oren_grad
-
Posts
73 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by oren_grad
-
-
<p>Schneider's specifications for the 90mm f/6.8 Angulon give it an image circle of 154mm at f/16, which in principle is just enough to cover 4x5 at infinity focus. That said, the Angulon is an old design, and many of the ones you'll find now date from the 1950's, when Schneider's quality control hadn't yet reached the high standard that we take for granted today.</p>
<p>If you want to use the camera to make negatives intended for big enlargements that will be examined critically, you may want to mount the camera on a tripod and use a newer, more complex design like a 90/8 Super Angulon, 90/6.8 Grandagon or similar. If you intend to use the camera hand-held in free-and-easy mode, you're already going to be trading off some technical quality, and the size and weight advantage of the Angulon can help make the camera more fun to carry and use.</p>
<p>Take a look at the Kickstarter page. They mention that they've specifically tested the 90/8 Super Angulon on the camera and that it works well.</p>
-
<p>There's provision to adjust for some variation in FFD, so you can nail down infinity or whatever other distance you like. Beyond that, yes, there will be some slop in the distance markings because actual focal length of different lenses varies from marked focal length, and because of sample variation. If that matters, a user can slap a piece of tape on and recalibrate it.</p>
<p>This is a $99 camera. It's designed as a fun, affordable, ultralight, ultraportable way to explore what it's like to work with a large negative. It also works as a low-cost accessory to let people who already have a 90 for their view camera try a different kind of LF photography. It'll also be a great base for all sorts of DIY camera projects that people will invent.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p><em>>> I can't see investing in a new camera that is made to only accept a half century old, or older, mediocre lens. <<</em></p>
<p>Bob, it will accept modern lenses too, so long as the rear cell isn't too large. The f/8 and f/6.8 lenses are likely to fit, the big f/5.6 and f/4.5 lenses not.<em><br /></em></p>
-
<p>3000B45 is the only Fuji B&W instant film still offered in 4x5:<br>
Acros 100 is still offered in cut sheets:<br>
-
<p>The late model metal-and-plastic Lisco 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 holder that I have in my hand right now is a hair less than 4" wide. Distance from the taped end to the locking ridge is about 4 3/4". Thickness of the main body of the holder is about 7/16".</p>
-
<p>On the front standard the Compact II has rise/fall, swing, shift and axis tilt. The rear has base tilt and a somewhat awkward swing capability.<br>
The Compact I has the same movements on the front, but the rear has tilt only.<br>
The two cameras have different focusing systems - the I uses a knob on the side which extends the front standard. The II has a knob in the rear of the camera, at the center of the base, which extends the front standard, but the rear standard can also be moved. The back of the I is fixed, while the back of the II rides on two "feet" that allow for the rear standard to be moved forward or back and/or twisted a bit, so it's more flexible than the I in accommodating a wide range of focal lengths at both the short and long end. The movable rear standard can also be used to quickly achieve coarse focus, leaving fine focus for the knob.</p>
-
<p>I've used both models extensively. The weight of the Compact II varies a bit with the different production runs, but the Compact I is smaller and lighter than all of them. The I has fewer movements than the II and is quite a bit simpler overall. They're both very fine cameras. It's just a matter of your budget, what features you need, and your patience in waiting for your preferred model to appear on sale.</p>
-
You can download the Contax 645 manual here:
http://global.kyocera.com/prdct/optical/support/manual/645_eng.pdf
If by chance you can read Japanese, you can download the product catalog here:
http://www.kyocera.co.jp/prdct/optical/catalog/pdf/contax_645_2.pdf
-
Steve, this is not correct. Please go check your APUG thread for more info.
-
I think the Microtek 9800XL is the least expensive flatbed that will handle ULF, sort of. Although the scan bed is 12x17, the scan area for transparent materials is 12x16, which will clip a bit off the long end of a 7x17 negative. I believe the tabloid Epsons are also restricted to 12x16 for transparent materials.
-
I also use a Wein Safe Sync adapter, to trigger my Profoto studio lights from my K110D.
-
The GX-10, with a list of six lenses, is featured prominently on page 166 of the B&H Summer 2007 catalog I received a couple of weeks ago.
-
Sorry Mads, I should have read your original post more carefully - you stated that clearly.
-
-
Go to the B&H website and search on stock number TOSFBAU.
-
In addition to the lenses Jason mentioned, Schneider still offers the 28mm PC-Super-Angulon, with interchangeable mounts to fit several different 35mm SLR types including Pentax K. It's not cheap, though - price will likely be at least $2000.
-
Just grabbed an MX body out of the cabinet to confirm my recollection of it. At least on mine, the mirror upswing and shutter opening are extremely well damped; I can't feel any shock from the action. I can feel a <i>very</i> slight jolt as the mirror comes to rest on its return.</br>
</br>
It's noticeably better in this respect than my K110D.
-
Pentax took over US distribution from Honeywell around 1976, so any camera labeled "Honeywell" is likely to be at least 30 years old.
-
Thanks for the responses.
GK - it's good to hear that the Calumet/Bowens lights have worked well for you. The rental stock at the local Calumet doesn't include the Acute2 line, but one of the MAC promotional days is coming up soon, so perhaps they would be willing to bring in a demo unit so I could at least do a comparison in the store.
Garry - a head-and-shoulders portrait on 8x10, or even a half-length portrait on 11x14, will take one into bellows-correction territory. But seeing as how anyone who volunteers to put up with my fussing and fumbling is committing an act of extreme generosity, it probably would not be sporting of me to assault them with multiple pops. Even if I did have head clamps on hand... ;-)
-
I'm wondering if any of the experienced professionals out there like Ellis
Vener or Garry Edwards can offer any insight re the pros and cons of the
Calumet/Bowens Elite 2400II vs the Profoto Acute2 2400.
The Bowens kit is somewhat less expensive here in the US. Also, Calumet's
catalog provides comparative data indicating that the Bowens unit offers a 1/2-
stop advantage in light output - f/64.3 vs f/45.7 - compared to the Profoto,
measured through a medium Chimera softbox at 5 feet, which is relevant for my
purposes.
The intended use is with large format cameras up through 8x10 and 11x14. I
need all the light I can muster to be able to work at middling apertures with
the focal lengths and bellows extensions involved. But I can't afford a high-
end 4800ws unit like the Profoto D4 4800 nor could I justify such an
expenditure in any case for my limited, non-professional use. So I'm trying to
figure out what can be accomplished at a more reasonable price. Other
important criteria are reasonable portability, and an electrical load that's
compatible with an ordinary 15-amp household circuit. I will be working
exclusively in B&W, so precise color temperature control and 1/10-stop finesse
in power settings are not critical.
I've read the catalogs of every studio flash vendor under the sun (and the
moon, for that matter) so I am aware of the offerings from many other brands
and have ruled out some because of my price, portability and/or electrical load
criteria. What I'd especially value is any insight based on actual experience
with these two brands, or otherwise directly relevant to the question of
maximum reliable light output for the money, subject to my other criteria.
Thanks...
-
Oops - make that March, 1979 for the MX 932xxxx purchase. I guess the turnover wasn't quite so fast for stock here in the US...
-
I have two MXs, one purchased new in March 1978, S/N 932xxxx, and another purchased second-hand in the late 1980s after the MX had been discontinued, S/N 955xxxx. The earlier body has the "ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN" engraving on the upper right of the back of the camera, the later body does not.
I'd be very surprised if anywhere near 1 million MXs were built over the entire run - probably a small fraction of that.
-
Yes, Dick is still in business. He will no longer be making the 8x10 Compact II after this year, but plans to keep building some 8x10 Explorers and some 4x5s, and also to continue providing support and service to existing owners.
Best way to reach Dick is via phone, not email. Phone number is 989-835-7897.
-
It does exist. Inexplicably, it was offered in a Copal 1, which made it too large and heavy for its optical specification, so it didn't last long.
The reference table in my copy of Stroebel (6th ed) indicates that the 120 has the same 72 degree coverage at f/22 as the other Sironar-N's up through the 300, which gives it an image circle of 175mm. That will easily cover 4x5, but it doesn't leave much room for movement, all the more important given the wide field of view. It would probably be fine on a Fotoman 45PS, except that I'm not sure whether you're able to fit lenses in Copal 1 to your focusing cones.
Afraid I don't have the flange-to-film specification.
TravelWide 4x5 portable camera project launched!
in Large Format
Posted
<p>And a comment for Steve: the folks behind this project spent several months on the Large Format Photography Forum soliciting input and testing ideas. They've also been using prototype cameras in the field. You can go read the thread for yourself if you're curious. But the take-home is that the product design as you currently see it reflects a set of design/cost tradeoffs that's been pretty carefully thought through. They've tried very hard to keep the price under $100 while still maintaining enough functionality for the camera to appeal to a wide audience.</p>