nicholas_rab1

I have not yet moved to CS3. An improved photomerge would really be a blessing though, thanks for the motivation.

Hello Eric,

 

Regarding the angle of view of your 58mm, it certainly will not give you the width you had on your 4x5. As the cambo only gives you a horizontal shift of 17.5 (zoerk gives 22, but not vertical AND horizontal at the same time) I think you will end up with something like the coverage of a 35mm-40mm lens. I have a pentax 55mm I use occasionally with the zoerk, and it feels much like a semi-wide.

 

Also, your Schneider may not hold up well on the 5D's sensor. I don't really know with this particular lens, but many very high quality lf lenses do not really shine with a digital sensor. I'd do some research there.

 

I do blend frames in photoshop. Primarily with a gradient mask.

I use the 5D + Zoerk with the Pentax FA 35mm for shooting interiors.

 

It's a nice setup for the price, but has taken a bit of practice to really get adept with it. I consider the major negatives to be..

<ul>

<li>

Machining could be better, frames can vary a half a degree or so of horizon tilt. This causes a small amount of forced cropping occasionally.

</li>

<li>

Visualizing the image without being able to ever see the entire capture through the viewfinder. LF experience will certainly help here.</li>

<li>

Substantially higher post processing time.

</li>

<li>Slower to work with (again, your LF experience will help here!)

</li>

</ul>

Other than that It is a great setup. The output files are fantastic quality The 35mm lens holds up quite well to shifts.

 

Here's some examples from the pentax 35mm yesterday, no not I great shot, I know, but good example. Almost no PP here, slight sharpening, basic align of frames. Note the cropping that will need to take place from the upper right frames aligning down..

<br/>

<br/>

<img src="http://www.daemonworks.com/posts/IMG_4216.jpg"/>

<br/>

<br/>

Heres a center crop at 100%<br>

<img src="http://www.daemonworks.com/posts/IMG_4216_center.jpg"/>

<br>

<br/>

Heres what the border between frames looks like. Note the color shift. This adds more effort to PP time.

<br>

<img src="http://www.daemonworks.com/posts/IMG_4216_line.jpg"/>

<br>

<br/>

Heres the edge at a full 22mm shift, overshifted past the lines on the zoerk.

<br/>

<img src="http://www.daemonworks.com/posts/IMG_4216_edge.jpg"/>

 

<br>

 

Hope that helps somewhat. No experience with the cambo, but I know it wouldn't be wide enough for my taste. Good luck!

<br>

I seem to have an unfulfilled alpa lust case. Not quite sure why. <p>

While I cannot comment on use of the alpa, nor it's film flatness, I would think that one of the huge pro's of the system is that you can use fantastic large format, non retrofocus, wide angle lenses.

<p>

Cons? Hideously expensive lenses, and no ttl (or even rangefinder)focusing. Graduated filter use would be difficult.<p>

 

Have you considered the Fuji GW/GSW 6x9's?

---I haven't seen really any accessories for mounting and projecting slides, Does any one make that stuff?

 

Not that I know of, you are probably better off with 35mm if you like to project.

 

---Can most labs print from a 6x9 megative?

 

Yes, most good ones can.

 

---Will it complicate getting scans made?

 

No, your scans will be fantastic!

Consider the Zoerk panoramic adaptor with the Pentax 645 35mm FA lens. If it's wide enough for you there is a large amount of shift available (22mm). Also if you purchase the lens tripod mount all shifts are rear standard (sensor shift) allowing you to stitch without parralax.

 

You will certainly outresolve the 24Tse. No tilt available though.

Look onto the bay, search for "6x9 handy". I know nothing about it other than it looks like a fantastic 6x9 wide choice. The GSW is nice too...

I just returned from 3 weeks in italy. I agree that without a car you really will find it a hassle dealing with the LF gear.

 

Your mamiya 6 is in my mind one of the most perfect cameras I could imagine for a trip like this. Consider shooting low contrast print film (I like the Fuji 160c and 400h) to deal with graduations in light that invariably exist with midday shooting in the old towns.

 

Have fun.

"Has anyone here used an Epson 4990 to scan MF Chromes?"

 

Yes

 

"Prints you can matt/frame and hang in a gallery. "

 

Sure

 

Are they up to the standards I would want to hang in a gallery?

 

No

 

It's a fine scanner for small prints. I drum scan when I need a gallery quality print, and use the epson for everything else.

It's a fantastic time to be a medium format shopper, as people sell off for digital bodies.

 

As it appears you are shooting for your own enjoyment, try to get your hands on some of these cameras to see what feels good to you. Some cameras feel right to me, some wrong, and I do better work with the latter.

 

If by backcountry use you mean multi-day hiking, consider the Mamiya 7 or the Fuji 6x9 rangefinders. Much lighter and extremely high quality.

 

Hasselblad is a dime a dozen these days as well, if you like the square. For some reason I like waist level finders with a square format, but not with other ones. Dunno why.

 

Really any of these will give you fantastic results. Maybe check out lenses in each of the systems to help you make your choice.

I use a Digisix for street/travel shooting with a TLR and C41 film. Very accurate, easy to use, and extremely small. Downsides are that it is cheaply built and overpriced for what it is. No spot meter.

 

I wish I had bought the digiflash instead, as that would have come in handy for times I didn't have my flashmeter.

 

You can also get a flash shoe attachment for it, I used to use that with my old Fuji GSW69. Works pretty well, though the shape/bulk is a little odd.

Hmm, guess this crusty old bb code doesn't like unicode. Utf8 to the rescue. That's a Zork adapter, with an umlat over the "o".

Hello all,

 

Has anyone compared the quality of these two 6x4.5 lenses? Primary

use would be as a shift lens via Z�rk on a Canon 5D. I am aware of

the Canon TS-E lenses, however I would have twice the amount of shift

available via this system at a very similar cost for one lens, and

signifigantly less for multiple lenses.

 

Thanks for any thoughts.

I don't want to compare wet printing to inkjet. There are a lot of opinions on the topic you can find. If you are printing b&w only I would consider getting a dedicated printer for that and using quad tone cartridges. I find that injet printing can be fabulous myself.

 

As for the epson scanner, good enough for whom? Nothing like a drum scan, but I find for 6x9 I can reach the limit of my printer (tabloid size) with most negatives no problem. The thing to realize is that some negatives/slides scan easily. The Epson will do a fine job on these. The more difficult negatives will not work out so well.

 

I scan and print up to 13x19 at home. Everything else is outsourced, as the outlay for recompense doesn't make sense to me. I think that one should match their input and output. If you are considering a wide format printer, drop the money on a better scanner, else the epson will be fine.

 

Oh, take everything rockwell writes with a massive grain of salt.

Many thanks for all the thoughts here. After going back and forth on the topic, I have decided that I really am not positive what camera body is going to suit me correctly. Um, I guess that means I decided that I can't decide? Anyway, what seems to make sense to me in this case is to get quality lenses and a cheap body. So, I am picking up a 58xl, 110xl, and a Shen-Hao TFC45 (an Ebony SW45 clone, under $500 from china). I figure the money on lenses is well spent, and if I decide a different camera is right for me, no big loss.

 

I really appreciate the thoughtful responses to my question. This is a fantastic forum.

Shen Hao does sell direct, I just contacted them about their wide angle body (in english) and they got back to me the same day.

Gee Brian, thanks for the dose of reality :-)

 

Actually the walker XL wide looks pretty damn nice. Not hideously expensive, a little limited with long lenses but far more flexible than many of the other ultrawide bodies. It doesn't collapse, but does look like it can take a beating. Lack of rear movements is a bummer, but better alignment is the payback I guess.

 

Looks like a perfect 6x12 landscape camera.

Thanks for all the thoughts everyone. The wide angle Ebonys and Arca swiss cameras may be the ticket. I really did want a folding camera, but if I have to give up one thing I guess that would be it. Part of the problem is I often don't have the luxury of using a camera bag, and am just tossing all kinds of crap in a rucksack along with the camera. It seemed that a "folding box" of a camera would hold up the the slings and arrows of (mis)fortune better. I dislike having to baby equipment.

 

It's all a comprimise though. I do like the idea of a dedicated w/a 6x9 fresnel/back. That makes a lot of sense.

Ah, the slippery slope of photography purchases, I seem to have fallen

back onto it. Looking for some real world recommendations for a dual

purpose camera.

 

Background..

 

Over the last year I have been doing a bit of "Cheap and Cheerful"

architecture work for some clients, primarily with Canon digital.

While I think my interior work has been OK, my exterior work just

plain sucks without movements. The clients thought it was good, but

last week I made the mistake of going out and adding a couple frames

from my crappy Nagoka 4x5 with a borrowed 90mm lens. Revelation, for

both my client and I. These are the kind of results that I want!

 

I enjoy shooting landscape/fine art work for my personal enjoyment, so

would like the camera to really perform dual duty. Here's the

requirements I have put together.

 

* Able to act as a reasonably good and wide 6x9 camera for commercial

jobs (47mm with movements would be nice, 55mm without a recessed

board would be fine).

 

* Able to be used as a landscape shooter camera with 4x5 and 6x12

backs, lenses up to 200mm.

 

* Durable, compact, and collapseable. No monorails. I have actually

managed to break a canon 1Ds, so I am a little hard on equipment.

Prefer a camera that folds into a self protecting box rather than just

collapsing.

 

* Linhof boards would be really nice, as then I could continue to

easily use my nagoka for ultralight backcountry travel.

 

Any ideas? The Linhof 2000 sure looks nice, but it's a little out of

budget.

I am aware of the quality difference, and I appreciate the buy once and be done with it approach. Cheapness rarely pays off in equipment.

<p> However, I am interested in it as a very light solution to go with my lightweight camera into the backcountry. If it's close to the car I can use sheetfilm. I was just hoping someone had been the guinae pig first.

Has anyone used this rollfilm holder before? I am considering it

primarily based on weight, as it looks to be much lighter (ie plastic)

than the other chinese 6x12 backs. Seems like it would fit into an

ultralight 4x5/6x12 kit quite nicely. Obviously if the thing has

light leaks/film transport problems/other mechanical issues it's just

not worth it, so hoping someone else has tried it first!

RE: medformat & digiback,

 

The camera is just a box, see what your local rental place has. Hopefully you live in a big city, otherwise that back will be hard to find. Get the best lens you can, not a zoom. I can't give you reccomendations because

1. I have not shot such a system, it just seems the obvious answer for you, and

2. I don't know what focal length you need.

What about renting a nice P45 back, and throwing it onto a Hassy? It will be easy and comfortable to work with. Yes, I know the quality wouldn't be as good, but I'd be scared heading into a commercial job with a format I wasn't solid with. Especially large format & film.

Hello all,

 

I am sure the answer to my question is buried somewhere in the

archives, but I can't find it. I tried!

 

I have a ultralight 4x5 wood field camera, a Nagaoka. I think it is

the same camera as the Anba Ikeda. I have been shooting with a 150mm

for quite a while now, and want to add a long and short lens. As I

like to shoot 6x12, I was thinking something as wide as a 75mm would

be nice. How can I tell if this will fit with at least a little bit

of movement?

 

On the other side, I'd like a longer lens. Probably one of the

smaller Fuji's, the 240 or the 300. While I can probably do infinity

on both, how can I tell the close focus distance. Not worried about

macro with this lens, but getting it down to 3 or 4 feet would be nice.

 

Thank you!

I own the non-is, and it is a fantastic lens. However, I think the quality difference between the two is overrated. Either lens should be high enough quality for anything you can think of doing with them. If you have the extra money I would go for the IS, the non can be found for a bargain sometimes though.