philippe_vandenbroeck

<p>Thanks for a great article. I find the demise of Bronica too bad. I think particularly the RF645 is a unique camera that offers outstanding image quality and handling. None of the Fuji 645 rangefinders even come close to what the Bronica has to offer. I am cherishing (and using) mine!</p>

<p>I have been a dedicated user of Quickload and it is indeed sad to see that the supply has become fragile. I invested in 700 sheets of Acros before it recently disappeared from the market. If I would have to guess, I'd say that chances are we have still access to Quickload in three years time. But I wouldn't want to guess whether it is still around in 10 years. That being said, the Fuji UK online store is still the best source for getting Quickload (http://www.fujilab.co.uk). They sometimes have offers of shortdated film. I think Robert White has become more cautious in investing in a stock of Quickload which is why they now tend to order it from Japan themselves when they have enough orders in.<br>

For me, regular 4x5" is not a real alternative to Quickload. I am schlepping my large format kit over the 4000m mark in the Alps which I couldn't do with a heap of Fidelity cassettes in my backpack. So if Quickload is phased out, then I will have to go for a digital back on my 4x5".</p>

Thanks for posting, David. I just did a trip in the Alps, more specifically in the Brenta

Dolomites, with 4x5 gear. Led by an experienced mountain guide, we did a 5-day north-

south traverse over a succession of "via ferrata". These are very exposed mountain trails

equipped with cables and ladders, leading you to places where otherwise only expert

climbers can come. I had my Canham on my back, Gitzo 1325, two lenses, and 40 Quickoad

sheets of Acros. I exposed 35 of them on the journey. This was my first foray with 4x5 in

extremely rugged outdoor terrain but I'm happy I did it and will do it again. See also the

latest postings on my photography <a href="http://bravo20.blogspot.com">blog</a>.

The SWC is a fine camera and I would certainly recommend it. However,

count in an extra $450 for a Cosina-Voigtl䮤er low-angle SWC finder which

is a must. It is much better - both optically and ergonomically - than the

original finder. It is expensive but, given the very poor Hasselblad alternative,

worth every dollar.

I seem to notice uneven development on these chromes: vertical banding as if

rollers have left an impression on the film surface. Particularly noticeable in

Photo 2 and 3 - the brightest pictures - some 3.5 inches (9 cm) from the right

hand side. I saw it right away when I opened the page. Anyone else?

Nels_, you won't regret ordering the German Farova book. I just leafed

through it again and it is a wonderful book. A hefty tome, weighing in at

around 3 kilos and beautifully designed and printed. There is plenty of stuff

taken from his studio window (although I don't obviously know to what extent it

overlaps with the older book). If you can get hold of the "Sad Landscape"

panorama volume, that is even better. I've seen those contact prints in Prague

and you really don't believe what you are seeing. It's awesome. It leaves

Koudelka, who went to Bohemia long after Sudek to shoot his "Black

Triangle", in the dust (and given how much I love Koudelka this means

something). Anyway, during my visit to Prague last year I visited Sudek's

studio. It's only a shed in a garden that has been completely rebuilt as it was

in the old days, before it burned down. It's a tiny museum now - just two rooms

- but fun. And it gives an idea of that garden he has been inexhaustibly

photographing.

There are a couple of Sudek books around. Have a look at the main online

photobookstores. As best (and very beautifully printed) overview of his work, I

would recommend a German book edited by Anna Farova and issued in 1999

by Keyahoff Verlag. It's difficult to find, however. The most cherished Sudek

book in my library, however, is "Sad Landscape": a superb collection of his

large format panorama pictures taken in Bohemia, end of the fifties, early

sixties.

Very nice work. I love these kinds of quiet, austere compositions. I'm very

much into that myself. The square is wonderful for that kind of perspective.

I have a Canham DLC 4x5 too, and a Phillips 8x10 Explorer. I find both

cameras very similar in spirit and handling. If you like the Canham, I would be

surprised if you would be disappointed by the Phillips. Sadly, the Explorer

8x10 is very hard to find.

I did a tour through all <a href="http://www.eucapitals.net" >25 capitals of the EU</a> with the Horizon. I didn't focus on people per se, but if you flick through the different portfolios you might find a couple of helpful examples.

I'm hanging on to my OM-1O as well. Very first camera I every owned. I love the Zuiko 55mm f1.2. Perhaps not quite the same thing as a Noctilux, but a lot of <a href="http://bravo20.blogspot.com/2006/01/picture-of-day-marit.html" >fun</a> anyway.

I use the Cosina Voigtlander SWC angle finder. It's a costly variant of the standard 35mm finder with a 15mm attachment. See Stephen Gandy's website. Works much better than the standard Hasselblad finder! With this finder you can work hyperfocally in confidence. It has the additional benefit that you don't have to hold the camera in front of your face. It's more like working with a TLR, hence much less obtrusive. This really turns the SWC into a great street shooter.

I don't think the distortion is a cause for great concern. But, obviously, you'll

have to get very close to your subject. Not everyone may be comfortable with

a TLR hovering just in front of their nose. And you need to be very careful in

focusing as dof is very limited (as is obvious from the picture posted in my

blog). But otherwise it works fine. Just give it a try.

Ok, linking the image went wrong somewhere. Let's try it <a href="http://bravo20.blogspot.com/2006/03/another-gabon-portrait.html" >differently</a>.

I disagree with the other posters. In my experience the Rolleinar 1 works very well for portraits. This picture was taken with a Rolleiflex 3.5F and a Rolleinar 1.

I have a 6x12 and have just tested the new viewfinder and focus mount:

 

http://bravo20.blogspot.com/2006/01/first-trials-with-upgraded-fotoman-612.html

After having reviewed the pros and cons of the Canham DLC45, the Linhof

Technica, Toyo 45 AXII, Toyo 45CF, Wista VX, and the Arca Misura in

combination with respectively the Fujinon C 450/12.5, the Fujinon T 400/8

and the Schneider Apo Tele Xenar 400/5.6, I finally decided on the Canham/

Fujinon 450 combo. Whilst I am not convinced of the rigidity of the Canham

with the 450 - I saw the Canham 8x10 in NYC and was not impressed - the

portability of this camera with three lenses (Fuji 90/8, Rodenstock Sironar

150/5.6 and Fuji 450/12.5) seems to be unrivalled. So I think it is worth having

a go at it. The more so as I was able to secure an "ex demo" camera at an

attractive price from Robert White. If it doesn't work out, I can still use the Fuji

lens on the 8x10. Thanks again to everyone for the input.

Sergio, Michael, many thanks for your response. The DLC/Fuji 450 combo is

on my list, but I hesitate as reviews of the Canham seem to be mixed. Michael

reinforces these doubts. Next Monday I will be in New York and I hope to visit

a large format camera store to have a close look at the DLC45.

 

Meanwhile I hope there will be forum visitors with other suggestions.

Hi all,

 

I would like to buy a new 4x5 camera plus a new long focal length lens (>

300mm).

 

Lenses I currently use are a 65mm Grandagon and a 150mm Sironar-S. I

would like to hold on to those.

 

I am planning to use the camera primarily whilst travelling and in the field,

including very alpine conditions. So portability and rigidity are key.

 

I would like to buy a long focal length lens that I can also use on my Phillips

8x10 Explorer.

 

My question is: what camera/long lens combination would be most suitable?

 

I am grateful for any suggestions.

Would love to see 6x12 available as neg format too. Otherwise a fun tool to

use. Thanks.

Don't confuse the Fotoman - reviewed in the latest View Camera issue - with

the Chinese camera on offer.

I work with 6x12 cameras for street shooting. First I used a Cambo Wide 4x5/

Schneider 58 SA combo with a 6x12 back. As viewfinder, I used the Cosina

Voigtlander 15mm angle finder and that went quite well. Some examples can

be seen on http://www.italian-portfolio.net/thumbnails612.html

 

Now I use a Fotoman 612 - actually a Linhof clone - with a 65mm Grandagon

but I'm surprised to see it takes a bit more time to get used to than I

anticipated. I took it with me on my summer holidays in Italy and I was

confident that I could guesstimate the dof at various apertures well enough to

make up for the absence of a dof scale on the camera. I was sorry to see that

only the pictures taken at very small apertures (say, 32 onwards) were sharp

front to back. It is also possible that, despite repeated efforts (and running a

couple of test rolls) that I have not been successful at mounting and

calibrating the Rodenstock lens 100% accurately. That needs to be checked

out.

 

The advantage of the Fotoman over the Cambo is obviously weight and size.

It is a very well made camera. Its weak point is the viewfinder. It don't think I

will get used to its partially blurry view. Depending upon where you put your

eye, some parts of the field of view are hazy.

 

Personally I think 612 is very well suited to streetwork. I have never used a

tripod when working with these cameras. The negatives are sharp however. I

have printed them on 2 by 1 meter canvases without any problem. The 6x12

format is to my mind very complementary with the square 6x6. In a single

project or assignment I would hesitate to mix it with 24x65 and 24x36,

however. When I switched to 6x12, I sold my xpan. I have used quite a few

different cameras, but the xpan is probably the only one I slightly regret

selling. I can live without it, but it is a very nice tool, particularly when you can

afford the 30mm lens.

I've worked with a 4x5 Cambo Wide equipped with a 6x12 back and 58 SA

XL. That's perfectly fine, even for handheld shooting. The 58 performs very

well, even without centre filter (B&W). I have recently switched to a Fotoman

612 with a 65mm Grandagon because I didn't need the 4x5 and shift

capabilities of the Cambo. I'm sticking to the 6x12 because it complements the

6x6 format, which I am quite fond of, very well. Interestingly, I had an

exhibition recently with very large prints (200x100cm) from the 6x12

negatives and many people commented that it looked as if the pictures where

signficantly wider than the 2:1 ratio.

I'd second Carsten's suggestion: the Littmann Single. But it is expensive.

Another attractive and cheaper option is the new Fotoman 4x5PS camera.

Check it out at www.fotomancamera.com.

Alvin, forum member Michael Przewocki seems to know an awful lot about

these cameras, but he is not always clear in expressing himself. Look up

some of his postings here:

 

http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member-all?proc_name=bboard&

user_id=454885