bruce_pollock1

Can anyone point me to an online resource that would describe the various

features and technical specs of M series Leicas? In other words, I'd like to

research and compare the differences between the M2, M3, M4, etc. Pictures

would be great, but not mandatory. Thanks for any assistance.

I'm in Victoria too. After seeing the posting a couple of weeks ago asking for shooting ideas for the Vancouver area, I started to wonder about how many of us there were in this neck of the woods. Glad you asked the question.

<p>Well, I live in Victoria and just flew home from Vancouver yesterday on one of those de Havilland Beaver float planes, so I'll offer a few insider ideas</p>

 

<p>You don't say how mobile you'll be (have a car?) or what subject matter you're mostly interested in (urban? landscape?) but if you have wheels and are interested in the natural scene, there are tons of locations. I have two favourites on the south end of Vancouver Island. The first is Botanical Beach near Port Renfrew on the west coast, two hours by car northwest of Victoria. Botany Bay in this area has some of the most stunning rock formations I've seen on the coast. The second is along the Sooke River about an hour west of Victoria (on the road to Botanical Beach by a happy coincidence) and a hike up the river to Sooke Pot Holes Provincial Park. Really interesting pot holes carved out by the river.</p>

 

<p>In the central west coast area of the Island (we just call it "the Island") is Long Beach which is in the heart of the rain forest, long sandy beaches, drift wood, (did I mention the rain??) and big, big surf. You can access Long Beach, Tofino and Ucluelet (two small towns) via Port Alberni. Also in the central portion of the Island is Strathcona Park which has easily accessible alpine meadows near Mount Washington Ski Resort. You can drive right up and within 10 minutes can be hiking in the meadows.</p>

 

<p>If you want to stay on the mainland, the Vancouver area is surrounded by rain forest and parks. The Squamish/Whistler area has lots of hiking, mountains and trees. Three hours east of Vancouver is Manning Provincial Park, more alpine meadows you can drive up to. The list goes on and on.</p>

 

<p>If you are more interested in urban scenes, Vancouver is simply one of the most beautiful cities in the world. I have a few shots on my <a href="http://www3.telus.net/pollock/moonrise">web site</a> of the area (not of my favourite areas, unfortunately) that might give you a few ideas.</p>

Also, check out "Architectural Record" magazine for first class, "real world" architectural photography.

Well, isn't that interesting! I've been using my Traditional for about four years and never saw that mark there on the front standard. I had just been guessing where the zero position was by placing the knob roughly in the centre of its slot. Now I realize that I have been setting the lens too low for the zero position. Thanks for asking the question.

Go to www.abebooks.com/

 

On-line searchable catalogue of used books from booksellers all over. I just searched and brought up 120 listings for the Daybooks, both hard and soft cover.

 

I agree!! It's one of the all time most important photography books.

I bought some Rubbermaid plastic food containers and lined them with foam rubber. They're a bit bulky but they protect my lenses inside my backpack really well and they don't weigh very much. Best of all, they're cheap.

The best one I've come across is the Transvue mask sold by Icon Distribution. The B4 size is a 4x5 opening in an 8x10 black mask. I usually put the transparency in a single PrintFile sleeve (not included), then tape that inside he black paper mask. The whole thing then goes inside the outer clear sleeve. The transparency is really well protected and looks very professional. Here's the web link:

 

<a href="http://www.iconusa.com/online/bmasktranssleeves.htm">http://www.iconusa.com/online/BMaskTransSleeves.htm</a>

I've never had a camera move on me since I started using a simple trick I learned from the cinematographer I assisted many years ago. When you're mounting a multi-thousand dollar Arriflex camera and Angenieux lens combination you want to be sure it doesn't fall of the tripod.

 

As I'm starting to thread the tripod into the camera socket, I have the camera slightly off centre - about 15 to 20 degrees to the left. Thread the tripod screw in as tight as you can get it by hand and then, holding the screw so it doesn't move, twist the camera into square (centred) alignment. You can get better leverage by twisting the camera than by twisting the tripod mounting screw. It works everytime.

...sigh.... Ever since I first read them 30 years ago, I've wanted a nice cloth bound set of the original Eastman House edition. Maybe Santa will bring them this year. AbeBooks (previous posting) has lots of editions/versions listed.

It's been a very long time since I handled one, but as I remember it, the camera is basically the rear standard of a Sinar P with a special conical lens board mounted on the front of it. The one I used had a 47mm Super Angulon with a special helical focusing mount - in other words, you focused it the same way that you would focus a 35mm camera lens. The 47mm completely covered the 4x5 film but, as I recall, you had no movements.

 

The camera had an optional pistol grip handle with a cable release and a view finder so you could use it like a press camera, although with a 47mm attached, I'd think you'd want to keep it on a carefully levelled tripod. We used to use it mainly for architectural work where an extreme wide angle lens was needed. A very cool camera, but a bit of a specialty item.

Does anyone know of any Canadian suppliers of Oriental Seagull

paper? It's a bit of a PITA to import paper from the States, not to

mention expensive at today's exchange rates.

I'll be travelling to Toronto in late September (never been there

before) and am interested in checking out used LF equipment retailers

when I'm there. I'll be without a vehicle and staying in the downtown

area, so I won't be very mobile.

 

Can anyone recommend any used LF stores? I'm aware of Henry's and

Vistek which, as far as I can tell, are probably within my travelling

range. Are there any other good sources of used LF equipment in the

area? Thanks.

Assuming that the lighting conditions have not changed between the two shots, it should make no difference what focal length of lens you are using. The exposure will be the same.

I really like the Transvue black mask transparency sleeves sold by Icon Distribution <a href="http://www.iconusa.com/online/BMaskTransSleeves.htm">www.iconusa.com</a> The B4 size holds one 4x5 transparency in a black cardboard mask which then fits inside a clear plastic outer sleeve. I usually leave the transparency inside the acetate sleeve that it comes home from the lab in and then tape it inside the mask before assembling. Looks ery professional and really protects the transparncy.

While it's always risky sending original transparencies through the

mail to anyone, I think the risk is lessened where you know the

publisher to whom you are sending them. Most of my stuff has been

sent to smaller local publishers who I have been able to build a

relationship with and so far (touch wood) I've had no problems with

lost transparencies.

 

<p>

 

However, I too was looking for high quality presentation sleeves for

4x5 transparencies and have landed on the Clear File system sold by

<a href="http://www.iconusa.com/online/bmasktranssleeves.htm">Icon

Distribution</a>

 

<p>

 

They run US$14.00 for 10 masks and sleeves which I don't think is

unreasonable. They look good and really protect the transparencies -

I like them a lot.

I know that this isn't directly on point with the LF content of our forum, but I came across this interview with Steven Spielberg in Wired magazine today and he has views of digital cameras and technology that some here may find interesting. The whole article is at <a>http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.06/spielberg.html</a> if you want to read more. Here's the quote:

 

<p>

 

"Now the thing I'm most saddened by is the constant talk about the

photochemical process becoming a thing of Thomas Edison's past. There's a magic about chemistry and film. Sure, a digital shot is steady. It doesn't have to ride through the gate of a projector. And, sure, it's as clean as the OR in a major hospital. That's exactly what's wrong with it. Film has a molecular structure called grain; even a still of just a flower in a vase has life because of the grain, because of the molecules in the film. Especially if you sit in the first five rows of any movie theater, you know what I'm talking about. The screen is alive. The screen is always alive with chaos and excitement, and that will certainly be gone when we convert to a

digital camera and a digital projector. I was one of the first people to use digital technology to enhance my films, but I'm going to be the last person to use digital technology to shoot my movies."

The earliest photographers were trying to legitimize themselves to

painters who were viewed as the "real" artists. They created softer,

romanticized images because paintings of the times were generally

softer and romantic.

 

<p>

 

The camera can be forced to make soft images (probably more easily

with the lenses of 150 years ago) but the medium is inherently sharp,

providing detail few painters can paint. One could then argue that

what Weston, Adams, et al did was simply break the pictorial bonds

and let the camera do what it was designed to do: make highly

detailed representations of what was in front of it. How the

photographer sees what's in front of the camera is a different matter.

 

<p>

 

What I find ironic is that today, there are many painters who paint

(and sell) paintings that look like photographs. In fact, they

probably made a photograph first and then painted from it. I always

find myself asking why didn't they just frame the photo. Answer:

because in the art buying public's mind painting is art and

photographs are not.

 

<p>

 

I don't know if I know what art is but in my opinion, not everyone

who picks up a paintbrush is an artist just as not everyone who works

behind a camera is an artist. I don't think we should be embarassed

as photographers because the camera instinctively makes sharp images.

We drink Vancouver Island Lager in Victoria and like to shoot

Botanical Beach (near Port Renfrew) with our 4x5. I get lots of

questions about my camera from interested passers-by, but don't see

anyone else with a camera like my Wisner.

 

<p>

 

My question to fellow Canadian shooters is: where do you go to get

your gear and supplies? I was disappointed to find out recently that

Lens and Shutter, one of our biggest regional camera stores no longer

deals in large format (somewhat understandable) or even medium format

(shocking for a pro-type store) anymore. They used to be a great

source of used equipment, but they have seen the future and it is

digital.

 

<p>

 

Any other ideas for Canadian suppliers of used LF equipment? Buying

my stuff from Mid West Photo Exchange in Columbus, Ohio

(notwithstanding their great service) is a bit of a pain.

What's the most efficient way to wash negs? I usually process my 4x5 negs using hangers and deep tanks and have been able to get pretty consistent processing results. When it comes time to wash though, I'm worried about washing the negs while still in the hangers - can you wash all the way out to the edges properly?

 

<p>

 

Don't tell St. Ansel, but I've tried putting the negs in a tray and using a Kodak Tray Siphon to wash. Generally no problems with scratching, but I'd like to find a safer method.

 

<p>

 

Has anyone devised any home made gadgets to wash negs while still in the hangers? I've looked at the Zone VI film washers that fit inside the print washers, but they're pretty expensive.

 

<p>

 

Any other suggestions for safe, efficient washing of negatives?

Does anyone still make the lead lined film bag that I bought 25+ years

ago for this very purpose? I'm not sure if there are current

suppliers, but it's a plastic coated, lead lined device about the size

of a lunch bag. You used to also be able to buy it in sheets and

"gift wrap" your film prior to travelling. Mine has carried film to

such exotic locations as Fort St. John, BC and Prince Edward Island

without fogging by airport x-ray machines.

I'm interested in a longer zoom lens and have been looking at the 85-300 f4.5 zoom. My question (duh) is whether this lens has separate focus and zoom rings. I saw one in a local used camera shop a couple of years ago, but thought it was an f5.6 lens, but I can find no record of a 85-300 f5.6 - only the f4.5 so I guess I didn't look that closely at it.

 

<p>

 

Any comments on the f4.5? Sharpness good? Anyone know the filter size (I guess that it's pretty big)? Any views on the lens would be appreciated. Thanks.

Ditto to the previous post. I have a Symmar 210/370 (not the later

Symmar-S) and it has a 58mm filter thread. Serial number also in the

11 xxx xxx range.

When I first started out and didn't have much money for such luxuries,

I made my own dark cloth. It was cloth but it wasn't dark, nor was it

big enough. It flopped around in the wind and I needed one hand to

hold onto it while I tried to focus with the other. Then I discovered

the BTZS cloth and was stunned by the difference it made. I could

actually see all the corners of the ground glass, even when using my

slower wide angle lens.

 

<p>

 

My opinion: don't think twice. If you can afford it, get a proper

cloth like the BTZS. I read the article in View Camera about draping

your camera in a tent sized cloth. I'm sure it could work with a

little practise, but the BTZS cloth solves all those problems

painlessly.

Maybe it's so stunningly expensive, none have been sold yet.