blue_sun408

Thanks Michael, I'll check them out as well.

Thanks to everyone for your help and suggestions. I have a few more avenues to explore regarding LF equipment purchases.

 

H.C., I think I will get in touch with Rob Skeoch. I checked out his website...looks interesting, thanks.

 

Great suggestions and tips as well from Ron, Bohdan, Ian, Arthur, and Tim.

Hello everyone.

 

I have been using MF for many years now and I am seriously considering adding LF

to the lineup. I realize that the selection for LF gear in Toronto is almost non

existent (with the exception of Harry's Pro Shop), so I have been looking at

distributors such as Midwest Photo Exchange, and Badger Graphic Sales as these

two seem to be the most popular choices with people here at photo.net.

 

 

So I guess my question is, has anyone in Toronto had first hand experience

purchasing LF gear from either Badger or Midwest, any problems with customs, etc.?

 

Just trying to get some feedback.

 

Thanks,

 

 

Steve.

Hi Marisa.

 

When I use FP4+, I rate it at 80 asa and then soup it in XTol (1:1). I get excellent tonality and great sharpness. If you want a little more contrast with slightly less sharpness, then just use it straight (1:0). I have found that FP4+ is a very forgiving film, exhibiting very good latitude with regards to exposure. If I were you, I would shoot a test roll of a consistently lit subject (bracketing exposure), then cut the film in half and develop each half using the above two suggestions and then compare results by making a print from each of the two closest exposures.

 

Cheers!

SMC Pentax-A 1:28mm/2.8, almost never leaves one of my two Super Program bodies. A favourite "walk around" lens.

I had this book on pre-order status (not expecting it until sometime in Sept.), but was pleasantly surprised when it was delivered yesterday! The images exhibited in this book represent some very remarkable work by Mr.John Davies. I am glad they decided to go with a larger than normal book as each photo gets it's due. A smaller publication with smaller images would have been an injustice.

My experience with Amazon.ca has generally been quite good. Even though I take advantage of their "Free Super Saver Shipping" option (anything over $39.00, they quote anywhere from 2 to 6 weeks delivery I believe) I always seem to receive my items in less than 2 weeks time, and on occasion the package arrives the following week of placing the order arriving via Canada Post. Maybe I have just been lucky, but I order on average one item every two months or so and have never been disappointed with their service in all the years I have used them.

Hi Greg. I own 2 of these fine little cameras, and never had a problem with either one of them (15 + years and still going strong).

 

 

I use Pentax glass as well, great optics. It's always good to have a backup body, the main reason I bought a second one (used). I load up two different film types and just swap lenses. Sounds like a good deal for under $50.00.

 

Cheers!

Another nod to Barry Thornton's "Edge of Darkness". Very informative and insightful but not too technical, but enough so, and just a very good read overall.

When I purchased my GSW690III & GW690III, I placed a B+W uv filter on both, primarily for protection, but I later got over that practice and realized that as good as the B+W filters were optically speaking, it was just another piece of glass getting in the way of those wonderful EBC Fujinon lenses...so off they came! I keep the lens cap on and only remove it when ready to shoot (mind you, if the weather conditions were harsh I would temporarily use a uv filter).

Oops!

 

Meant to say "incident" not "ambient" : )

I would also suggest the Sekonic L-308B. A very accurate, light-weight, ambient/reflective/flash meter. Great battery life (uses 1 "AA") which seems to last forever, and reasonably priced.

 

Or try to find a used Gossen Lunasix 3 with spot attachment (15 - 7.5 degrees) with an "ok" ambient slider function.

 

I use both, but lately for the kind of shooting I do I prefer the little Sekonic in most situations.

I now rate both 320TXP and 400TX @200 ASA and pull process in XTol (1:1) with phenomenal results.

 

 

Aurelien's description is very accurate. You will get a flatter neg., but I find this much easier to work with in both traditional darkroom printing and for scanning purposes as well. You can always "beef up" the contrast later if desired, much more difficult to get good results if alresdy starting with a contrasty neg. IMO. A lot has to do with the contrast range of the original scene or setup, and works especially well with normal to contrasty subject matter or lighting conditions.

Tri-X (120) rated @200 ASA and processed in XTOL (1:1).

Hi Mark. I spoke with a service representative today at Fuji Canada and they could not give me a quote regarding servicing the G617. They said that all cameras must be be mailed in or brought to them (in Mississauga), and then after evaluating the camera based on the customer's needs, have it sent off to Fuji USA for servicing or repair.

 

Seems like it would take longer than expected, and so much for trying to keep it in Canada.You could try Kominek Camera & Optical Repair at Yonge and College (416)977-2132, or Commercial Camera Repair also on Yonge St. (416)223-2257, both located in downtown Toronto. I have had absolutely no experience with either repair shops, so I am not endorsing them, just found them under photo equip. repair in the Yellow Pages.It wouldn't hurt to give them a call or just ask Fuji Canada for a "ballpark" questimate.

 

Best of luck...Steve.

Mark, just rumaging through some old receipts and found this phone number on my old Vistek sales order (905)890-6611 (Fuji Canada), or try this link http://www.fujifilm.ca/

Hi Mark.I'm not sure, but Fuji Canada used to have a warehouse and service dept. located in the Malton area (N. of Toronto).I know because I had to call them regarding a technical question with my then newly purchased Fuji GSW690III ... but that was about 3 or 4 years ago.You could try "googling" for Fujifilm Canada and see what comes up, sorry I don't have their phone number any more.

 

I'm hoping they still exist, as in a few years my 2 Fujis will need servicing no doubt.

 

Hope this helps in some way, good luck.

Can't comment on DDX, but I've used ID-11 (1:1) for both Delta 100 and 400 films (120 format) and have been very pleased with the results, but I agree with Michael's recommendation for XTOL, even better results with the Delta films, although I use it 1:1.It's what I use mostly now for all my b&w films, and especially the Deltas.

For Tri-X (35mm), ID-11 (straight), XTOL (straight).

 

For Tri-X (120), ID-11 (1:1), XTOL (1:1), HC110 (dil.H).

 

My preference is XTOL for giving close to true film speed as well as a bit more "umph" to the shadows, but all three have never failed me, it's more a matter of exposing the film properly than anything to do with any ONE developer IMHO.

Hi Ron.I prefer FP4+ for portraits (candid,formal) regardless of the lighting conditions.Processed in D76 (straight) or XTol (straight)I find it a very forgiving film (gentler curve),almost a little flat tone wise but you can adjust for contrast later if you like,but having a slightly flatter negative can be easier to work with.Don't get me wrong,APX100 is another film I use frequently,but just not for portraits,I find it a little "grittier" than the FP4+.

You could try other developers other than the ones I've mentioned.

Good luck,

S.W.

Thank you,John,Akira and Mike for your information(and photo) concerning the "interior differences" issue.At least now i know they are just built that way.It still seems odd that they would omit the protective "plate" on the GW unlike it's GSW cousin(probably a design thing),oh well i can relax.Again,thank you all for your insight and speedy response...regards.

I purchased both(new)the GSW 690 III and the GW 690 III (a year later)

and noticed that inside looking at the rear element on both cameras

the construction appears different(taking into account one is 65mm

and 90mm).The GSW(65mm)rear assembly is nicely enclosed with a

covering or "plate" exposing only the rear element of the

lens,whereas on the GW(90mm)i can see the focusing mechanism(for lack

of a technical term)and grease that lubricates the focusing

threads,which seems much more exposed than on the GSW(65mm),making

the GW(90mm)look "unfinished" to me.No problem with focusing,just

curious if something is missing in the final assembly.Anyone else

notice this?Thnx.

Just a small addition.Try Ilford Delta 100 in Kodak Xtol (straight).I shoot 6x9 format and find it is a great combo.