot differently than the original polaroid it was based on!
    Essentially it is a new camera, and not just a modification of the old one. Think Reconstruction, rather than Renovation! I do a compete CLA as part of the package, and often find I need to canabilise 4-5 cameras to get all the parts within the appropriate tolerances required for the conversion. You will find these bodies are stamped, meaning the original tolerances, whilst fine for 3x4 use are not adequate enough for shooting on 4x5.

    All of the changes that are required, do mean the cost is significant, but the results people achieve make it worth it."

    If this had have been the response to my initial question, the discussion would have ended here and now.

    I'd suggest you get used to people questioning your camera, because at $2350 it is a significant investment for a person to make. People question the Leica MP, or the Nikon F5, all the time, and yet they are still bought by significant numbers of people. Questions being raised give you publicity - which by your own statement is a good thing, because you make more sales. You need to know how to turn that publicity into a good thing.

    I would also suggest if your responses were a little less defensive, you would find people wouldn't have to suggest you 'go easy on the caffeine!'

    Adrian
     
  21. Mr. Morgan; thank you for your persistence on the one subject which I clarified is not my duty to highlight /answer etc.

    I have answered that I do not believe in the merit of such products, because for the cost you have confirmed there are very good existing products that do more and better , why should I have to explain that when I haven't offered a mere conversion since the summer of 2000 because it fails (period) i dont believe in it to offer it myself why should i validate it when made by others( dont you get it), and it is only when you insist that because they offer a conversion they are competition( I do not know that it is a legal competition)

    it is then that you confirm that they have confused the market because as I thank you that you have confirmed that you are not their friend but a legitimate potential customer and you are instigating me after all I have explained that I should continue to explain theirs compared to mine , and as I have explained that a mere conversion isn't merited because better products exist at same or lower cost yet you insist in saying that these people are my competition and that I should have even listed them on my site and offer comparisons? after I explained in detail why it is that such explanation isn't warranted or merited nor expected from me,

    Therefore after you obtained the explanation in technical terms and it wasn't sufficient and you insist I should describe such products as competition , and insist and insist I am clear that you do not wish to allow me to look the other way so here is my answer;

    A) you claim to have visited such sites or offers yet you came here originally asking if such products exist.then in your original question for starting the thread you stated"has anyone actually bought and used one of these, and can give some real life experiences? " as such experiences are readily available in my site
    I again fail to see the point.


    B) after admitting that you have seen such offers and are aware of them why not ask them to clarify what they offer comunicating with them directly to their sites or offers and not in a situation like this where you are attempting to use my site and name to validate theirs you have even questioned the establishment of my product compared to theirs.

    If when I explain why It isn't my duty or wish to because Of many reasons you persist, while insisting you do not intend to disrupt the value of my product, or you don't understand why I believe your actions are disruptive, then you validate that theirs are, because its Sunday i spent my vacation ( the first one in 3 years answering your questions and you told me to "cut the marketing speak"

    and instead of doing what I have to I'm here having to
    bother with what is already protected by my patent.

    C) I have looked the other way and in my last response insisted I still had the intention to do so, but you will not allow me to and technical merit differences are not enough, my response is;consider my patent, and if such products do not meet any of the claims allowed in my patent and in any patent applications pending then they are fine" I doubt that can be the case.and it should be clear in their offers and it isnt and the proof is that we find ourselves here.

    D) Being that you admitted that my product is out of your price range and you do not accept my words and those of other thread participants which have pointed you to better products than a mere conversion for much less, I fail to see that your interest is obtaining a better camera for your money and that all you wish is to corner me into validating that which I don't believe in ( at all) or obtaining my permission to do it yourself, I think it is clear you have no intention other that to put me in a tough spot.

    I) you represent yourself as interested in the information for your own purpose, and you have obtained it, may I ad, with no consideration to me, and as I insist that it is not my duty to highlightwhat others do specially if I do not agree with it, your insistence is disrespectful,

    I just noticed you provided my web address and use my product name etc , and came here allegedly because you did not succeed in obtaining the info from me( you didn't ask) and from other sources( you went/ you didn't ask) when you come here and obtained it, and you still put me on the spot your intentions are very clear, and I find them malicious. I fail to see what your duty is to highlight the offers of others and your right to breath down my neck insisting or telling me what to say or do.

    F) yesterday I asked to be left alone and I would continue to look the other way, you will not let me so now I wont and my answer is
    " my product is patented"

    G) If you will not trust my words or accept my request to be left alone accept the legal answer:

    Claims 4/7/8/9 of my patent have nothing to do with a better rangefinder or a better camera and speak of a mere conversion, so let me be clear ( a mere conversion is patented and I am the beneficiary)claim 4 specifies an adapter having 4 walls defining two parallel open spaces , makes no reference to brands or makes and refers to a frame which can be any type of 4x5 back, the 3/8 of an inch refers to the distance needed from film plane, and in other patent application pending the distance is more flexible , therefore, you cannot continue to insist on this in any way because as I said, the people you are trying to highlight have admitted that my patent is a legal patent and needs to be respected, you are , disrupting my weekends and work week, why so much effort ?

    And when I see that an effort has been made to present my product's price as only acceptable to the rich and famous by you and those who say they speak for the rest of us, I reiterate that because my clients are mostly middle class and they have the willingness to pay for it without reservation , I insist that I value an interest by legitimate potential customers to find the truth but such truth must originate independantly from the sources in their offers, you complain that you fail to find an independant review of my product, but insist on promoting others in reference to mine , how is that independant and how is that legal?

    Then when the words are aimed at justification by confusing the market I cant accept that, most of my customers have no more money than you and no one has had to mortgage their house since a new professional Nikon 35 body or
    any new medium format camera without a lens has a similar price tag, and those sell by the thousands every day., therefore as that section of the population is very much my market and they have the willingness to pay, if you do not, then that is your choice, and I believe that your course of action has gone past what is inappropriate
    and crossed over to a clear effort to corner me into doing or saying what is not my duty, or promoting others at my expense .

    I reiterate I have to protect the value of my product and my right to not have my time diverted into these type of situations, what you have done here is not in good faith at least towards me and I ask you to Desist the Instigation, this is all it is.

    If " other products" as you call them do not meet the claims allowed in my patent , or applications pending and they have a lawful right to proceed, then it is their duty to make them known on their own effort (in their offers)so that you and others will not confuse them with mine, when you confirm they haven't and that to a big degree you thought so enough to have put me thru this and you will not desist ,I say it is pointless, you can not start a thread using me and my site
    to highlight or promote other products, (It is not Independant) you do not have my consent,

    Trust the following, after my product has been rated as most resopnsive large format camera in history, i need no more publicity
    as i only intended to make a good camera , not the best camera,now I have to defend the right to have the time to meke it in peace, and just as im not interested in obtaining sales at the cost of disrupting the harmony in my life, Im also not interested in publicity which comes as a result of this type of situation where the words of the most qualified are belitled not to mention my own,

    you can print and read what you wrote, Insisting that it is fine for
    you to ask me questions as if I was in court, and tell me that it is good publicity for me, makes me feel that you are joking, trust that i have had no time to attend to my duties and that i have no interest
    to conduct my buisness in a way that i disagree with, you can not force me to, don't.

    just because in a LF forum which isnt the place for this discussion to begin with and if there is a computer in the middle and admission is free doesnt mean that i Am obligated to agree with what i don't.

    I have my own convictions which i believe are not biased toward my own benefit but on a careful and dedicated learning experience, and after my findings have been validated by the best of my peers , I feel confortable defending them ,have no interest in giving them up in the hopes of being popular, if they make me unpopular so be it.
    and after so many years of communicating with people from different walks of life on the subject I know what the acceptable parameters of a need for information by a potential user are.

    If you had given me a chance to inform you for your own benefit
    by contacting me directly or you had obtained the info from the sources and after you still needed clarification I might understand
    but forcing me to say or think what I dont is inapropiate no matter how you wish to present it.

    I trully don't understand how you believe I need your advice on how to conduct my buisness when my product is rated as it is, I reiterate I have no need for more buisness , I have need for pleasn't
    buisness which I get every day, It is when you fail to understand that ,and I need to defend my right to proceed as i choose that it appears that caffeine is an issue but rest assured Im on my way to get a good coffee and see if I can wake up from this nightmare


    thank you, enough is enough!
     
  22. To be honest it looks as is you have the wrong end of the stick William, nobody has put anything up for questioning other than the pros/cons/differences between your camera and a backyard polaroid conversion and whether the price tag is justified (from the point of view of the CONSUMER not the MANUFACTURER, as I cant imagine any manufacturer who doesn't think that their prices are fair ;) ). I personally would love to own a camera like this as it looks like great fun...and I am sure that if I had the money I would go for the Littman as it APPEARS to have a few advantages over the alternatives and looks to be very well made. Best bet here Adrian is to let it go...try the pola conversion yourself and maybe save up for the Littman...maybe you could post your comparison results up here so nobody has ever to ask the question again :) good luck and best wishes to you all.
     
  23. Kamm please consider the following;

    pat·ent n.

    A grant made by a government that confers upon the creator of an invention the sole right to make, use, and sell that invention for a set period of time.

    both ends of the stick are covered by my patent, and my point is that because the public disagrees with the idea of what a patent stands for i have agreed to tolerate the backyard nonsense you refer
    to but it isnt excluded from my rights, so If I tolerate it i clearly dont need to be insisted to validate it nor should it be done by others unless the Patent Office decides one day such backyard conversions are legal, becuse proof of a prior effort/ art is submitted and accepted, In the meantime if Im looking the other way and i dont have the wrong end of the stick but the wrong end of the bargain if Im being a gentelman and tolerating them and on top
    public opinion is used as a force to insist i should either validate them allow others to ,in threads started with my name or product, or anywhere else.otherwise I have no need to tolerate them specialy when I see that people insist that the price of my product is valid only to the rich and the famous, which isnt the case , but if the price was not merited by the product as i have stated I have to consider what the patent means and my patent covers what you refer to as a backyard conversion.

    ultimately ,patent or not a product should be made know and understood on its own effort and offers and not by asking another product to do it on their behalf.
     
  24. ???
    The point I was trying to make (perhaps a little too subtly) is that we ARE NOT asking for your validation, and you ARE NOT under any obligation to respond to ANYTHING. My belief is that it would be of great benefit to all if in fact you restrained from trying to have the last word and actually let somebody who owns some of these cameras sing its praises... I truly understand your need to feel that you are protecting your investment but you are really quite off the mark here.

    Patent:
    n.

    A grant made by a government that confers upon the creator of an invention the sole right to make, use, and sell that invention for a set period of time.

    Yes, well...doesnt mention anything about rights to quash the opinions of others or to try and drown out valid and compelling questions regarding said invention or commerce related to. Nowhere does it say that you are not allowed to make comparison to another product no matter how irrelevant it may seem to the inventor or anybody else for that matter.

    Does it?

    This is all getting a little foolish dont you think?
     
  25. No it doesnt say that, what it says is that if the product isnt made by the inventor or his licencees it cannot be made used or sold by anyone. the comparison in a forum debating the value of the patented product would have to come after the " alternative "
    product can exist/ proven legal
     
  26. Hmmm...Interesting, but i just did a search on this site and noticed that you have had this conversation a few times before. To be honest it seemed that quite a few people werent happy that you had patented something that they asserted had been in common use for quite some time prior to your invention.
    See:
    http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005ypC
    and
    http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0069fE

    Really, why not just leave it alone...it seems that you are creating your own problem by jumping on every little mention of anything that even has the vaguest similarities to your camera. Just because somebody modifies a polaroid to do the same job as your camera doesnt mean that they are trying to threaten your business, and after looking at the rundown on your manufacturing process I cant imagine anybody would even come close to emulating your modifications anyhow. You dont hold patent over graflex, you dont hold patent over polaroid, I would imagine that there are numerous ways to place the two together and achieve a similar end result...without infringing upon your patent or upsetting your business base. Looks like its all been said before and it has come full circle. So from what started as a question about your camera vs. alternatives has turned in to an academic debate about patent law. I suppose the only way any of this would ever get sorted would be for somebody to make one these things and sit it beside yours in a court somewhere, wast a whole lotta time and money just to see if they achieved virtually the same result in a mechanically (too) similar package...I for one could not be bothered.
     
  27. Do you also read what I write? I made reference to these threads at the very beginning of this discussion, that is why I cant believe that im being asked to describe other peoples products on their behalf because the public confuses them with mine??

    I was the first one who insisted that this has been an issue for me for a long time, and a month ago after a discussion on the matter
    the initiator of those threads insisted my patent had to be respected,and at the same time I agreed to allow all such efforts to proceed and I have but I wasn't able to limit my claims as I explained

    I reiterate I am not preventing such offers from proceeding, that is all I can do, but don't ask me to validate them because I have explained why I cant, this thread made it clear that such offers have been confused with my product and that causes me to have to intervene and I'm constantly insisted that I should validate that which I don't know or approve of when I don't due to my own experience , I have read thru this thread and it is a relentless instance that I should be the one validating or explaining the offers of others, I'm signing out insisting that My patent is legal and needs to be respected .

    and as I insisted earlier if other offers do not meet the claims in mine I have no problem with them, if in the future I have certainty that they don't then ill be glad to participate in a comparison , in the meantime I will tolerate them as I have, and in return I expect to not be asked to participate in what I don't agree with,I feel it is enough that my product has been compared to the best products,

    that is all I have stated It is my right and wish to leave it at that, do as you wish, and as I have no more time and im behind in my work , I feel I have contributed what I could, allow me to focus on my work, I really need to, and I really would have been more open if everything said by the reviews of my product had not been disputed, im sorry but if the words of those I respect are met with disbelief then I feel it is pointless for me to continue, being that the best insist that my product has exceeded the best and you insist I should compare it to what I don't believe in, you are correct, you don't need my opinion,

    or consent, Mr. Morgan asked for it and I explained why It wasn't my place or wish to continue. as I am certain that I have cooperated as I promised, I would have hoped that I wouldn't have to clarify other peoples products on their behalf, it is not too much to ask,

    I don't have ten days a month to do so, and I have a right to be upset if the public confuses my established product with another and instigates me to clarify it on their behalf.

    I answered what my product was and I should have been left alone at that, Please desist in insisting otherwise,Mr. Morgan who initiated this thread insisted that reviews must be independent and that goes both ways, don't blame me if I disagree that my name and site are used to validate other products because that is not independent,

    I have had disagreements and I felt they had been left behind and that is why I do not appreciate being cornered into re living the past
    I am not hiding it as it was I who first mentioned it as a reason why I wished to focus on my work and when I am asked to describe someone's product because the public has confused it with mine, that shouldn't be so hard to understand

    If I will not be allowed to focus on my work then the problem for me exists in continuity and this is what has happened here, I agreed to
    look the other way even though I have no certainty of prior effort and I have kept my word I expect that in return I have the ability to focus on my work and not the work of others It is a fair request
    and I believe it was agreed.

    I don't want to have to keep asking for your consideration, If I sound incoherent at times is because I neither have the time or enjoy when people insist that I should do or say what is not my business

    Please?
     
  28. Same thing over again... All we wanted to know was if your camera was worth the money...all we got was an earful of how generous you are for turning a blind eye to these discussions about alleged possible infringements on your patent. Great, thanks for the information and opinions. GO AND FIND ANOTHER FORUM to guide the poor lost sheep home who seem to be having major issues with confusing your camera with all the other polaroid/graflex/rengefinder graftees in this minefiled that the 4 x 5 market has become.

    This thread now rates higher on search engines than your site. Free publicity I suppose?
     
  29. Mr Littman,

    Questions get raised.

    Leica M7 vs Voigtlander R2?
    Why? because they are similar - Both are rangefinders, both have a similar function, both take Leica lenses, both are 35mm, but one is a lot less than the other in cost. People still buy the Leica - because as a product it stands up on it's own.

    Nikon D2H vs Canon 1D?
    Why? Because both are Digital 8fps, 4 mega pixel pro line bodies - They are a similar price, and it comes down to features. And people choose to buy both.

    If any product has a comparison with another, then it warrants examination. Your product, whether you believe it or not, whether you want it to have or not, and whether it is 'true' competition or not, definitely has a competitor. You can see on the other links Mr Pryor mentioned, there is evidence that other 4x5 combinations have been created prior to yours - in fact there is a picture of said conversion done by Noah Schwartz in 1979-1980 (photo can be seen at http://www.photo.net/photo/1750929) . This is your competition. Your argument that you have a patent means nothing to the consumer. You had better create a reasonable argument about what it is your camera does, that is better than anyone else's (note I have provided one for you to use above).

    Even if you try and ignore your competition, you will see my statements don't even acknowledge your competition, but talk about YOUR EXPERIENCE!! Not any one else's, and you are not deriding your competition. You are talking about how you found the lens didn't cover 4x5 without modification. You are talking about how your modification requires rebuilding of the rangefinder, and how your modification requires 4-5 cameras to complete your 1 finished body.

    if you want to continue arguing about your patent, then feel free to do so in a legal forum somewhere - just remember the US patent office issued a patent for all DTMF tone combinations up to 16 digits - effectively making it illegal for you to phone anyone, without applying to use the patent 'song'. Defend your product, not your patent.

    You choose to defend your product - as is your right, however I do note, not one client of yours has stepped in to help defend the product.

    Not even the one that highlighted this 'new disruptive thread'
     
  30. I bet nobody asks this question again.
     
  31. David,

    I forgot to say before, thanks for the suggestion about the Crown graphic. I'm in the process of investigating. I like the ability to hand hold my cameras so i will look down this path first.

    Adrian
     
  32. I have insisted very early that my product is not a mere conversion and that I do not offer it, therefore I do not consider mere conversions my competition, It should have been left alone when I insisted that I do not offer it because I do not believe in it, and I believe that fully answered the question that could be expected of me, but you wouldn't let go , after I had no choice I had to say that i cannot participate in a comparison because I have unsettled issues,
    and your need for information cannot be more important than my need to be able to coexist in peace and I ask that you understand that and be considerate towards me.


    All other tech questions about my camera were also answered to the best of my ability and it is not an unfair request If I ask that questions about other products be answered by those who make a product and not by me, My clients provided comments about their enjoyment of their cameras, that should be enough defense, If on top of asking me to stop working to answer things that should be answered by others, you cant expect my clients to stop what they are doing to do so as well,I will ask one of them to see what he thinks but I find it in poor taste that
    " defense" is expected it shows that im under attack. and I shouldn't be.and just because you buy something doesn't mean that you agree to become the poster boy for it and I don't have the stomach to disrupt them because I am being attacked , first because it should be the case , and sufficient
    that I post what they have been willing to say and I have answered what I could, If that isn't enough then , there is not much I can do.

    I insisted that the value of my product isn't such because it is also converted but because of the summation of its conveniences ,and If you will not believe my words about my own,little business do I have describing the product of others ,as I insist that I feel strongly about it to the point that I have said nothing different for 2 years about the subject of conversion .

    I feel that a photo that doesn't show the conversion is not evidence and I made reference to the earlier threads first because I was on vacation for the first time in many years and I deserve to have a minute of peace at some point and I pleaded that if you would please just let me answer what is my place to answer and get back to my life, and said clearly that I was attempting to coexist with the other options and when I insisted that I preferred to not answer on their behalf I have the right .

    I do not expect any of you to agree with any of my tech opinions or anything else which may be my opinion but once I see that I feel I have answered what i could and you dont seem to agree I can feel that I have done my part for better or worse.


    Thank you.
     
  33. Adrian,
    You could try this guy, looks like he has made his own way in the conversion stakes, he has some really interesting stuff on his pages...and most of the bits are readily available in Aus.
    He has a crown graphic shooting on 120 rollfilm...and a pola 600 with a 4x5 interchangeable back on it.

    http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/
     
  34. Adrian,

    While you're searching, you should also ask yourself: will you ever want movements, or a rotating back? The Super Graphic has these features, a built-in rangefinder and is made of aluminum rather than wood. There's a neat article about them on the CameraQuest.com site (it's not responding for me right now or I'd post the link). The Super generally costs a bit more than a Crown, but the extra features might be worth it. You should also look around the Graflex.org site for more info on both the Crown and the Super.

    Good luck, and be sure to let us know how it goes.

    Regards, David
     
  35. Here's the link I mentioned:

    http://www.cameraquest.com/supergrp.htm

    Regards, David
     
  36. David,

    Thanks for the suggestion - are these handholdable? (And I do use the term fairly loosely!

    I'd also think, this won't be the last time this type of question is asked - After all it is a large format equipment forum. I was thinking of asking a new question comparing the Speed Graphic to the Littman 45s :)

    From where I sit, Mr Littman seems to have a good expensive product , but a completly defensive attitude about it. He seems to not be willing to compare it to other cheaper (and possbily not as good) products, as he doesn't recognise them as his competition. Very odd since they began from the same products - they may not have ended up the same, but there beginining were identical. I think he feels he is above questioning. It is also interesting he keeps talking about being respected, when he has hardly offered respect in the other forum entries I have seen.

    It is also pretty odd that the manufacturer would weigh in so heavily on the discussion. Can you image Leica argueing everytime someone asked if the Leica was better than the R2? Leica's are generally defended by the owners of the camera. And they fight hard for them.

    I can imagine this is not the last time we will hear from mr littman.......

    Thanks

    Adrian
     
  37. Adrian,

    The Graphics are hand holdable to some extent. They've got a thick leather strap on one side for exactly that use. Some folks feel that a little weight makes it easier to hold a camera steady. A flash can help, too. John Brownlow did some street photography awhile back with a Super Graphic. You could have a look at his site - he talks about his cameras at www.pinkheadedbug.com/gear/cameras.html. You might also drop him an email about his experiences with the Graphic.

    Oh yeah, just thought of this: The Koni-Omega 100/200/Rapid/Rapid-M cameras have accurate rangefinders and parallax-correcting framelines. Okay, it's 6x7, not 4x5, and you sure won't get any Polaroids, but the lenses are plenty sharp. So there's another option for you. They're going around $200 - $300 with 90mm lens, too.

    Can't help Mr. Littmann with his marketing expertise, or rather lack of it. He's not the first entrepreneur to work hard at alienating customers. Some folks just never learn.

    Good luck with your decision.

    Regards, David
     
  38. you can find a comparison to the graphic cameras in the
    interview with alban Christ and other owner comments provided earlier in this discussion ,
    i will ask owners of both the Littman the Graphics and the Lihoff toyo etc, to participate and when i have time i will provide a comparison which offers the tech data of the Littman which isnt available from other sources.
     
  39. As the tone of the discussion has been established by the original question, and those who participate side with that or risk
    to have to " defend" the product or that their words will be met as were mine,, I have received emails from those in the sidelines who disagree with the participants , but who at the same time do not, may not wish to come under attack for doing so and and one has authorized me to post his comments" as a response to the following " I do note, not one client of yours has stepped in to help defend the product. "

    first response;
    Monday, November 17, 2003 11:59 AM
    Dear Mr. Littman
    I was following with great interest your discussion on Photo.net. I think that you did wery well in protecting your work from not so kind oppinions from your kritics.Best regards
    Boris Balant.

    Others will do so directly , I do not expect anyone to have to come under attack ,potential customers have not been alienated, I appreciate the continued support.
     
  40. this is another email i got today, neither a customer nor
    related to the thread but has authorized me to post his comment .
    Hello William

    I finally got it!! The idea behind the camera. After agonizing whether to
    get a Mamiya 7- I figured out that your camera is so much better. The
    advantages are: 1) 4x5 neg 2) with a Gramatic back you can shoot 6 shots
    continuously 3) ability to use Polaroid film w/ single sheets or pack film
    3) Can focus closer 4) Compact (w/ the 127mm lens).

    Not being a view camera- I understand why the ground glass is optional. It
    would defeat the intent of keeping this camera light and take the
    spontenaeity out of it.

    I just wanted to let you know this.

    I'm still putting money aside and trying to rearrange my finances for this.
    I will probably get the camera w/ the 127mm lens- I like wider angles. The
    110mm XL lens would be nice but is a little out of my budget. If possible -
    I think you have a great camera here. I am glad to have been able to meet
    w/ you at the Photo Expo in NYC and be able to handle the camera.

    Best of luck.

    Yoichi Kawamura
     
  41. Has anybody seen a modified polaroid 110/120 etc with tilts/shifts?...i know its a (relatively) small package but i would be interested to see if it is posible to to these mods so as to be able to get a little more flexibilty out of it. Are there any insurpassable complications to doing this? I realise there are other cameras out there that are already very capable (as mentioned in prev posts) but its the quirkiness and the challenge of it ;) they do have a certain je ne sais quoi.
     
  42. I have come here after i was informed by Mr Littman that my words is
    response to Mr Littmans questions about my experience with his product over
    two years in an interview he conducted were doubted as "beeing authored"
    let me just insist that every word in my responses was what " I " meant.
    Thought I work for major publications on a regular basis using the camera. I
    am not made of money,this is not a toy and photography is very expensive
    and the price of his product is merited and I will buy and other one.

    I have read thru this thread and I must insist that this is not fair to Mr Littman
    who is a gentleman and very dedicated to his work and if as a result of such
    dedication he cannot on top of that be expected to agree to this type of abuse
    and neither do I.

    My words in such interview should not have to be notarized before they are
    beleived to be mine, and anyway, those who dont have the willingness to
    beleive what Mr Littman has to say , are wasting their time after all that he has
    said has been proven entirely.

    Now that I said what I had to say I ask that any questions you may have for me
    be considered answered by my responses in such interview as i trully dont
    have the time to get involved and besides, I not made of money and when I
    bought the camera few people knew about it, and the price was identical
    and so now that the camera's standing and recognition has reached the
    Zenith.and its validated by the best, I dont see what all the fuss is all about.

    I have been looking for such a camera since I came out of school, after
    trying a lot of different products, here it is I had the genious to think of it
    and made it.. this exactly what I was looking for and I never seen any
    product beeing able to perform the same way.

    thak you

    a. Christ
     
  43. Mr Christ

    Thanks for your response. I was not meaning to say your interview had to be notarised in order for it to be valid - what I was alluding to is an interview by the manufacturer is going to be biased. I strongly believe that owuld be the same for Nikon, Leica, Kodak or any other manufacturer.

    I originally asked some questions on the camera to try and get some real world response - hardly expecting to be responded to by the manufacturer Mr Littman himself!! however Mr littmans words, abundant as they may be, hardly answers any questions. To search through his words for answers is extremely difficult as his language is quite hard to follow. He keeps responding about patents and the like, when all am I am trying to do is find out the differences between other conversions and his camera. Eventually after sorting through his comments I beleive I have discovered the major differences.

    Mr Littman needs some marketing and PR lessons. He has a product to sell and yet acts like someone is out to get him personally if his product gets questioned. He accuses me of starting a dirsuptive thread, and being an instigator with a friend because we live in the same country - Hardly the actions of a 'gentleman'

    I can understand his dedication to his product, but not the attitude. As you can see above, I'm not the only one to wonder 'what the??' with his attitude.

    Thanks for you comments. I appreciate them.

    Adrian

    Adrian
     
  44. Alban,

    So, how do you find the camera? Can you give us a TECHNICAL opinion on its graces and shortcomings or not?
     
  45. for those in the sidelines who did not find the interview with Alban Christ , the link;http://www.photoworkshop.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgiarchive=8&num=408



    Mr. Gentleman Let me just state that if my marketing skills are poor and my camera is considered as it is, then you should believe its standing is true and merited, and not a result of marketing..

    Ill tell you what is the problem with my attitude, on my vacation i posted my first response you replied

    "Does anyone else have instructions on adding a 4x5 back to the Polaroid cameras? Any instructions would be handy. maybe if I am not satisfied with the results I get by making my own, I can start saving for one of the Littman singles."

    i should have said sure ( 6608971) thank you very much.

    You havent an interest in communicating with me as a manufacturer as when you went to my site you didnt ask me.
    so dont obligate me as a big manufactuer whn i work by myself and im on vacation.

    (dis·rupt ;to interrupt the normal course or unity)

    I have a product that sells ,that is my modus operandi , "not a product to sell", as you told Alban, your actions in this thread starting with the original question aim at changing product that sells into product to sell , that is disruptive . that is the problem with my attitude, no one else need agree but most do. those who do qualify as potential customers .

    you insist it is merited I have verified it isn't.

    you also aim at insisting in refering to my product as a conversion whn I do not even offer such after learning it isnt merited and not the value of my product and then you insist in comparing my camera to conversions instead of learning what is valueble about it by insisting H ardly answers any questions", I answer the questions in a way so as to compensate for the confusion you are creating by rattling the non event issue .

    let me leave it at that and I hope that it ceases.
     
  46. I find the Polaroid 600SE with a 545i or Pro back to give much the same advantages at a price below $500.
     
  47. Seeing as you are so fond of Dictionary.com:

    con·vert

    To change (something) into another form, substance, state, or product; transform: convert water into ice.
    To change (something) from one use, function, or purpose to another; adapt to a new or different purpose: convert a forest into farmland.

    Its a CONVERSION, no matter what proprietary improvements you make you are still CONVERTING and Polaroid 110 to take 4x5 film.
     
  48. Anatole,
    Thanks, looking up some more info on that one now...another interesing polaroid!
     
  49. Mr Pryor, Polaroid 110/120 tilt je ne sais quoi
    006Z6s-15381484.jpg
     
  50. ??Je ne sais quoi?? You should know what...you 'invented' it.

    But seriously, not bad...how many degrees of tilt does it have...I recall from previous forums people had trouble finding info apart from very basic specs on your website...I also have had the same trouble. Does it shift also...that would be very useful.
     
  51. Mr. Pryor , you said "je ne sais quoi" applies to mystique or feeling even about the things one knows quite well,

    I only repeated how you referred to it, I know about the tilt but I agree it has " je ne sais quoi" anyway.

    No .Shift could be possible but it would require a very precise F standard system that would allow the mechanism and a perfect lock in "0" or dead center for normal use and that would take a lot of space and weight would be a problem, as all would have to be reinforced, , the tilt issue came as a result of other factors needed and has no consequence on normal operation but the shift issue would require a major front standard because these cameras require that infinity be perfect on both axis.

    doable, yes, but I believe it would interfere with the rf quality unless you had a very good standard and that means size and weight.

    The tilt here is useful for moving portraits, because if you check with the glass back once you will see that if you focus thru rf with the tilt on something a fraction of it will be in focus, if you use that point as reference for subsequent photos thru the rf/vf and shoot with tilt in motion for portraiture and throw half or 1/3 of the image out of focus
    etc, this is possible because you will keep accurate composition
    by the parallax and use the reference point you checked with the glass once you would get results which would also allow for spontaneity and not just the tilt " effect".

    It is a good eventual trick on the snapshot camera which becomes swing in the horizontal position, its included ,works quite well and doesn't hurt to have it .

    from where you see the standard in the draft that is (infinity) and the rf will focus from 3 ft to infinity, but you can move the whole standard forward in increments all the way up to the very front and do close-ups thru ground glass with all lenses up to 1 ft.

    ------------

    I also have the Littman FRFIII by January which is a derivative of that gadget on the hotshoe of the American photo article which can be programmed to shoot close-ups thru rf between 1-3 ft or use as a finder to use view cameras with complicated tilts and shifts as hand held preset portrait cameras or shoot 8x10 handheld in movement thru rf, " that is cool".
    both focus and parallax can be programmed to match the glass and then all is locked and camera is operated as if a Polaroid big shot.

    good only for those doing repetitive series of identical cropping so you only focus once.
     
  52. THIS IS A PHOTO shown in the draft below fig (20A)BY WHICH SOMEONE CAN INSIST TO HAVE RIGHTS, IT SHOWS THE MATTERS AT HAND , IT SHOWS WHERE THOSE RIGHTS ARE ESTABLISHED,AND DUE TO EXISTING DOCUMENTATION IT PROVES DATE BACK TO THE YEAR 2000. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT MY PRODUCT BUT WHEN THE INSISTENCE IS THAT THE ONLY VALID ANSWER WOULD BE " COMPARISONS WITH OTHER CONVERSIONS" I INSIST (A) A MERE CONVERSION ISN'T MERITED AND WHEN THAT ISN'T ACCEPTED I INSIST (B) A MERE CONVERSION IS PATENTED SO THERE IS NOTHING TO BE COMPARED UNTIL THAT IS ESTABLISHED OTHERWISE BY THE LAW. thank you.
    006Zf8-15394784.jpg
     
  53. He he he...ur a funny guy. Thanks for the previous info, gives me something to ponder.

    In the meantime i think i will stick to my 35 mm digital and save for a TS lens for that ;)
     
  54. Hey mr Litttman, back to your defensive ways. After providing us with some excellent info about your Tilt and shift, you revert back to the strange conversation of not comparing your camera to any other and bring back the patent issue.

    Face it - you lost the 'only 4x5 conversion' arguement a long time ago. You have a good product, that can do what other conversions can't. You have a patented method of attaching a 4x5 back to the polaroid - but it isn't the only method.

    It will go on being compared, and not just by me, but everyone. Face that reality, and your life will be a lot happier.

    Adrian
     
  55. (WHAT SHOULD BE COMPARED)

    the method of attaching a back,as is not the merit of my product,nor any product, photography is all dedicated to a final synergy which takes place in amillisecond considering a camera's benefit should be a quest to analyze how it can contribute to such synergy and not otherwise , clearly the conversion of a camera is negleigible if other cameras of that format already exist for less money and better made.

    I have an issue when the comparison is based on that and after all is answered which is the merit and difference the insistence is that the conversion was the only question. a good example is that while my product requires extra work as I explained due to the parts, any 3x4 camera as in the case of the 600 se mentioned By Mr. Anatole,
    the rf will suffice up to 3x4 with the lens wide open but if you can put a ground glass and the camera at minimum distance (3-4) ft from an led or laser beam and another beam or led at 15 ft and you also have access to infinity thru a window lets say a mile away,
    you will see that one of these three points will not superimpose,
    you have converted nothing and you have modified no back, and you can live with this because in these cameras or graflex xl or mamiya universal the 3x4 was for Polaroid but the film was 6x9 or 6x7 and the smaller the film the less you need a dedicated cam to a specific lens, these issues are the reason a coupled parallax rangefinder 4x5 was never attempted and I have been able to verify and the reason why my camera has to have a fixed lens.

    You wanted to see why it is that my camera was so special , but you insist that the hull or enclosure is the difference, I insist it benefits weight and tolerances to a degree but not the difference with other conversions or with any other previous existing camera when one wants to consider that the intention is a camera to be used hand held and thru a rf/vf , if it isn't the whole thing is pointless as was my first opinion because a crown graphic with a lens focused thru ground glass would provide the same result as the littman focused thru ground glass, yet no other existing or converted 4x5 would produce the results of the littman and this isn't as a result of the fact that it is converted but as a result that what counts is the internal configuration if one is to rely on that for hand held use,

    there are 3 degrees of accuracy in a rf (from worst tobest)

    1) back- forth mechanism without cam as in speed graphic/kalart etc
    2) standard cam by manufacturer for all lens of same focal length .as in 3x4 cameras
    3) standard cam by manufacturer for all lens of same focal length as in linhoff and selected lens by manufacturer of camera to best fit the cam performance

    4) dedicated cam to each specific lens by manufacturer of camera as in littman and I don't know if linhoff does the same ,which is absolutely required if one is to use a 3x4( tessar lens )on 4x5 thru rf as in the case of any of these 3x4 cameras or in any case in which one wants to use a combined rf/vf for the application the issue becomes potentiated because the rf part in the finder will be shared with the parallax and smaller.

    In the 600 se you can get larger film but you don't get parallax correction and rf issues will be present with the lense wide open
    this will be the case on any configuration regardless of conversion
    or existing 3x4 cameras, what I did was overcome that and I added parallax correction , that is the true comparison.

    My camera as a synergy can be compared to the Linhoff and other
    LF .rf cameras with a dedicated cam , shells, hulls etc are the realm of cameras focused thru ground glass not Lf rf cameras.

    While i agree that what you insist is insevitable fueled by the
    "spend less" factor I hope that the focus of the discussion can turn towards a synergy, and that the merit of fault be found based on whether " comprable products have comprable synergy" and in a wholistic perspective considering the actual moment of taking the picture.

    (FINAL NOTE ON THE PATENT ISSUE)



    I did loose any argument in the forum of public opinion due to the way it was presented as a "loose- loose "situation for me .but in the end even the person who started it ,admitted that the patent needs to be respected and what I lost is that people were made to believe otherwise .

    I thought I could yield to something which isn't my call to determine as I haven't been allowed to see what could put the issue to rest and it is not my call or yours.I tried but it turns out that the person in question still has to submit the evidence establishing his priority to the patent office.



    Patent claims aren't something you buy , they are granted due to proof of invention and it appears I cannot limit them
    unless I have seen evidence of prior invention,

    I can neither win or loose an argument fueled by the hopes of those who wish to spend less, therefore that argument is closed and it will be resolved when the Patent Office receives proof of priority by another on a specific configuration . In the meantime im not enforcing my patent but it also doesn't mean that all else is free, you and others have gone to ask for maps to build your own and the insistance that I lost an argument is always fueled by a personal motivation as expressed, therefore not independant when those who insist that my rights should be limited because they want to pay less, make their own, as an admitted reason for insisting an argument should be lost.






    thank you
    >
     
  56. what should be compared.

    From the point of view of the consumer - and after all, that is all that matters as we buy the products :)

    2 cameras, both shooting 4x5 film, both rangefinders, both based on the Polaroid 110A body. can you honestly tell me you expect no comparisons????? If both of these were $600 then there would still be a comparison. Since one is $600 and the other is $2350 there is a stronger comparison. And one stands up better than the others.

    You know that others exist. You know from previous discussions others exist. but you try to ignore them - to your detriment.

    i've read your patent, and whilst I am not a patent lawyer, it seems you have patented the method you attach the 4x5 to your Polaroid 110A bodys, and the methods you take to change the focussing cams etc. That's fine. It doesn't look to me that you are actually patenting the attaching of the back, but the method.

    You have proved the method you use is unique - and I agree.

    You have proved the changes made to the focussing are unique - and i agree.

    You have proved your camera with the total of all the modifications you make is unique - and I agree.

    You have also proved your marketing approach is unique - and I think everyone agrees.....

    Enjoy life, and try and relax.
     
  57. I may know they exist but as i have reiterated as priority has not been proven by another I felt it was sufficient that they sell their product and market it on their own effort. you expected me to advertize them on my site? whatever it is that i have proven, I offer, since nothing else has been proven know that it is an outstanding issue, which may turn out as you expect.nobody knows that. lets leave it at that

    After which it was not an unfair request that you dont turn mowhill into mountain using my name and vice versa.I hope you enjoy yourself as well. and I hope your rush to compare proves justified in the future, thanks
     
  58. Happy Thanksgiving;

    wanted to announce the opening of a new Photo gallery by an L45s owner in our site,
    http://www.littman45single.com/

    Once in the gallery section look for ( other galleries)

    Photographer Sebastian Kim , utilizes instant peel apart films to shoot all his work and has done so for years with a collection of instant cameras and he owns all the major ones as; Polaroid
    180/195/konica instant press , etc.

    In this case the pics are low light (night)exposures and a tripod has been used due to long exposure times, yet focus and composition was done thru the L45s rf/vf.

    4x5 Polaroid color prints can be used as final product, as you will see the low light, and tonality make for a funky effect but under normal light conditions the colors would be closer to film, and there is nothing wrong with funky as a creative alternative, being that fuji instant films are another option and its color balance fluctuates less
    and the resolution is also different. and then there is film,both positive and negative,

    Next week you will finaly find the gallery By Alban Christ which will be published images by Marie Claire, and elle magazines and lanscapes he likes to shoot when on brake while on his fashion assignements.

    Alban shoots all his work on wet process films.

    then the following week you will find the first high definition /Hi Res. gallery shot with a L45s 120 apo symmar, By renowned New York Portraitist Henry Lewtwyler, and the work will include published Images of celebrities, magazine assignments, using both polaroid T55 and wet process color films.

    Henry was the first recipient of the Coupled paralax rangefinder 4x5 advantage in november of 2000 and the first to also receive the advantage of a Apo symmar coupled to a custom cam in the L45s.
     
  59. Are you paying to advertise here?
     
  60. When this thread was started my site was not updated because I hadn't the time, and questions were raised as to whether the pro's use the camera on jobs, I have posted this response as an answer to that question,and also after you insisted they buy it because they are affluent, or the camera is pretty I have to show that they buy it because it is a tool that merits the expenditure,

    So my response is not advertising ,it is a direct answer to specific questions, after all, only one series of 20 pictures by one Photographer was all that one could see, that will change into
    more galleries by the owners and their comments .

    Again (Happy) Thanksgiving
     
  61. If you don't want to jump through hoops to get to the photos, just go to

    http://www.littman45single.com/10gallery/gallery_home.html
     
  62. Be careful AZ. Accessing Mr Littman's site makes you click an agreement saying you won't duplicate his camera! He may get cross if you bypass that!!!

    (don't worry that you can go to the US patent office site and download all the details).
     
  63. I regret that there is no such agreement anywhere in my website!
    I apologize but it is quite uncomfortable to be at the mercy of
    these fabrications.

    Again those interested in (Photography )are invited to the Opening of Alban's gallery on Friday.those interested in creating dissent are invited to go away.

    thank You
     
  64. First off, I'm not from Australia and I do not know AM or any of his/her Aussie friends(LOL). So, do not accuse me of being part of this rabble rousing group.(What is a Rabble anyway, any definitions?) I came to this sight to get an opinion on the Littman 45.
    Since Mr. Littman feels his camera is not a conversion, then I guess I was looking at the wrong Littman website. Because all the cameras there looked like they were Polaroid bodies converted into a fine 4X5 piece of camera equipment, not a 4X5 built from scratch. I think I'll buy one of those, because they seem to be well made and of great quality. Especailly for a conversion. That must have taken a great deal of work.
    I would like to know if anyone has seen the other Littman 45, that Mr Littman is refering to. I still have not seen this Littman 45, since Mr. Littman insists his camera is not a conversion. I would love to see this inovative, built from scratch, brand new camera that was not made from the body of an old polaroid 110 camera body, it must be wonderful.(Can you feel the sarcasim here?)
    Here is a little something without sarcaism Mr. Littman. I was intent on purchasing your camera conversion and looked to your website. After reading a brief article, which mentions your camera conversion, I was very curious about the camera. Since your website really did not have a whole lot of technical information, I googled your name to find critiques, praises, COMPARISONS, and information. I stumble upon this thread. After reading the thread, and hoping to get tech data, I was disturbed by your responses. At first I was suprised to see you responded to the queston. But, after I read all of your responses, the tone and wording has put me off completely to purchasing your camera.
    As a consumer I do not care about who patented what and when, I only care about the product. Is it the best? Is it worth the cost? Will it fill my needs? What are the technical aspects of the camera? Not one of your answers addressed these concerns. Not one of your answers help me to make an informed opinion. I do know, however, that you patented your camera. Unfortunatly, that does not help me. So, I regret to inform you that, your attituted and responses have swayed my decision. I will NOT be purchasing your camera. Maybe if you would have responed with more information about the camera and a little less information on the patented I would be parting with $2500.

    Brian (USA not Aus)
     
  65. Here we go again.
     
  66. Mr. Brian

    I have had no problem selling that which I can produce, I do not insist that my camera isn't a conversion, I insist that it utilizes a conversion as 10% of the process to arrive at a finished product, and as hundreds of models of 4x5 cameras existed without need of body transformation that aspect is negligible unless one wants to evaluate things based on their external appearance, what I offer is not a box, what I offer is what is inside.

    If you visited my site you may have noticed that those who use it insist it excels the best products previously available because of the synergy it offers as a point and shoot 4x5, and that is just one aspect but when coupled with the fact that when I started the project the first cameras were just a conversion and they didn't exceed anything ,were unreliable and had all kinds of shortcomings ,I can assert with confidence that what I now offer is not a conversion but something which utilizes a conversion to a degree in order to take advantage of what is good for the final product, the final product is an efficient coupled rf parallax camera which now is even better than it was, and the conversion done by me earlier was nothing like it, after examining other conversions I can state with confidence that the value of the littman is not the conversion but I also admit that the conversion aspect is valuable to the Littman, and anyone can see that it is not the same thing at all.

    Yes I chose the avenue for a reason , the avenue in itself is insufficient , the proof of that is that once you have converted the format you end up with a box , and there are better existing boxes which have never been recognized to be as synergistic as The l45s as a snapshot 4x5 .

    I apologize if you feel that I haven't answered your questions , I'm a photographer and I got interested in this project and suddenly found myself obligated to learn engineering laws and challenge existing beliefs.

    When I introduced my camera it was laughed at by the old school and now it is rated as most responsive Lfer yet, I recognize that My communication skills are limited, but I offer a camera not my personality , The camera appears to have performed in excess of any expectation and It is a short time project, and my frustration stems from being obligated to do more than I have to when people make public requests for more info, more service etc, etc,

    I apologize that the product cant be more easily examined as it is a limited production, I should not be penalized for doing all and sometimes more than I can.

    I am constantly forced to answer questions not asked to me directly and in public and after the fact, with an implied threat of risk, that I either become the service you would like or I will be discredited, clearly it is this which is unacceptable to me .

    I do have a duty, first to the making of a good product, It appears I have fulfilled it, then to service my customers, that also has been fulfilled, and it is insane that I should be obligated to divert my efforts away from my customers so that I can satisfy the curiosity of those who wish to believe external appearance is key on a precision instrument.

    I can no longer do it, I do not wish to do it and in a few days I will no longer have to do it.

    If some insist I do not answer tech questions I say I do so more than anyone else , forgive me but until I got involved in this I was a successful fashion photographer , It is said that those who can express their opinions well thru their art have a tougher time putting their thoughts into words, so yes I am guilty of that but lets get real and face that in the end my efforts yielded something which works really well, and the best insit that it performs better than anything else and for a long time, and reminding all that this is not my background I insist that nobody has the right to ask more of me when the fact is that I had to leave my picture taking aside because all who can write very well never produced something like the L45s.

    You do not like my tone and I do not like that all is taken out of context.

    Way before any of these threads were started the person who claimed to have converted a 110b to 4x5 25 years ago sent me the following email"Your camera must be so much lighter and so much more well made than mine. If I had a choice, I would have a Littman over what I am producing. (They aren't the same thing at all. )Yours is like an ultralite Linhof, and mine is a Polaroid 110B with a flange on the back. "

    Let me just remind all that the linhoff is the best Rf assited view camera ever made and you can read what my clients rate my camera in comparison to it on my site, what are we talking about ? everyone including those who wish to compete at any cost admit there is no comparison .

    If that, which is the truth would have been conveyed by the converters in their offers these threads would not exist , or at least would not be hostile to me , I do not have to defend my words when I have admittance from them That what I state is the truth, My words are defended by my clients results in the field and I will continue to do what I can to update my site and make it as informative as I can.I have no quarrel with the free flow of information but I do no longer wish to be ambushed by abuse as a result of misinformation . they admit(" they are not the same thing at all") I agree and I have always insisted that , and I abandoned the mere conversion before anyone else offered it,

    I am not an ogre , just very busy and I would like to dedicate my time to those who after this long track record of reliance prefer to believe the best publications, the best editors, the best photographers , the awards, and why not the images produced and finally my word , when all I say has been substantiated by years of
    positive results , those who qualify as clients will believe those who qualify to give their opinion on a professional product which can be successfully used by amateurs but is not an amateur product.

    I would like to end this long and reiterative post by saying that I would like to share the success of The L45s with all photographers,the recognition of being the easiest to use and most responsive Large format camera belongs to all Americans and all of photography , what I ask in exchange is that is that those who act in good faith do what they can to prevent any further abuse , I have done more than I could , everyone has benefited from my efforts, and asking for more is nothing but abuse. " 4x5 Flange" did not/does not translate into "most responsive Large format camera yet" , anyone can see that so please give it a rest .

    I do buisness on my terms , that doesnt sit well with some, nothing I can do about it, but my clients know that I am a well educated responsible and considerate person and they get a great camera, and that is all that matters ,

    Today after 4 years , I had set some time aside to go take some pictures with one of the cameras I made, instead I find myself discredited again and forced to respond , I cant make sense of any of it and Im over the whole equation, I will make a few more cameras for those who will allow me to enjoy them as well.

    Thank you.

     
  67. Blimey, I`ve only just found this one! For a visit to a friendly website dedicated to converting old Polaroids to different formats, including 6x12 rollfilm AND 4x5, go to 'Razzledog`s Camera Homepage' at: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle It`s even a 'Patent'(laugh) and Intellectual Property' free zone. All the humbug associated with fitting a simple Graflok back (or alternative) to a 40 year old Polaroid camera is explained. The resulting camera is superb, the cost is realistic, the results are fantastic. Unfortunately the idea isn`t new.
    00A8LP-20480584.jpg
     

Share This Page