neal_shields

One of the best pieces of advise I have gotten on speeding up a view

camera shot was from Ctein ( I think). Who ever it was, said go buy

a pair of high magnification reading glasses instead of fumbling with

a loop.

 

<p>

 

I am a camera collector and shot my first 4X5 over 30 years ago.

However, I am just now learning what can be done with shifts and

tilts in terms of tilting the focal plane to suit the subject. (I

always thought that all that stuff was useless unless you were

photographing tall buildings.)

 

<p>

 

It takes me a very long time to get a foreground image and the

subject in sharp focus. While three points is technically possiable,

I expect it will be a long time till I try that.

 

<p>

 

My point (question) is that: how many pictures taken outside a studio

would not benifit from a tilted focal plane, and if the answer

is "not many" as I suspect: then can anybody focus on multiple points

quick enough to make the difference in camera set up time meaningful?

Be aware!!! Several of the airlines will weigh your carry on. If it

is overweight, they will insist that you check it. Quantas and

British Airways can be very un-reasonable.

I have friends that regularly check underwater cameras. Some of them

use sturdy ice chests instead of camera cases. They are cheaper and

don't scream "steal me". However, sometimes the airlines might

refuse to accept liability as they are not "luggage".

 

<p>

 

I have traveled several million miles and have learned the hard way

not to trust the airlines with anything you are expecting to need

again. You can and should when making connections check to each

destination and then recheck. Leave yourself time. Also, be sure

your carry-on can be checked in a pinch. Some airlines will almost

pry them out of your hands, espcially with the very small feeder

flights. So be sure they are well padded and locked. I was

seperated from a Nikonos RS and 3 lenses that way one time and it

didn't catch up until the following flight. This was in a 3rd world

country. Nothing had been touched, but I used a whole roll of

Rolaids while waiting.

We used to make "internegatives" when I was a kit. You take a 35mm

negative with grain at 8X10, make a 4X5 negative from it, and make a

8X10 print from that and the picture lookes clearer. But the

improtant thing is you still have the same amount of information. If

a sign was too small to read in the origional picture, you still

won't be able to read it after makeing an internegative or

"interpolating".

 

<p>

 

The problem is not "interpolating" or "digital zoom" or for that

mater "focus free" cameras. It is that fact that these sorts of

things are used to confuse buyers. I don't know why, because

although you will have to pry my film from my cold dead fingers,

Digital is the right choice for over 90% of Americans.

 

<p>

 

Aside: Is it ethical for a triditional wedding photographer to use a

Medium format camera with a 35mm back?

About 20 years ago, I saw a Polaroid print in a museum of (I think) a famous painting titled The Assertion. The Polaroid print was about 4�X6� and was not seamed together. They had the camera that had taken it on display. It was essentially a aluminum frame about4�X4�X6� with dark cloth draped over it. At the time it didn�t occur to me to ask where they got a lens with a 4� focal length and an 8� field of coverage. Does anybody else remember this picture and camera? I think that I saw it at the museum at Berkeley.

Everyting in life is a compromise. This question may have been

triggered by Wisner's full featured camera. I do not own one but have

read critizisms about how hard it is to fold. However, that is

probably because he goes to a lot of trouble to be sure that the

image doesn't shift when using tilt and swing to focus. This is a

compromise I will gladly make if I ever have the price of a small car

to blow.

 

<p>

 

If we are considering used cameras, how about the Super Speed

Graphic, it has greater front movements than a speed or crown, is

thinner (will accept wider lenses) and has a revolving back and is

all aluminum. Compaired to used Linhofs, it also has the advantage

of having light tight bellows.

 

<p>

 

If in terms of convenience we group 4X5 cameras in order from: Press,

Technical, View, Field, I would place it somewhere between a Press

and a Technical.

 

<p>

 

Aside: With a Speed Graphic and standard plate holders, the UP

photographer was able to take three stills of the Hendenburg between

the time it exploded and when it hit the ground.

Back when I was a kid, you used 4X5 to achieve resolutation. With

some of today's modern films, you may never take a picture where you

will be able to tell the difference in an enlargement between 4X5 and

645. My wife has a Contax 645 with Zeiss lenses that is esentially

point and shoot if you want it to be.

If you are going to use movements to tilt the focal plane, and take

enough meter readings to use principals of zoneing, you are a better

man then I, if initial set up time is more than 10% of total set up

time.

The ebony web page says that your camera will take Linhof

lensboards. If you have a good used camera shop near you they would

probably let you try one.

 

<p>

 

However, it is my understanding that a Super Anglon is a Biogon

design. I don't think those designs are like the old Protar

plasmats, I.E. you can't just swap elements around.

 

<p>

 

If you do not have the correct rear element, I suspect getting the

lens to "focus" will not accomplish much unless you are into abstract

images.

 

<p>

 

My 90mm is an F8 also and I suspect that it was built about the same

time. I would be very suspicious if the rear element of your lens

doesn't have the last four digits of the serial number on the outside

of the barrel. Mine are very small about a 1/16 of an inch so look

closely, they would be very hard to see if the white paint has rubbed

off.

 

<p>

 

My understanding of the ebony web page is that there are two models

of the SV45 one definately would not need a resessed lens board to

use your lens. I can't tell about the other.

According to their web site:

http://www.ebonycamera.com/cam.html

you shouldn't need a recessed lens board until you get to a 47mm lens.

 

<p>

 

I don't have a 65mm Schneider but on my 90, the last 4 digits of the

serial number on the front element are repeted on the outside of the

lens ring on the rear element. Do yours match?

Better Light's latest ad in View Camera magazine for their digital back claims "superior detail and clarity to an 8X10 transparancy"

 

<p>

 

This would seem to be an objectively measureable statement. Put me in the doubting Thomas catagory.