jimmy_p_guet

Pfff, once enough : once again, of course :-) Terrific english :-)

I use a metal 8x10 JMC since about three years. No problem with flexibility, hundred of

sharp pictures. I like very much to work with the camera. My only minor complaint is like

many of you about the tightening of the back : I always try to not overtighten the T knobs,

and to introduce the filmholder delicately, but the back moves sometimes a bit, not very

much, one or to degrees, nothing really wrong and never enough to blur the picture, but

it's a bit irritating.

 

I also use a 5x7 Canham wood field : no problem with the lock of the back on the camera.

So I guess the problem could come from the length of the back tilt levers and from the

small pressure surface of the T knobs : maybe the round small surface that applies ont the

lever is not large enough. Maybe to make or to make manufacture round metal parts to

mount around the axes of the T knobs and on the back of the camera, with larger nylon

disks, in order to slightly increase the pressure's surface on the side levers would solve the

problem without having to overtighten the knobs. Just a thought.

 

But once enough, the pictures from the JMC are sharp.

 

Jimmy

Ake,

 

Try Prophot in Paris http://www.prophot.com/rev/prophot?langue=us

 

They sell 8x10 darkslides (19.24 euros ex. VAT), they speak english and send in Europe.

I bought a new 305 from Robert White 1 1/2 month ago.

Hi all,

 

I'm going to order a G-Claron. It will be better suited to my needs. You all really helped me to decide.

 

Dan, I very recently bought a second hand 450 M. Seems to be a great lens.

This is much more than I thought. For instance, it's only for silver contact prints. A friend told me once he could use only 15 mm (2/3") of rise (for colour work), I sticked to this opinion and had forgotten the Nikkor in my list of possible choices for 8x10", but I begin to doubt. I have now to choose between this 300M and a G-Claron.

 

Thank you.

I have read many things here about the coverage of the Nikkor 300M,

which seems to be larger than Nikon's specs. But how much larger ?

To get a more precise idea, how much rise can one get approx. when

using it on a 8x10" camera ? What would be its real (estimated, of

course, it's just to get an idea) image circle ?

These are the first opinions I have read on the JMC. I won't phone to Keith Canham (I know his good reputation), because of my poor spoken english, and he has no email address. My dealer in France has not yet seen one of these cameras. That's why I ask you all.

 

All this sounds interesting. If I like the design, I don't want to buy only because of the look. I would prefer a metal camera to replace mine, and want of course a functional camera. As I said first, all cameras are a compromise, and I was curious to understand how M. Canham did this compromise, and if I could recognize myself in it. It seems it's the case.

 

Thank you all for your answers.

No livel here, Ellis, maybe a bad-expressed question, if you prefer. The first (and only) opinion given to me was about what I called this "supposed defect", which I would be ready to accept. I am really interested by this camera, but have no possibility to see one. Could you tell me more about it ? I currently use huge lenses, and plan to use soon something around 600 mm, and was wondering if that would be a problem. Reading reviews, I often read small problems with the back of smaller models. Has it been fixed on the new 8x10 ?

 

Hoping I've been well understood.

Hi all,

 

Does anybody here use or as some comments about the new Canham 8x10

metal camera ? Each camera being a compromise, looking at the

camera's pictures, I guess this one must not be very rigid at long

extension. Apart from this supposed defect, what would be its other

defects ?

 

Thank you for your answers.

Living in France, I order Azo from Smith and Chamlee : Azo is not avalaible in Europe. Azo doesn't work with enlargers, as Mark said.

After some trials with PMK and modified PMK for printing on Azo, I now use ABC (Michael Smith's formula) with 8x10" HP5. Good results, beautiful negs and prints (as Jay said), in fact the best I ever got (but I am new in 8x10"). To get good shadows on Azo, I must rate HP5 at 100-125 ISO (traditionally placing important shadows in III). With D76, I had to rate HP5 at 250, but in ABC the negs are very underexposed at this speed. N development with 4 sheet in 1 liter in trays is about 7' at 20°C. Density range between I and VIII must be about 1.5 or 1.6.

 

ABC hits strongly in highlights, it's hard to control it. For contrasty subjects, I think it's almost impossible do down highlights decreasing time, it needs another dilution. For flat subjects, it's easy to increase time, but another way with shorter time would be to add C.

About the book I was speaking, the author is Pierre Groulx, not Michel Groulx.

To finish : "Chambre photographique" (shortened to "chambre") is the generic term for all bellows cameras. It includes "chambre technique" (technical cameras like Linhof Technika, as I said), "chambre de presse" (press cameras), "chambre de campagne" or "chambre pliante" (field cameras like folding wooden cameras, "chambre monorail" (monorail camera, surprising, no ? :-)), "chambre à télémètre" (rangefinder view camera). Michel Groulx, in one the the best current books published in french in Montreal, Canada, ("La photographie en grand format", Modulo editor) uses also the term "chambre photographique".

Maybe the better translation would be simply "chambre photographique" ? It is the classical term used in old and modern books, and if it can include all types of cameras, any french-speaking photographer or reader will understand this as a big old-style camera with bellows generally used on a tripod :-) It is more generalist than other terms like "chambre technique", which applies to cameras like Linhof Technika, or "chambre monorail", too precise and technical.

Processed in standard D76, I rate BPF200 at 80 ISO.

 

I don't remember where I got the original chart (I modified some of the given times).

I wrote : 10" -> 20". Please correct : 10" -> 50"

I use the following table. It works well with BPF200 and my habits :

 

1" -> 2"

2" -> 5"

(Dev. -5%)

 

4" -> 15"

8" -> 35"

(Dev. -10%)

 

10" -> 20"

20" -> 2'

30" -> 3'15"

40" -> 5'

(Dev. -20%)

 

50" -> 6'45"

60" -> 8'45

70" -> 10'

80" -> 13'45"

90" -> 16'45"

(Dev. -25%)

 

100" -> 20'

(Dev. -30%)

Thank's, Tim (and others who responded by mail, I can't answer, all my recent mail have been destroyed by a virus).

 

Would it be possible to use other drums (e.g. Jobo, to process my 8x10 negs) if it was possible to get a base, or have Unicolor something special, apart from price ?

Just a question about Unicolor drum and its motorized base : where is it possible to buy them ? I've never seen a used Unicolor or base for sale in France, and I don't see these products on US web sites (I checked Calumet, Badger...). I've only seen the description of a base on the Beseler's site.

 

Are they avalaible new, and where, or only used ?

Another address in France (in Toulouse) :

 

http://www.numeriphot.com/

I think leg's locking is now different from the friction system you know, at least in the Report tripods. You can guess how the system works on the home page's photos (the 2 pictures on the left) of Berlebach's site : there is a notched wheel on the tripod's collar, which allows to set the legs in three positions.

One pound is 453.6g (1kg = 2.2 pounds).

 

For Dhananjay : is the Berlebach variable leg locking very different from the Ries locking ?

 

Berlebach has a website in english : http://www.berlebach.de/ with all technical specs. They have a great consumer follow-up (they answer to email questions in less than one hour).

 

I used last week-end a friend's Walker XL mounted on a Berlebach #9013 two leg extension, with a Manfrotto micrometric head, it was surprinsingly stable. I'm going to order. Thanks to all.

Brian,

 

1 kg is approx. 2 pounds. The Berlebach weights 2.9 kg, about 6 pounds (admitted charge : 24 pounds), the Gitzo 1370 magnesium about 2 pounds (admitted charge : 16 pounds), and my 8x10" Arca with lens about 14 pounds.

 

I think Bogen are Manfrotto's, right ? I don't know the Manfrotto equivalents, there are no Bogen in France. Berlebach is interesting because it's well built, and because of its price, 4 or 5 times less than a carbon Gitzo.

Habitually using a light 4x5", and now a 8x10" (about 7 kg with

lens), I must change my tripod, too light with the 8x10" (I would

prefer to use only one tripod for the two cameras). What do you

think about a not too expensive wooden Berlebach 3012 (single leg

extension, charge 12 kg) in association with a Gitzo low profile

head 1370M ? The head is a bit light for a 8x10 (the 1570 would be

better, but sturdier), do you think this set would work ? Thanks.