ivan_shukster1

<p>Some one should tell KEH that they are either overcharging on Mamiyas or undercharging on Hasselblads as the price difference on bodies (not the 645) is not that great although there is one on the lenses. In my case though the "savings" on buying a Mamiya would be less than the cost of having to buy one the lenses that I currently can borrow or the extra bulk and weight of the body. The idea that a RZ would be 10% the cost of the 500 C/M sure are not reflected on ebay or KEH. However the "fact" that the 110 lens from the Mamiya would blow the socks of the 100 Planar is interesting. Must be a great lens. My entire system when I am done will cost about $1750 for a body, three lenses and five backs does not seem outrageous to me. That is still less than the cost of a new F6. A 645 system would have been perhaps half the price and if i wanted to crop from a square image than that is what I would have bougth. Sure cannot be a lamb or sheep if you get the system that works for you as opposed to what someone else thinks is best. If I had not the opportunity to use one for over a year before buying my own perhaps I would not have thought of buying it but I did based on my own experiences and expectations. And if the digital back for a system other than I do own is overpriced it does not make my lenses work any the less.</p>

<p><strong>. </strong> <strong>Why are ZEISS lenses for Contax produced in Japan? Are ZEISS lenses "Made in Germany" better than ZEISS lenses "Made in Japan"?</strong> <br /> Our lenses in Japan and Germany are produced using the same materials, the same design and the same quality standards. Wherever the lenses are made, quality assurance is conducted by Carl Zeiss personnel working with Carl Zeiss measuring instruments. Carl Zeiss does everything possible to guarantee that the same quality standard is achieved.</p>

<p>So a Zeiss lens is superior to a Zeiss lens if the latter is on a Hasselblad? Learn something new everyday. There must of been a lot of stupid pros in the past....even Ansel Adams was duped into using a 'blad I guess. Imagine how much better his shots would have been with a RB67? LOL</p>

<p>Tom<br>

Guess with your tone you just want to bait Hasselblad owners. Cannot think I could get a Mamiya freshly serviced and a three month warranty for less than $50 hence you remarks on one tenth the price may be a slight exaggerated. For the situation I was in and for my choice of aspect Hasselblad turned out to be the best choice, other situations and preferences and I would have chosen a different system. That is why there are 645, 66, 67 and 68 cameras. And did Zeiss make two tiers of lenses, one for the good stuff and one for Hasselblads?<br>

If any of the systems were so vastly superior (and cheaper) in the professional MF market one would think that the one company would have totally cornered the market. Changing systems seems to me more of a lateral move than upgrade or down grade.<br>

I've used a 645 in previous job and to the OP unless you are printing in square moving from a 645 to a 66 is not going to be any improvement. I love the square format but that is my personal preference. If you like rectanglar prints than you would be better off with one of the larger Mamiya if you want to "upgrade" as you would get a negative noticably larger. For a project my wife just did we borrowed another MF system as she needed a rectangular aspect and for the size of the final prints cropping the Hasselblad was not the best solution. If you are happy with the Mamiya 645 and have 10 years experience with it why would you want to change it for something else?</p>

<p>Draw a retangle for each of the formats you want and draw a circle to cover the entire rectangle. The size of the circles are not the same regardless that one side of the rectangles are. A 645 lens does not have to be able to cover a 6X6 and certainly would not a 6X9. To calculate the circle of coverage needed square two adjacent sides add the results and find the square root.</p>

<p>Take a look at the diffences in sizes between Pentax 645 and 67 lenses or Mamiya 645 and 67 lenses, those companies would not make one set of lenses much larger than the other if both covered the entire film area.</p>

<p>The Shen Hao may require the optional bag bellows to make full use of the 90mm lens with movement. The bellows are quick to swap over only $100 and some people just leave the bag bellows on all the time. With what your requirements are, look into the movements with a 90mm on the Chamonix. Otherwise I believe you will find all the movements you require on either camera and both are more than adequate for you requirements.</p>

<p>The Shen is available used whereas the Chamonix is so new that it seldom shows up in the pre-owned market and when it does it is almost the full price of a new one.</p>

<p>There is a long white portion with TMAX film leader. You will notice this if you have an old 12 magazine, it seems to go on for some lenght of time anyways. If you did screw up it would not be the entire roll and unless you say the number 1 I do not think that that is even a problem.</p>

<p>The lens is a decent or at least useable one. I have the same one with my 5X7. An alternative to a shutter repair is getting a different shutter of the same size. What happened to the shutter? Perhaps it is more a setting than a breakage.</p>

<p>You will need the darkslide in order to either remove the back or remove the lens. I do have one back that does allow me to do so but it creates problems due to this.</p>

<p>There are at least four companies currently manufacturing them, sometimes only by special order. Just got mine but it is 80 years old. Both Ilford and Kodak make whole plate size film. Holders may be more of a problem to come by.<br>

The thing about film availablity is that both of Ilford and Kodak have a run of ultra large and unusual size films and you can pre order if you so wish. Many film suppliers order as well so that they have some in stock. For example Glazier's in Seattle advertise TMAX and Bigcameraworkshops in Ontario sell FP4. I have not used ours yet as still some things to do to it like lens board adapters etc but judging from the ground glass I think it will be an excellent contact size.</p>

As an owner of both a Hasselblad system and a Rolleichord the latter I have had for 30 years I would strongly agree with Robert that the other systems are great and for many people even superior to the Hasselblad or Rollei. MF is much more than a larger than 35mm system, it is also a choice between three types of cameras that all have their advantages and disadvantages, SLR, TLR and rangefinder plus from 645 to 69 is also a large range in both negative size and camera size and weight.I love the square format but if I was cropping most of my shots I would look at 645 or 67 instead.

 

I will disagree with one of the earlier posters about lenses for a digital camera. If you are really not sure if you want to become real serious about photography or of what format you want then it makes little sense to buy now for 4 or 5 years down the road. If you decide digital then getting a decent consumer DX lens with it would mean that for less money and less weight you can do what you need right now. Perhaps buying your third or fourth lens should be concerned with the future but for the first couple why worry. The lenses used are not that expensive and one would hope that if cameras are all full frame in the future, and that may not be the case for some very practical reasons, that you would still be able to use this camera as a carry around or camera for the kids etc.

 

I shoot digital, some 35 mm , MF and LF and as of the last couple of years MF has become by far my favourite format. MF is great if you do your own darkroom or have a good MF scanner but if you do not have a darkroom or existing camera gear I would suggest the digital. Many people who have started with digital have added MF or LF film to their lives afterwards.

 

If you still have the older screw mount Pentax lenses they can with adapters be used on digital Pentax and I think both Canon and Nikon with adapters.

We bought one last month for travelling without a laptop for the digital camera. Got the 320GB one on sale. On the trip we double downloaded every time just to be sure but it seems like that was unnecessary. It tells you how much is left and how many files were downloaded so if you pay attention you "know" if the download was successful. Recharge of battery was quick but it does not last long but how long does one need it on?

 

On the negatives on more than one occasion it was difficult to get it to turn on and stay on. A matter of repeating a series of pushing the button. Also not happy with it needing two USB ports for uploading onto the computer. I would buy it again.

If all four started acting strange at the same time, perhaps it is the body itself. I have a couple of older backs that seem to occassionally spread the last two or three frames out resulting in one less exposure per frame. If it was all my backs I would look to the body, especially as you say that it is OK if advanced when the magazines are off the body. If that is the case then sending them in for repairs will not be correcting the problem although perhaps a rebuilt magazine might have higher tolerances so that for a while it corrects for the body's malfunctioning. This is all guess work on my part of course.

 

If possible I would suggest that you find someone with a working 500 series and swap backs for a shoot and see if it is your body or your back. These are old backs if they have the flip up window but then that is also what I have been using and have no idea the last time they were worked on as just got them last year. But I would find out which is the problem.

 

David Odess (never remember the spelling) is very helpful and if you find out which it is the problem send them to him for an overhaul

 

Good luck

The two models that your refer to are probably the two best or top models Pentax made. How much are you using it and for what purpose? I have a SF1n from the late 80s that is a solid camera but larger than newer models and slow at AF. The other one I use is a MZ5n from early 2000 that is more compact, seems faster but with less automation and I like it better. The SF1n can be had for about $50 and if it is only to shoot some wide shots that or the newer MZ/PZ series have many fine models. The lower the number the higher the grade of the model so a MZ5 is "better" than a MZ10 for instance. There are many models very reasonably priced some with AF some with not and some with many program models and some with few or none. Perhaps giving a price range and what you want from the camera would assist those more familiar with the other models more to go on.

Simplest way would be to order film from Freestyle at $32 fro 50 sheets, no cutting and no waste. Make a mask for

your negative carrier or you can find the correct size on ebay as well. Think one of my carriers is that size and

have one even down to what looks like 110 size for that same model enlarger. There are also roll film backs

available for that size of centruy graphic. Also visit graflex.org for more info

The Camerastore in Calgary had a good stuck of it last I was in

I too had a tachihara that I sold and bought a Shen Hao. In my case the Tachihara was an old and much used version whereas the Shen looked brand new.

The only problem I have is that the lensboard opening is so tight that Technika lens boards do not fit and Wista ones are tight but no name generic ones fit in perfectly as do home made wooden ones. Shen Hao seems more robust and has more movements and has interchangeable bellows for very wide angle. The Tachihara is lighter and seems to be able to use a wider lens with its bellows than the Shen Hao with its normal bellows.

If you still have your Tachihara you may try installing nylon washers on all the knobs, it makes it so you can tighten them more. You may not need to buy a different brand if that works. I would have kept my if it was in better condition but have no regrets getting the one I have now.

My wife and I have been into photography since 1973. The last four cameras we have bought were a Sony P&S digital, 4X5 Shen Hao, Pentax K10D and a Hasselblad 500 C/M. I have taken some great shots with all of them and one of my favourite images is of my dog taken with the Sony while I was bent down tieing up my shoes. Could not have taken that with the 4X5.

 

As far as costs go in my last job we were making a purchase of a printer and when comparing good digital paper to good fibre darkroom paper the darkroom paper is less expensive and chemicals are less than inkjet inks. And compare the cost of a large inkjet to a good used enlarger than film is much much cheaper. On the other hand our last holiday we had if had to buy slide film for the amount of digital shots we took with the Pentax and a borrowed D200, the savings alone paid for the Pentax. What I am trying to say is the cost factor depends more on what you are doing and how much you shoot than the digital/film argument.

 

Only two things count if you are shooting for yourself 1) does the process work and you get the results you want and 2) do you enjoy it. If no to either question than it is the wrong process. For us film and digital answer both questions depending on the project or the mood. For me the choice of when to shoot digital and when to shoot film is an easier one than when I choose between MF and LF. I do however find myself shooting less 35mm but there are times it is the best.

 

Film is getting stronger although you may need to depend on on-line or mail order to get your stuff but many of us live or lived in communities that was the case even before digital. Digital is of course getting better. I opened this thread with a bit of hesitation as often this subject degenerates but all the responders provided a well thought out position and even an old hand (old anyways) learns from these comments.

 

Good luck and go with what you enjoy, that is what will give you the best images and the most satisfaction.

On the downside with the D1X is it is very hard on batteries and seems to grow its own dust. Where I used to work we had three of them and they were replaced with 2 D2X and 1 D200 and the dust problem went away.

The K10D is very light on batteries and a lighter camera as well. The dust problem was the worse thing about this camera, we worked in areas that were dustier than normal but the new Nikons did not have the same problem, went from cleaning the sensor at least twice a week to trying to remember the last time it was cleaned.

They were still open last time I was in Calgary in November

I just got my satin snow gg and it took me longer to find a screwdriver than it did to make the change. And it fit perfectly.

When your "friend" posted the comment that the people at Satin Snow did not know anything about large format photography he was tortured by those who simply stated that Dave Parker has shot LF for years and new about large format cameras. Making corrections to your assumptions is not torture. There are even records of Parker trying on the list to assist you with your problem when it first occurred.

It looks like you are going to be tortured on this list as well as those who posted previously are all stating positive experiences. Looks like you are just seeking others with similar complaints about Satin Snow. Seems like a lot of bother for a ten dollar piece of glass.

I found the F2 just slightly too tight for fitting a D200, 70-200 and 17-55 with lens hoods on (which makes for faster out of the bag shooting) It is perfect for when I am using the 18-200 and 12-24. If I was to buy again I would have gotten the next larger bag. Also carry flash etc with it.

Otherwise it is a very comfortable bag to use.

Thank you everyone for your responses. Placed a deposit on a body yesterday at the local photofinisher at a very good price. It is unlikely to be in intime for Christmas but that is ok as she would be suspicious if I took out Pentax film cameras along with the Hassleblad and D200 for the few days we are going away. For now the 17-28 will have to do on the wide end

I have been a long time Pentax user since the Spotmatic F days and have a number

of decent or at least useable lenses. And all my current Pentaxs are film

cameras. At work I used a D1X and now a D200 which I love. I have read on some

past posts that some people have used both the D200 and the K10D. I am thinking

of purchasing the K10D primarily for my wife but also for my use when I have not

brought the Nikon home from work. I will probably continue to use the D200 as my

primary colour camera as have access to countless lenses and love the camera.

So my real question is having used the D200 would I expect to be satisfied with

the K10D as far as quality of build, easy of use and image quailtiy? It is at

least a three hour drive to see one in person so I am asking here. I do not

expect the two models to be equal in all respects considering the price

difference but does the Pentax feel and handle in a similar quality as the D200?

If the answer is no then my I will think about a D200 or even the D80. It would

be nice to have the same system for film and digital and we have lenses from 17

to 400 in K mount already but as I have large and medium format systems I

hardly even shoot 35mm anymore.

Once again I am not looking for which is the better camera, just if the K10D

will be very close in quality to the D200.

 

Thanks

I have owned a Rolleichord for 25 years and this last six months have been able to use a Hassleblad with lenses from 50 to 500mm (have not yet used the 250 or 500). As also have large format I probably would not buy the Hasselblad but since I have been using it I have really enjoyed it and it is a wonderful camera to use. Also have access to a Rolleiflex but do not see the reason to use it. If you are sure that you want to get into medium format the Hasselblad is certainly the more complete system (can you call a Rollei TLR a system?) and more like 35mm is use than is the Rollei. If uncertain and you seem to be deciding between two completely different types of cameras I would suggest looking at a Rolleichord or Yashika (spelling?) or similiar less expensive TLR because if you end up enjoying the larger film you might want to plunge into the blad but you can keep the TLR for a backup, when you wish to travel light, or to take advantage of the TLR . I often take my Rollei when I am out shooting large format or even off with the DSLR but have never taken the Hasselblad as a tag along camera.

Of course one needs camera gear and usually the "correct" gear but I do not think that is the point of Rockwell's article. Say I have Pentax camera and a Sigma 400 lens and wanted to be a better bird photographer. I could look at the work of the better bird photographers and buy the same equipment as they do and although my images will be a bit sharper as not that satisfied with my Sigma, my photos will not be anywhere near the quality of those photographers. If I however kept the equipment that I do have and build a blind and acutally got out and scout more locations and spend more time there my work would improve. Of course no matter how good my equipment is I could not be a bird photographer if all I owned was a ultra-wide angle lens.

Ansel Adams did not use the best equipment nor does Rockwell and dismissing their options based on claims that they do is false. Adams used good lenses but not necessarily the newest or those claimed to be the sharpest and large format can be much less expensive than 35mm or now adays digital SLRs. Rockwell is using one of the least expensive large format cameras and I also bought the exact model of one of his lenses for $78 last year on ebay. He uses the D200 not the D2X.

The point of the article is that it is not looking for the silver bullet in terms of the best camera so that you are a great photographer but leanring and using your existing equipment and more importantly learning to see and visualize images. I have know people to swap entire systems and own three different systems in less than 3 years just trying to make their photographs better. I do not think that Rockwell means that we can all take our photos with a box camera and they will be great. But I do think he is right in it does not matter if you use Leica, Nikon, Canon or Pentax in order to create great photos