alec_kennedy

Mamiya made a Model 3 roll film holder for their Press series of

cameras. This RFH has the provision for fitting a cable release. <p>

My question is where can I get the cable release which fits these roll

film holders. I've tried the one out of the handgrip but it's the

wrong dimensions.

<p> If you want the coverage of a wide angle lens, consider taking two pix side by side with the 150 lens and then stitch the two frames together. You'll double the resolution, which is very useful if you're going to print as a panorama. <p> Personally I'm going off wide angle lenses with their light fall-off, and dim edges for focussing, and loss of resolution on wide prints.

<p> And if you get bored with ordinary film you can try Polacolor image transfer, see this link, (and many more via Google)<p> http://www.silverprint.co.uk/pola2.html

<p> Go for it ! <p> There's a whole new and fascinating world out there.

I use a Benbo with the camera mounted on the bottom of the centre column.

<p> I seem to be the only one plugging for a Linhof, monorail or field camera, so here's a link to a review written for the Large Format Page,

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/linhof/kardan-color.html

<p> OOPS, At the end of para (3) above, my reference to depth-of-field should be more correctly called "plane-of-focus adjustments".

I have a book called Panoramic Photography by Joseph Meehan. In it he refers to a 1904 panorama print measuring 5 ft by 40 ft long depicting the Gulf of Naples. This single print was made from six separate 8 1/4 X 10 1/2 inch negs through an enlarger onto the bromide paper. The print was processed on a vertical wheel of 41 ft circumference. The processing solutions were in three troughs which ran on a railway line under the huge print wheel. Then the print was washed in a 50 ft trough holding 3000 gals of water. The whole process was done in the open and at night. <p> Maybe not the biggest negatives but one huge print.

<p> (1) From past experience, processing 4x5 sheet film was about the same price in $/sq mm as 35mm or MF film, (here in NZ). Except you blow it all in one click of the shutter. I guess it depends where in Aus you are though. 'Phone around for prices and be prepared to post your film for processing. <p> (2) For scanning LF negs consider one of the top-end flat bed scanners, eg Epson 4990, or the Canon equivalent. Read the forum posts, there are a lot of opinions out there, both for and against. <p> (3) My favorite 4x5 field camera is actually a monorail, specifically the Linhof Kardan Color, (NB not the Linhof Color or the Kardan Color 45S). It has a two piece monorail, the front and rear standards have tilt and swing and rise, and can be collapsed onto the short section of the monorail to give a unit about the same size as a Linhof Technika, but more robust and a fraction of the price. The rising rear standard could be useful for photographing down into a canyon or similar, otherwise probably the lens board tilt and swing will take care of your depth of field adjustments. <p> (4) The Kardan Color can be found regularly on eBay for $250 - $350, or so, without lenses. Add a pair of Schneider MC f/5.6 lenses for about $800 each. If you want to use Quick-loads then add $250-$300 for a Polaroid 545 holder. Still well within your US $4000, (enough left over even, to hire a porter). <p> These are my own opinions, and I'm quite prepared to be shot down in flames over them. <p> Consider LF photography to be a way-of-life, a culture, but don't try to compare with miniature camera (35mm) photography. <p> PS. you can email me directly if you wish, for any elaboration. Cheers.

Not quite, Dan. <p> The AE prism finder for the 645 Super is model "AE Prism Finder N", (no actual number code), and for the 645 Pro/ProTL the AE prism finder is known as the "AE Prism Finder FE401". <P> While these are mechanically and electronically interchangeable between these three 645 models, the FE401 shows more information when fitted to the Pro/ProTL. <P> And don't forget the "AE Finder FK402" for the Pro/ProTL which has a mirror system instead of a glass prism, LED display instead of LCD numerics.

So why not the 120mm AF Macro. It will give you a med telephoto, and you can focus from infinity to as close as you like.

Jason, forgot to mention. <p> Consider stitching together a couple of scanned frames, or even more, using one of the many panorama stitch software programs on the net. That way you can end up with the equivalent of a 6x7, 6x9, or even larger neg, and still only have to carry a 645 camera.

Hello Jason,

You've got a fair selection of opinions on medium format gear already, but maybe one more won't hurt. <p> I've owned and used the Mamiya 645 series for about 20 years now ever since the 1000S first appeared. Now using a Pro TL and a Pro, with a wide selection of lenses to choose from. In my opinion, the 645 is a very successful compromise between portability and negative size. <p> Any time I feel the urge for a larger format I pick up my Linhof 5x4, and usually after a half hour of carrying it around, the urge disappears. <p> I still recommend the Mamiya 645 as a really usable camera.

For landscape work I recommend the 35/3.5 wide angle and the 55-110 zoom lenses to cover most of your needs, and to keep the weight down. For a lens in the tele range I recommend the 300/5.6 ULD, it really is a superb lens, and not so heavy either. If you want to reduce the weight further you can use the manual film crank instead of the motor drive, and there is a light-weight reflex finder instead of the glass prism. And I recommend, as some one has already, to get a decent handheld meter. <p> Cheers,

Pin 2 is the AE metering lock, and pin 4 is not used. I've only used the larger motor drive (WG401) which behaves as one would expect, and advances the film immediately after the shutter fires. I've also used this on both Pro and Pro TL cameras. <p> Email me for more details if you wish, the wiring of pin 2 is not so straight-forward.

To put it fairly simply, the Pro TL has through-the-lens flash control, the Pro does not. Otherwise they're identical. <p> The WG401 is faster, quieter, has more battery power (6xAA), includes the socket to connect your leaf shutter lenses and also one for an external winder battery. Also the control switch will wind on fresh film to the first frame as well as give metering preview. And there's a socket for a mechanical cable release. And about twice the weight of the WG402.

And, Ilkka, I'd love your 4990 scanner for $200. (assuming it's not actually a defective unit). <p> I think basically in the on-going argument of modern flatbed vs dedicated film scanners that it comes down to dollars, and the depth of ones pocket. <p> Another factor which seems to have been overlooked is the computing power needed to manipulate these high res files. Any thoughts there ?

I have made my own remote release for my Pro/Pro TL cameras. <p> If you just wish to trip the shutter then it's straight-forward. Connect terminals one and three momentarily (reading from the top). I used the "cable release adaptor as a plug, it has the advantage of being polarised and is complete with a lock. <p> Email me if you wish, for any other details.

I accept that a drum scan of a neg/tranny will probably out-class a flat-bed scan especially 35mm, but in the real world WHO CARES. <p> It's nice to know the limitations, but buy what you can afford and work within its limits.<p> Remember, great photographers are remembered for their images, and not their n'th degree, gnat's whisker resolution.

Something the instructions won't tell you is that you can add a 2X extender to the 80mm macro to get a 160mm 1:1 macro. But do be careful to set the macro on close-up first. You will not be able to focus to infinity due to clashing between the back of the lens elements and the front of the extender elements.

For your budget I recommend the Epson Perfection 4870, (or even possibly the later 4990). I bought the 4870 new about 18 months ago for $440 US, so they should be available less than that on eBay, (or even new, having been replaced by the 4990). I am using it to scan 645 MF color negs. Initially some problems with color rendition until I discovered the optional Silverfast SE scanning software, in the same software package with the scanner. Silverfast allows you to nominate the brand and type of color neg film that you are scanning. I am perfectly happy with the results, and have no plans to replace it, even with the later 4990. I recommend you read this review for a critical assessment.<p> http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%204870/page_1.htm .<p> See also his later review of the 4990, just search his index.

I've used Mamiya 645 since the early '80s, currently using the Pro and Pro TL, though as a hobbyist rather than a Pro, with no problems. For example, I've given up keeping a spare back, never needed it. <p> In the past year I've introduced the digital element by scanning my negs on an Epson 4870, to Photoshop, and then Epson R800 printer. <p> I've done some fairly critical subjective assessments of the digital print quality, and can't fault it for resolution. I believe the weak link in your arrangement will be the photo lab print quality, and not the film resolution. I've scanned my 645 negs at 4800 dpi, getting a half Gig file, still without seeing the film grain.<p> Cheers.

Hello Claude,<p> According to our local Mamiya serviceman, the Super is not as reliable as the later Pro and Pro TL models. Also you may have a problem with flash sync at 1/60, and may have to slow down to 1/30 sec.<p> As I understand, MF lenses will work on the AF models but only in a stopped-down mode.

Try this eBay link. Just listed as of 12 Sept.<p>

http://cgi.ebay.com/MAMIYA-ROLL-FILM-ADAPTER-6X9-FOR-CAMERA_W0QQitemZ7545902756QQcategoryZ3352QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Let's consider the last question on drum scanning.<p>

Have you any idea of the file size for a quality 4x5 scan ?<p>

eg, a quality scan from my MF 645 neg is in the order of 250 MB, so now multiply that up for a 4x5 scan, and that gets you 1 Gb or more.<p> Which leads to the next question, what size computer do you have to process that file ?<p>

Let's assume you have solved that and have a top-of-the-line PC/Mac with as much RAM (2Gb or more) and clock speed (2GHz or more) as you can/can't afford.<p>

Then instead of getting drum scans done of your favorite negs, (those scans are not cheap and the dollars will soon mount up), read some of the reviews on the latest flat-bed scanners (for example Epson 4990), and you'll realise the latest flat-beds are more than sufficient, and will soon pay for a few drum scans.<p>

That's my 2 cents worth.<p>

And BTW, I suspect MF film will be around for a lot of years to come, though I'm not so sure of 35mm.