jos__garese

thanks, tony. i am UTTERLY NEW to the jobo system, have just bought a ccp-2 processor and i am now considering which tanks/drums to buy. looking at the jobo catalog, i see that there is a 2593 tank that holds twelve 35mm rolls or fourteen 120mm film rolls, but it asks for a minimum filling quantity of 1500ml. does that mean this tank (which exceeds the 1000ml limit) can only be used with other jobo processors, not the cpp-2?

 

whereas the combination you suggest would need a minimum filling quantity (according to the jobo catalog) of 170+330+330 = 830ml, within the stated limit.

 

but how about the 1540 tank plus two 1530 tank modules? apparently, that would allow me to process 4+3+3=10 35mm rolls, or 4+2+2=8 120 rollfilms. the minimum filling quantity would in this case be 240+330+330= 900ml, still within the l000ml limit.

 

i have never used a jobo processor, sorry if these questions seem a bit naïve, and thanks again for the input.

what are the maximum capacities of the cpp-2 jobo processor: how many

35mm rolls can it develop simultaneously and which would be the

tank/drum #?

 

the same question for 120/220 rolls.

According to photographer Pall Stefansson "I'm able to store one [fuji 680] body, angle finder, 65mm, 100mm, 180mm lenses, two backs, format masks, Polariod back, lens hoods, cords, film, and miscellaneous items in a Tamrac 646 case which will fit as airline carry-on luggage."

 

The cost at B&H is 294 usd. Some specifications:

 

Material ABS Plastic core

Ballistic nylon exterior

Type Of Closure Zipper plus buckles

Exterior Dimensions 21.25 x 14 x 9" (54 x 36 x 23cm) (WDH)

Interior Dimensions 19.5 x 12 x 6.75" (50 x 30 x 17cm) (WDH)

and yes, i want to at least reach 1:1 magnification. any further comments on the portrait lenses mentioned in the question will be much appreciated,

thanks rob. i did some internet research into bobbie lane. her ex-students seem to praise her A LOT, but am i wrong or are her workshops beginner to intermediate level? her own work i'm afraid i didn't find too impressive, but perhaps you don't need to be a very good photographer to be an inspiring teacher...

 

through internet, i also came up with two names worth checking, and i would like to get some feedback on them, should anyone have attended their workshops. their work is really good, and they evidence a solid, sophisticated knowledge and use of lighting. they are: 1) andrew eccles. 2) michael grecco

 

finally, i would like to recommend frank franca, who teaches an excellent two weekend workshop at the ICP.

that is a VERY GOOD link and it sure answers my question. thanks a lot,

thanks, lakhinder.

 

yes, i too think that f3.2 will make a hell of a difference compared to f8.

 

with regards to macro, i am just following the advice of another photonet member, danny burk, who is also a very good photographer (some of his flower portraits can be seen at www.dannyburk.com). when i asked him which lenses he would suggest for macro, he picked the 100mm in the first place. this is what he wrote: "The 100mm and, to slightly less extent, the 135mm are the best choices [for macro work]. They will give you the greatest magnification and close-focus ability; the shorter lenses (under 100mm) don't work well for macro use since they have virtually no working distance from the subject. I don't suggest buying *both* 100mm and 135mm because they are too similar to one another if they are to be your only lenses; instead, I would obtain the 100mm and perhaps a 210, 250, or 300mm. These longer lengths don't focus close enough for macro use by themselves, but if you add a Canon 500D 77mm screw-in diopter lens, they will focus very close indeed. This would give you the added benefit that they have a much more narrow angle of view than the 100mm lens, allowing you to eliminate distracting elements more easily. Plus, if you want to use the camera for other purposes, one of these longer lenses will be very useful."

 

but I'm all ears if you have a different opinion, and i am WILLING to hear different opinions ahead of my shopping and before it's too late. thanks again, josé

richard: if you're not interested in that camera, and don't even care to reply to the very specific question, which narrows the choice to four lenses of very similar focal distance (with any of which i will be doing exactly the same kind of portrait work) WHY ON EARTH MAKE ANY COMMENT AT ALL? this question was directed to owners/renters of the gx 680 III system. hopefully, at some point someone familiar with the lenses in question will come up with useful suggestions.

the difference is around U$S 2400. if there existed a second hand

680III market at all, i would happily buy a used III version of the

680. but unlike the used Mamiyas RZ67, which you can find at the

blink of an eye, the fuji 680III version is only available brand new.

so my question is: is it really worth it (that USD 2400 difference)?

or should i get the old second hand version?

(sorry. i'm posting this message again, since i forgot to select a

catergory in my previous post)

 

i've been considering entering the fuji 680 system for a while, and

finally i seem positively decided.

 

which lens would other users of this camera reccommend for

portraiture? i am considering the 180-210mm range, where there are

four specimens:

 

180mm f3.2,

180mm f5.6,

190mm f8 (soft focus),

210mm f5.6.

 

i have to choose between those four and can only afford one of them.

the 190mm seems a bit too dark, but i'd like to hear your comments.

the other lens i will get is a 100mm f4, for macro purposes.

yes, I do know the icp personally. and also I've heard about the maine and the santa fe workshops. that's fine. but i'd like to hear about specific courses at the icp or wherever (in the states or uk) that photonet users would recommend. like the workshop run by a specific photographer. so i'm rather after photographer names, not after places. the icp surely hosts excellent courses (i know it first hand), but also of the other kind (i know it first hand).

Does anyone have any suggestion on workshops that teach portrait

lighting techniques at an ADVANCED level?

I will be opening a photo studio early next year �around February-

and I�m deciding on the equipment I should buy. I already own 35mm

reflex cameras and a medium format rangefinder (which I have used

mostly on the field and which I think will be of hardly any use

inside the studio: it�s a mamiya 7). I will be working mostly with

portraiture, but on a personal level macro floral work has long been

a postponed aim in life, and I intend to make a try once the studio

is ready.

 

The alternatives I have been considering: Fuji GX-680 III vs. Mamiya

RZ67.

 

As I said, portraits and macro is what I intend to do. Which one

should I go for? The Fuji 680 seems a little cumbersome and heavy

(almost twice the mamiya's weight). But on the other hand, I won�t be

working in the field, so would this be a problem? Sometimes, though,

even inside the studio, I have the intuition that a hand-held

friendliness may be a plus: I�m thinking about a fashion shoot,

where you want to move more freely. The gain in film area when you

step up from 6x7 to 6x8 seems negligible (though I personally prefer

the 68 proportion). So is it worth adding all that weight for just a

tiny fraction of extra film? And, of course, what you do have in the

Fuji, though limited, are some �large format� movements which could

come handy if at some time I have to photograph products. Aren�t they

too limited, though? Or will they make a difference, especially when

doing macro work?

 

All inputs appreciated. I have to buy the equipment in the next two

months and really don�t know what to do. Money (not unlimited) also

should be considered. Thanks,

i know you have asked about equipment, but let me advice you against "the business of portrait photography" a book suggested by yves (in his overall excellent thread). i bought that book four or five years ago and found it dreadful, the portraiture being so utterly bad! when it comes to books i would suggest that you go for monographs of the masters, like the books by richard avedon and irving penn (they both make an excellent use of available light). sometimes you can learn a lot by watching excellent results arrived at by excellent photographers. your eye learns. i think that's a better first step. the "how to" necessarily comes next...

[�Are you sure you really need more than 645 for flowers? I find that macros are a lot less demanding of film area than one might think�� David]

 

In fact, I do not own any 645 or 6x7 SLR cameras, so I have to buy the whole kit before even trying. My original intention was to go LARGE FORMAT on this project, which I must add, will be done in the studio (exclusively). But so much have I heard about how painstaking it may be, and about how impossibly narrow DoF can become (the tilting function notwithstanding), that I settled for the nearest thing to LF, which is MF SLR 6x7. Yes I have seen some impressive results with 645. For example, in these forums I came across Danny Burk�s work on flowers, which can be reached at http://www.dannyburk.com/Studio%20Flowers.htm Nevertheless, I still want to have even more negative area than him. I will be doing large prints, 20x24, b&w, where the extra 55% (6x7 vs 645) neg area will be appreciated.

 

[�Remember when you go up to 2:1 or 3:1 magnification the depth-of-field is so small that it would be seemingly impossible to render close-up shots with a 3-dimensional look.� Paul]

 

My subjects will be individual flowers, seen from the top. And my intention is for them to look as flat as patterns on a fabric.

 

[�let me suggest that you might also want to consider using a 2x3 or 4x5 press, field, or view camera with a 6x7 roll holder. These cameras offer reflex viewing on the ground glass, accept lenses that work well at 2:1 or 3:1, and anyway you're going to be shooting static subjects from tripod so for you the SLR's advantages in normal shooting are pretty worthless.� Dan]

 

I really hadn�t thought about that. It seems a good idea. But since I am going to have to buy all this outfit, I am thinking of getting a camera that I can put to other uses as well (I also happen to do portraiture and fashion, where I could benefit from SLR advantages fully)

 

[�Lastly, a flower that will fill a 6x7 frame at 3:1 isn't particularly tiny. What are you going to do when shooting flowers 3-5 mm in diameter?�] Dan

 

I would love to do that as well, Dan, but I was also trying hard not to be overambitious. Do not tempt me! 3:1 would be enough for almost everything I would want to do.

 

Thanks all for the input so far. Further suggestions GREATLY appreciated. I look forward to them. Thanks in advance!

The Mamiya 645 with a 120mm lens has been recommended in numerous

threads for macro MF photography. But I would like a negative just a

little bit larger. I intend to photograph common flowers (where no

great magnification is necessary), but also very tiny ones, where I

would need 2:1 to 3:1 magnification ratios to fill the neg. Which 6x7

camera would you recommend? Any help will be greatly appreciated,

and thanx for the norman koren link!

thanks, andrew, i will look into that possibility as well. another scanner which is available where i now live (uruguay) is the AGFA DUOSCAN. it is supposed to be excellent but it's way too expensive, and the holders also have this problem i've mentioned before. you can't even let the rest of the strip stick out, which i wouldn't mind in the least (it's not simultaneous scans that i'm after but single scans without having to sacrifice the strip). but yes, i suppose that, in that case, i should make my own holders. thanks again,

thanks for your prompt suggestions. the epson 3200 has been on the top of my list for some time, without knowing it had that feature... leonard, i have read your threads regarding that scanner (are your new film holders working alright? tight and flat?) but i do have a small problem: i recently moved out to uruguay, south america, where very few epson products are available. in particular, i have repeatedly asked for the epson 3200 photo perfection, and it is not and will not be available. what i could order and get is the canon 9900F. do you know whether MF strips can be accomodated in this scanner as in the epson (with no need of cutting individual photograms)?

i have noticed a design trend whereby the medium format film holders

just hold a single photogram, unlike the 35mm holders (of either

flatbed scanners of any brand, or dedicated scanners like the nikon

coolscan) which hold the whole negative strip.

 

i would like to know if there are any affordable flatbed scanners

(epson, canon, minolta or whatever) which "respect" the medium format

strip, which don't require to chop it up before you scan a photogram.

 

i use the classic besfile storage sheets to store my 35mm, 6x7cm and

4x5in negs. when it comes to 35mm and MF, i want to keep my rolls

together. if i have to start chopping MF strips to have single

photograms scanned, i'm afraid i will end up with strips of three

photograms (untouched), strips of two (of which a photogram has been

cut off) and single photograms. which is a bit messy...

 

so are there any scanners with a long holder for the whole MF strip??

i've been interested in macro photography for a while, and would like

to do it in LF (or MF with bellows) and in a studio setup. my

subjects would be tiny flowers and leaves. i have searched through

photonet and amazon and have found three books that approach the

subject, but I don�t know if they come close enough..

 

1) "Manual of Close-up Photography" by Lester Lefkowitz.

2) "Close ups in nature" by John Shaw.

3) "The complete guide to Close up & Macro Photography", by Paul

Harcourt-Davies.

 

the first one was published during the seventies (might be a bit

outdated?), the second and the third one during the eighties and

nineties, respectively, and they seem like 35mm books, very glossy and

colorful, and more aimed at the stock photographer who works in the

field. actually, my aim is to do still lifes, in the studio, in b&w,

and more in the tradition of karl blossfeldt. would anyone who has

actually seen (or who owns) any of these books make suggestions?

should I get them or not? or would you recommend another book by

another author? thanx in advance,

you haven´t mentioned it, david, but in ANY CASE please avoid the M5, a flawed design. about the M7, i confess i haven't used it, but consider this: if you were into digital, i would understand if you conceived of going into the latest model/latest systems available (its like a crazy arms race, older models getting obsolete faster and faster and needed to be substituted by newer ones). but it happens to be that you have chosen the LEICA realm, where this law of unstoppable progress and obsolescence DOES NOT really apply. so my advice is: drop the new M7, get a second hand M6.

M6 Classic, from here to eternity. absolutely no hidden mechanical problems. i wouldn't worry about it being second hand. and get your M lenses USED too.

thanks, tony and scott. i live in south america, and i have to go through a proper import procedure. i can´t buy equipment on the internet and then have it sent home, just like that. it will be stopped at the customs and a burocratic nightmare will ensue. i will try to look into the possibility in any case, throug fedex or dhl. but yet, there´s another potential problem. what if the equipment were not working as it should (for instance, if it had problems with the cooling system)? i just wouldn't be able to afford the TRIPLE nightmare of sending it back to its previous owner. and would he or she be willing to pay for the shipping back and forth to a far away place? so buying second hand i think is much easier when you live in the same country. the risk of these problems occuring is minimized by buying new equipment (i will probably not have to send it back/fingers crossed). the expert drum, if there is a substantial economic difference, yes, i would buy it on ebay.

 

one question remains to be answered, though: how much do you think i would have to pay? forget the import, consider the prices within the u.s. how much would we be looking at if i were to resort to second hand on ebay, how much if i were to buy new? i much appreciate your input. thanks again

for the last twelve years i have been into 35mm and 6x7 B&W

photography, and recently i have added 4x5". so far i have hand

processed everything. my 35mm negs have always been perfect, the

medium and large formats not so. but aside of that, i just can't

stand the hand process anymore: the agitation, the dripping

chemistry, the odours, and of course the potential for uneven

development. so i am looking into buying a JOBO PROCESSOR.

 

QUESTIONS:

1. if i will only use it to process film, which one would you

recommend? cpp-2?

2. i have visited the JOBO products website and have subsequently

looked at the worrying price$$$$ at B&H. the processor doesn't

include the motor? (the motor alone costs almost like a processor).

3. how much do i have to spend for a new equipment? (e-bay being out

of the question, since i'm not based in the u.s.)

4. and which are the essential components i need to buy? (i have

seen the lift device highly recommended by photonet members.)