joseph_dickerson

<p>Yes, the little Graphic, I believe it's a Century, is an OK camera for this kind of work. I used a Gowland 6x9 view camera for a while, they were also sold as a Calumet Pocket View, and if you can find one they're great. Shen Hao also makes a 6x9 wooden field camera, you can check it out on Badger Graphics web site. Tell Jeff I sent you. <br> Perhaps a bit more money, but offering a lot more capability, would be a Horseman VHR. Note: VHR or VH not the 982 model. The VHR/VH have a rotating back so all the movements are useable in both the portrait and landscape orientation. The 982 lacks the rotating back, so when shooting in the portrait mode you need to turn the camera on it's side and some movements are no longer going the way you'll want for landscape photography. <br> The Graphic and the Horseman cameras also fold up offering protection for the mechanism and the lens that's on the camera.<br> The Cadillac/Mercedes/Rolls Royce, depending on your nationality, of these cameras is of course the Baby Linhof. Frankly, the Horseman is just as good, and will be a fraction of the cost.<br> BTW, the Horseman lenses I had were among the sharpest I've ever used. You can also get away with a lighter weight tripod, as all the lenses are leaf shutter, so no mirror bounce.<br> I noticed you mentioned 645 format, Mamiya made/makes a 645 for the RB that you could use on the cameras I'm suggesting. Very easy to mark the ground glass, or make a simple mask if you shoot multiple formats.<br> An article I did for Shutterbug about a hundred years ago on 6x9 View Cameras is still on the magazine's web site, it might give you some more ideas to consider.<br> I'm really interested in your project, as I wish I had done a lot more hiking/back packing/mountain biking when I was your age. I still do some, but am somewhat restricted as to distance, and the gear I can schlep. Keep us updated on how it goes.<br> JD</p>

<p>Ashley, <br> Nicely done, you really nailed the beautiful blue merle Aussie, is my prejudice for Aussies showing?<br> A friend of mine, George Lepp, has been doing some "time lapse panoramas" and was using agility trials to get the technique nailed down. You might find some on his web site, I think he's posted a tutorial as well.<br> Looks like the 70D is a great little camera, it's certainly getting the job down in your capable hands.<br> JD</p>

<p>Would I carry my RB back packing? Not on your life. Should you? Entirely up to you. At your age I might have, but then I wasn't the brightest bulb in the fixture. At least that's what my dad always told me.<br> Check out Jim Zuckerman's stuff, much of his early work was with RB/RZs, and it's incredible.<br> Want an easy test? Put a couple of bricks in your pack, add food, shelter, sleeping bag, etc., etc., and take a hike. I bet two miles in, you'll have your answer.<br> I for one would suggest Mamiya/Pentax 645 equipment. Not quite the same neg, but damn close. With the current state of medium format prices even Hasselblad gear is affordable, if you like the square format.<br> For cycling, don't put your photo gear in a pannier, all the shock/vibration will transfer directly to it. Use a handlebag bag with some "give" in the mounting system. It'll act like suspension for your cameras. If you ride a fully suspended bike, I ride a hard tail, you could mount a rear rack on the seat post and I think you'd be OK. Whatever you decide to carry make sure you pad it thoroughly in case of "face plants".<br> A 6x9 view camera or Crown Graphic 23 might be even better. It'll shoot roll film, give you multiple formats (6x6, 6x7 or 6x9cm), offer minimal movements, and have interchangeable lenses. Focusing on the ground glass will be very similar to using a waist level finder. Plus most of these will be lighter than any other option you're considering.<br> Jose', that's one bad ass trail!<br> JD</p>

<p>On the "J" there is a shutter lock which surrounds the shutter button. Make sure it's not locked, other than that what you're doing should work. Also, be sure and select a shutter speed, not the red dot which sets the camera up to use the metered prism.<br> JD</p>

<p>Mark,<br> Nice comparison, thanks for doing that.<br> Even the 7D is "useable" at ISO 2500, especially after a bit of "clean up" in ACR, or for me a trip to NIK Dfine. But the 6D, as expected, is noticeably better.<br> JD</p>

<p>Mark, <br> Cool test, I'll be interested to see the comparison as, like you, I use both the 6D and a 7D. It'll be great to know exactly how they compare. I confess to be a bit lazy when it comes to testing out this kinda stuff. I shot some stuff in Edinburgh Castle last fall hand-held at ISO 25,000 with the 6D and it was very usable. Amazing stuff.<br> The 70D has quite a reputation for outstanding auto focus performance, but I don't think I'm ready to buy yet another camera.<br> JD</p>

<p>Mark,<br> I don't think ducks approach anything like 80mph. Peregrines, yes, ducks, don't think so.<br> However, for agility trials, especially indoor, there are several issues. The dogs are motoring, she'll want to fill the frame, or nearly so, in most cases she'll have to use servo auto focus so the 70D is a very good choice. The 6D doesn't have as sophisticated an auto focus system as either the 7D or 70D, so it's really not the best choice in this situation.<br> I do agree with you that the high ISO performance is spectacular, but the auto focus...not so much.<br> JD</p>

<p>See if the light leak, which sure is what it looks like, goes to the very edge of the negative. If it does it's from the back of the camera, if the negative rebate (edge) isn't fogged, it's probably from the front. Maybe a bad bellows or some such.<br> JD</p>

<p>Great choice, not sure why not one of us thought to mention it. <br> My dad had a cousin Dave in Texas, but that's all I remember about him. My people came to Virginia in the 1640s from England, which means we were probably criminals and got transported, common punishment back then.<br> Lets us know how the 70D works out for you. Ann and I recently "adopted" a miniature Aussie and will probably try agility at some point. Still got to do the basic puppy stuff with him yet but it didn't take us long to figure out we had gotten a dob that's smarter than us.<br> JD</p>

<p>Ashley, any chance that you could borrow/rent the 7D or 6D and try it/them out? I'm still sure that you'd be better off with a 7D for agility, but you may have noticed that at least a few of us have both.<br> By the way, didn't notice your last name originally. Where are your people from? My family is all over the Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia, although I'm in California. We're famous for moonshine and the Dickerson Ketch, but I'm not close enough to anybody back there to get any sippin' whiskey, or a free boat!<br> JD</p>

<p>I recently spent several hours shooting agility, actually testing a lens I bought, with both a 7D and a 6D. <em><strong>Much</strong> </em>higher success rate with the 7D than the 6D. I was shooting outdoors so noise wasn't an issue but next time I won't even bother with the 6D.<br> Having said that, I love the 6D for landscapes, low light urban shots, portraits, but action...not so much.<br> JD</p>

<p>I may need to look into that. I do dig my RB out of the closet for my students to use once in a while.<br> JD</p>

<p>Rick...$49? Really? You should be ashamed of yourself!<br> Good on Jim for finding the manual. Everything you'll need is right there.<br> About a hunert years ago I did some lovely b&w flower stuff with the 150SF. Also used it to some effect for landscapes. It's not just for portraits anymore. <br> Just discovered my venerable 127mm doesn't sync with flash anymore. Might have to replace it with a 150SF, especially if I can find one for $49! Probably cheaper than repairing the 127.<br> JD</p>

<p>I think Jim is a little confused. The lens is soft without the disc(s) at f/4 and f/5.6, once you stop down to f/8, it is sharp. The disc(s) give you more control over the soft focus effect.<br> Like all soft focus lenses, focus stopped down to at least f/8.<br> I'm with C. Watson, I don't know how hard it will be to find a set of discs by themselves, but many of the lenses offered for sale seem to be missing them for some reason. <br> JD</p>

<p>Here's a thought...offer them $200 for both, play with them and keep the one you like best. Sell the other, maybe for a small profit?<br> Just a thought, <br> JD</p>

<p>Just to clarify, can you see a blink (or head turn) in 30ms...yep you sure can. I shot weddings and portraits for a living for nearly 40 years. Did I use TLRs? Yep. Did I also use SLRs? Yep. But I used SLRs on a tripod so I could look over the camera at my subject(s) to look for blinks etc. OP suggests she doesn't/won't use a tripod so this "fix" is not an option for her.<br> By the way, 30ms is approximate time mirror is up with <strong>some</strong> SLRs. But with Hassy, Mamiya, and many others, it's until you wind on to the next frame. Which is a lot longer.<br> We're all showing our biases, but the OP sounds like an intelligent lady so I'm sure she can sort what works for her.<br> This thread has been an interesting read. Nice to get four+ pages in without a single curmudgeon showing up!<br> JD</p>

<p>For years I have heard people parroting that with an SLR...wysiwyg (what you see is what you get). Balderdash! (I've always wanted to use that word in a sentence).<br> The very moment you <strong><em>need</em> </strong>to see your subject you're blind 'cause the mirror is up. Did the child move? Did the bride blink? Did the flash actually fire? Did the old lady feeding the pigeons in the park just give you the finger? You'll never know until the film is developed with an SLR (digital SLRs excepted of course). You'll know for sure with a TLR or rangefinder. Yes, macro is challenging, but there are work arounds if you need them.<br> If you don't like the right/left reversal thing with TLRs, replace the waist level finder with a prism. This solution works with <strong><em>all</em></strong> Mamiya TLRs, C3/2 through C330/220. Also works with some Rolleis (E-2 and later if I remember correctly).<br> I once tried a Mamiya rangefinder as a wedding camera, great for posed shots, drove me nuts trying to do candids with it. Although Mamiya 6/7 lenses are brutally sharp, any rangefinder is difficult to use with moving subjects. Mamiya TLR lenses, especially the later ones, are also very good, but remember they're all at least 15-20 years old, I'm not sure the exact year the Mamiya TLRs were discontinued. But, more importantly, they were made for a long time, so there are a lot of them available, just get the latest lenses you can afford.<br> As mentioned previously, the best camera for a hyper anything-year-old is a digital SLR with a good zoom lens, but for me at least, the second best choice is a Mamiya TLR, with a prism.<br> One last point, old Rolleis, like old Leicas, have a lot of collector appeal. This tends to drive the prices for <em><strong>user</strong></em> cameras artifically high. Mamiyas, not so much. The prices have stayed pretty reasonable.<br> Good hunting for the right camera for you, and remember, photographing any two-year-old with <strong><em>any</em></strong> camera is challenging. So plan on shooting lots!<br> JD</p>

<p>Henry, <br> Canon G1X II and I have APS-C sensors, as does the EOS M.<br> JD</p>

<p>Darcy, <br> As the fungus was disclosed, albeit not very accurately, I guess you're stuck. Although for what you paid it's not a big problem.<br> I'm sure that Mamiya can give you an estimate before they start, but you might be able to do it yourself.<br> I think that Ray is probably correct, in that the fungus is not between elements but on the inner surface of the rear group. Shouldn't be too big a problem to get at it. Take lots of photos on the way in, and buy a good spanner wrench.<br> Good luck with it, let us know how it comes out.<br> JD</p>

<p>That looks like some pretty serious fungus. I'd send the lens to Mamiya, or an authorized repair facility for an estimate if possible. <br> I would also be contacting the seller re: a return or at least partial refund, unless the fungus was disclosed at the outset.<br> It will affect image quality and will only get worse. In fact, it may have already etched the glass beyond any chance of a mere cleaning.<br> A used lens from KEH and keeping your current one as a parts donor is another option.<br> JD</p>

<p>Rodeo Joe, <br> Of course you're right, had to take my shoes and socks off to figure it out as I ran out of fingers to count on. Too many years of TTL I guess.<br> JD</p>

<p>One small correction. If your guide number is GN 50 at ISO 100 it'll be GN 200 at ISO 400. Not GN 100 as you stated in your original post.<br> Sounds like you've got it all worked out.<br> JD</p>

<p>It's not the flash that's causing the problem, it's the positioning of the flash. A different flash will still exhibit the same shadow.<br> The 270EX is a nice unit, as are all of the Canon flashes, but the answer to the issue is to get the flash off the camera. If she doesn't have the strength to hold the flash to the side while holding the camera then you need to look into some sort of flash bracket that raises the flash hence placing the shadow out of the frame. You'll also need the Canon off shoe cord.<br> All the TTL functions will continue to work as per normal. <br> BTW, this will also solve red eye with any people pictures.<br> JD</p>

<p>If you shoot jpegs, and I can see why you might want to in this case, just convert them to TIF when you download them and the problem is solved...sorta.<br> JPEG is lossy, but only if you do additional processing on the JPEG files, converting them to TIF allows you to then open and work on them as much as you want without further quality loss. Raw will still give bigger files, but you may find the approach I suggest is fine for you needs.<br> JD</p>