Littman 45 Single/110 Polaroid question

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)

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

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

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?

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.

Why not buy the NPC 195 for $750, and you get three free packs of film.

Mr. Littman,<br>

<i>"the littman 45 single is the only camera in the world with coupled rangefinder/parallax for the 4x5format"</i><br>

<br>

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

<br>

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.<br>

<br>

Explanation : when I move my eye from the rangefinder to the finder, my brain carries out another function. <br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

<br>

Your cameras are very attractive, full of advantages and disadvantages.<br>

One drawback is that the lens can't be changed, another one is that they are very expensive ;>))<br>

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. <br>

They look beautiful and the conversion seems well manufactured. <br>

As you can notice, I hesitate...<br>

Regards<br>

JLL

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.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, but $2350?...

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

Yep - Read the article, and saw the author - How come I can't find a truly independent review of this product?

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

 

 

 

 

 

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

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

Pardon my ignorance; I wonder when the last time was that Bob Weber and Patrick Demarchelier used one on any fashion editorial or campaign.

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

 

 

 

 

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

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.

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 .

 

 

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

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!

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.

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.

???

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?

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