jil_tardiff

<p>Marvin, <br>

It might be worthwhile to contact Jim at Midwest Photo ( http://www.mpex.com ) , he helped me (and many others around here) put together my first LF setup and is stellar at balancing price and quality. He tends to have a broad range of LF gear besides what is on the website. I have since purchased from him many times and have never been disappointed, he stands behind what he sells.<br>

No affiliation, just a pleased customer.<br>

And FWIW, I made the same jump as you are making-- it's been a blast on all levels.<br>

Good luck,</p>

<p>JT</p>

<p>Thank you, Rainer-- that did help. Looks like I just need the SCA-301 for the Rollei and it looks like I might be able to use it for TTL with the Hassy as long as I pair the SCA-390 with the 300D spacer.</p>

<p>So I guess I will get both, good thing they are not expensive. <br>

In the end I may have to contact Metz anyway since I cannot figure out how to access the battery compartment. Talk about frustrating!<br>

Jil</p>

<p>So I was given one of these flashes in nice shape. The only problem is that it doesn't have a module or flash shoe. I have a Metz 45 CL-4 that I use with the SCA300/SCA390 and my Hasselblad 503CW, a great combo.<br>

I was thinking about using the 32 CT-7 with my Rollei or just as a fill with the Hassy (no TTL) but I can't find a manual that will explain what additional modules I need. <br>

My options appear to be either the SCA300D spacer + 300A (but then I am unclear about the shoe) or the SCA301 shoe mount alone. <br>

Can anyone give me some insight? I've been unable to find a manual anywhere and don't want to buy anything I don't need.<br>

Appreciate the help,<br>

Jil</p>

<p>Paul,<br>

Your use "pattern" is exactly what I plan to do, with the added advantage of considering a metered version to give me one less thing to forget (my digisix meter) when I just want to go out and shoot. And I agree 100% re: the PME45, I can't imagine spending that much for an occasional use item at this point. So I'm currently digging around for a good deal on a PME5, good bang-for-the-buck at that level.</p>

<p>Bill,<br>

I completely agree about the WLF + magnifier, I've done very well with it up until now, but always with tripod use. Part of the reason for exploring the prism option is to try to free the camera from the tripod and use it handheld a bit more often. I think the prism might facilitate that -- I have found the WLF + magnifier approach a bit cumbersome handheld.<br>

I still do some hiking with the 503 and I think I will stick with WLF in that context.<br>

Jil</p>

<p>Great-- this really helps. The situation you mention, Edward, is exactly what I am leaning towards (standard + glasses). The only "problem" is that the relatively reasonable price of the PME5 vs the very expensive (and out of my league) PME45 has me reconsidering the PME5.<br>

But I think that either the PM5 or the PME5 should do the trick for my aging eyes.<br>

Time to call my favorite salesman at KEH.<br>

Thanks again guys,<br>

Jil</p>

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p> I am slowly coming to grips with the fact that my eyesight is aging (yes, along with the rest of me) and I have decided to try using a prism with my 503CW. I will have to use my glasses in any case as I have a significant cylindrical correction in (of course) my viewing eye. I also use a Polaroid back at times, so the 90 is out.<br>

I have read a ton and although I would love to buy one of the metered prisms, the cost premium is pretty serious and so I have basically narrowed my options down to the PM5 and the PM45. It seems that the general consensus is that the PM45 is a bit brighter, but that comes with a near 2X price difference for a nice version from KEH. I know that it is tough to judge whether something is 2X "better" and hence worth the price differential, but I'd appreciate some input from those of you who might have used both.<br>

I might just end up heading down to B&H and comparing, but their prices for comparable grade PM5 and PM45 prisms is almost the same (and a little on the high side vs KEH). Not to mention the fact that they have a PME-5 that is $100 more and might make me break my promise to my better half about keeping the price down. <br>

Appreciate any and all advice!<br>

JT</p>

Ah, this is quite helpful -- I hadn't realized there was a Zing that fit the Mamiya 7II well, I've never used one for one of my

cameras, but when I bought my oldest a Nikon d70s I included one to save it from the inside of her collegiate messenger

bag.

I am a hopeless photography bag collector -- I'm chuckling because I own the exact bag Kenneth showed (so I will dig it

out and check, might be good for hiking) and I carry my D2x in a Crumpler 6 million dollar home. I carry my hybrid

Polaroid in a Domke.

I like the idea of a small messenger + ZIng. I'm based in NY (right outside the city) so unobtrusive is preferable.

Actually, one thing I'm going to check is a small Pelican for motorcycle trips this fall -- I'm looking forward to having a

serious camera with me when I ride. Somehow I snagged the last M7II at the lower price from my vendor -- usually I fall

on the wrong side of that situation.

Thanks for the pointers, guys.

JT

Hi all,

Sharing an M7 II + 80mm kit with my better half (I know, we'll see how this goes..). I'd like a reasonably padded bag for carrying it about

that isn't took camera-bag like.

Can anyone give me some starting ideas? I'd like to carry just the body with lens attached and small accessories for basic travel or just

walking around, unobtrusive would be nice.

I am heading down to B&H this weekend to pick something out, but a little guidance would probably keep me from going nuts wandering

through their huge bag section filled with people.

Much appreciate the advice,

JT

Kenneth,

I started with a Shen-Hao 4x5 field and recently switched to a Chamonix. The Shen Hao was a great camera to start with but I have

found the Chamonix to be a bit more intuitive. One of the best pieces of advice I received when I was starting out was to buy used gear

in good condition to keep the initial price outlay down. Also, I think it is somewhat common to trade in some of your initial gear when

you become more proficient and decide what works for you. MF covered some of the basics and I have found this site:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info

(and the accompanying forum) to be a great adjunct to photo.net.

Good luck,

JT

Tony-- thanks for the heads-up on the Omnisport, I use a similar case to carry my 4x5 inside my Kelty Redwing backpack. I usually don't take the 4x5 on long day hikes because the rest of the family doesn't seem to appreciate the contemplative nature of LF <grin>, but this might be the ticket for carrying my other gear as well. It would be nice since the Redwing is *very* comfortable.

JT

Good idea, I had been considering the Lowepro Off-Road (would prefer to not have the bag hanging to far off my waist (downward), I hadn't noticed the PhotoRunner, which may fit the bill perfectly and doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

Looks like I have to head down to B&H.

JT

Hi all,

About to head out west for a few weeks and will be shooting film while hiking

for the first time in many, many years. Pretty excited about it, actually.

I normally carry my D2x with an attached 70-200 or 17-35 depending on what I

plan on shooting and have heavily modified a Tamrac Velocity to handle that

load. A couple of weeks of hiking with that plus a Gitzo 1325 + Markins 10 is

quite a workout.

This time I want to carry both cameras and I'm a bit stumped. I can lighten

things up by going to 3 primes for the D2x (105-50-24), giving up the extreme

focal lengths. I've actually made do with just the d2x and the 50mm 1.4 in a

small waist pack when I need both hands for climbing, so I can certainly strip

the digital side down.

So does anyone have a suggestion for a minimal waist pack that would carry my

503 + 50mm CFE (attached) and one additional back? I can probably talk one of

the teenagers into carrying the 150mm lens <grin>.

Appreciate the input,

JT

Boy, what great input --- I *really* wanted to try to get the Century as close to it's original

state as possible, **exactly** as Frank did with that beautiful Liberty (I can't believe

someone painted it black!) It seems that both Frank M and Frank S. are describing very

similar processes-- similar to the French polishing John mentioned. This sounds like the

way to go-- looks like I have a nice project for awhile.

Thanks for the heads-up on the "New Finish" for the brass, Ron. Maguires makes great

stuff--my husband uses all of their products on his beloved vehicles.

Time to peruse some web sites (garretwade has tons of interesting stuff).

Can't wait to get started-- first a through cleaning. I think a few photos of the camera

with appended notes will help me keep track of where everything goes as I start to

disassemble it.

Thanks a million to all,

JT

Hi all,

I acquired a nice Century 5x7 (still blows my mind to see these old cameras

with light-tight bellows and functioning geared movements).

I fully intend on cleaning it up, polishing the brass, will have to replace a

piece of wood on the center track, etc. My main question is regarding the

finish. According to my research, this model has a mahogany body and cherry wood

rails.

Would anyone mind weighing in on their favorite approaches to restore or

refinish this camera? I'm actually in the midst of stripping a battleship grey

B&J -- planning on going with Tung oil/shellac, but that is a wholesale "attack"

sort of job, I want to "do no harm" with this lovely oldster.

I apologize for the lousy image-- only had a very old digital at-hand, but

figured might be useful for folks to eyeball.

Thanks in advance,

JT<div></div>

Eric,

That's good to know-- I'm keeping my eyes out for the Geronars.

FWIW, here's what I decided to do.

1. I found a great deal on a relatively new APO-Symmar 210mm. Since I had planned on also shooting some color out west and the reviews on the lens were excellent -- I went for it -- so now the Shen-Hao has a fine 210 to go along with the 135.

2. While digging around researching many of the lenses that folks had suggested I found a Burke and James 5x7 Field in very nice shape and bought it. Uh-oh. Well, maybe I can turn this one into a portrait camera.

3. So, as soon as I am done getting the 5x7 totally tuned up I will look for an older (maybe much older) lens to cover 5x7 and do my portraits.

Funny how things work out, but I do agree that the 2-lens approach is the way to go given the difference in subject.

Should be fun!

JT

Clearly this is one of those times when the "best" lens for the job is two of them. And

there seems to be some serious consensus regarding the utility of some of the more

"classic" lens designs for portrait work-- in all honesty, the shots my eldest took with her

Rolleicord (Xenar 3.5) definitely were more complementary than the Hassy 150mm . As I

was the test "subject" it was pretty sobering. Having the 16-yr-old say "Can't you scan

and photoshop them?" was not too amusing.

Hmmm, guess I'll keep my eye out for a good deal on both a modern lens (landscape) and

an older design for portraits. My better half will *love* this scenario....

I've heard good things about the 300 Geronar, Eric -- but I will have to dig around to

evaluate the focal length for 3/4.

Jenny-- didn't the Imagons come in kits? Legendary lenses if I recall.

JT

Ah, like everything else in LF there are many ways to skin this cat.

I'm chuckling over the copy lens suggestion-- my sister is a photographer and that is what she suggested, I had thought she was pulling my leg a bit.

Brian, the sharpness issue is very well taken, I'm rather fond of my Softar on my Hasselblad for exactly that reason. I've been letting my oldest practice portraits with the cleaned-up Rolleicord Vb + Rolleinar I gave her. Since I was the subject, the softness, uh, hit home. I think that if I really find that I enjoy the 4x5 portraiture I will end up investing in either one of the Fuji soft-focus lenses or maybe one of the older classics.

I had seen comments about the Nikkor-n, I'll have to check it out, and you are not kidding about the original Shen-Hao groundglass -- I lucked into a good price on a Maxwell and replaced it pretty quickly!

Nice shots, Tim and absolutely, I've been looking forward to trying some 55, I've only been using my gear for a few months, wanted to get a bit more proficiency given the cost of the film. And it's interesting, I really enjoy shooting landscapes at "long-normal" as well. My "wide-angle" eye still needs refinement.

OK, much food for thought, I think I have to take a deep breath and pick a lens.

JT

So I have been having a super time learning to use my Shen Hao 4x5 with my first

lens (a 135 Nikkor-W). Enjoying every step including using my BTZS tubes and

learning about exposure/developing latitude, etc., a good activity for an

endless "fiddler" like myself.

I had figured that my 2nd lens would be a 90mm (heading out west for a few weeks

in August, seemed an obvious choice). But to my surprise, I have found that I am

really enjoying contact printing with the 4x5 negatives. Small, I know, but

there's something about the size and intimacy of them that I find attractive.

I've always enjoyed portraiture, preferring the 3/4 shot ---- so I started to

think about going with a 210mm as the second lens, figuring it could do

double-duty (it would also complement my 135 well). After having read dozens of

210mm LF lens threads I am still somewhat in the dark. I know part of the reason

is that many of the characteristics I would be concerned about are subjective,

not to mention that there is no one "true" OOF look, but for those of you who

have shot natural light portraiture with a 210mm -- do you have preferences? I

guess that's what I'm looking for, a lens sharp enough to do justice to a

Western landscape (and at most a 4X enlargement) with bokeh that doesn't

distract from the portrait subject.

I was actually about to purchase a relatively new Fuji 210mm when I stumbled on

a couple of threads muttering about the bokeh, so I backed off. Price range? Up

to $450 (could go to 500 for a good reason). Obviously no problem buying used.

The input is much appreciated, as always.

JT

Now that's a unique use for a lingerie hanger...

JT

Guys,

This has been a tremendous help, I really appreciate the advice based on accumulated experience, without a doubt it will shorten my learning curve significantly. Especially the small specific tips regarding workflow.

Rob-- yup, I had read your threads, as a matter of fact, they were the ones that started me thinking about slowing down a bit and thinking through my first attempt!

As I commented, the incentive for this was not necessarily to save $$ over the long run, but to allow myself to learn at my own pace (especially regarding 4x5 color) without the gnawing concerns at the back of my mind over the subsequent processing costs. In the end probably a financial "wash" -- but psychologically easier.

Hopefully will be setting up tomorrow after a run to B&H in the AM.

Thanks again to all,

JT

The

Hi Ellis,

Actually, I was discussing this with the head of our analytical imaging facility at my university yesterday, came up when we were bantering about Fuji vs Kodak. We had to set up a B&W imaging station (step tablet, etc) in my lab last year and he was quite helpful.

They have a densitometer with Status A filters that I can use, probably with the Fuji strips.

At some point for convenience's sake I should invest, have a recommendation?

JT

Hi all,

<p>

Film continues to take over my household. Now both of the teenagers are

shooting MF (Rolleicord Vb for one, Holga for the other) and I have been

fiddling with 4x5.

<p>

All B&W so far, inversion and BTZS tubes for me. Everyone is having a good time,

as the developing started to pile up my husband bought us a CPP-2 + lift. An

interesting "family" gift for sure, but I'm not complaining! And I had been

holding out on any color slide work, but now I am definitely going to give it a

shot. From the outset, this has little or nothing to do with saving processing

costs per se, we all simply enjoy the process and want to branch out.

<p>

He left the "accessories" for me to buy and while I have a good idea of what I

need for the basics, I have a few questions (especially regarding E6 chemical

"management")

<p>

So for you folks who have "been there, done that" how would you approach the

following? Again, this is mostly from the E6 perspective, I will obviously buy

an extra set of bottles to do our B&W if we have "big batches" and don't want to

stick with inversion for those. The CPP-2 will also allow us to move processing

into the basement as opposed to the brutally hot 3rd-floor bathroom darkroom.

<p>

<b>Tanks:</b>

<ol>

<li><b>Expert drum 3010 for the 4x5 + pump </b>(no brainer)</li>

<p>

<li><b>Jobo 2553 tank (5-35, 3-120) + 3 2502 Duo reels </b></li> <br>(I'm a

little on the fence about this regarding the economics of the Kodak 5L kit). I

know that folks make up the E6 chemicals in batches. And 3 reels of MF a shot

makes sense to me from a practicality standpoint. I suppose at some point we

would get some larger film tanks. I'm a bit on the fence here, trying to match

efficiency to economics. Input and suggestions would be great.

</ol><p>

<b>E6 Chemicals</b><br>

<p>

OK, I have read a ton of threads and I still don't have a clear approach on how

to optimize the E6 chem usage. Part of the problem is that I haven't picked up

one of the 5L kits yet. Assume I'm going with the Kodak kit. I certainly plan on

stockpiling exposed film (actually, where would you safely store exposed film

for a few weeks, freezer?).

<p>

2 Basic scenarios:

<p>

<ol>

<li>We all head out on a Saturday and shoot 2 rolls each for a total of 6 to

process. My guess is that one 500 ml mix from the Kodak kit would cover this.</li>

<li>We come back from our planned 3-week trip through some of the upper Midwest

national parks this summer with a ton of film. </li>

</ol>

<p>

The latter is obvious-- we would buy the number of kits i think we need based on

the total volume. But say I wanted to buy an E6 kit to last for 2-3 months of

weekend shooting jaunts like in scenario 1, how are the chemicals efficiently

stored? The reason I ask is I am about to place an order with "Specialty Bottle"

for some amber bottles and could order extras if anyone had suggestions.

<p>

I'm planning on making a tempering box out of one of our large coolers and a

"drying cabinet" from a nice vinyl hanging suit bag I found.

<p>

Any and all suggestions, advice or warnings would be greatly appreciated!

<p>

Thanks, <br>

JT<div></div>

More food for thought -- a the points for and against both approaches are well-taken.

Neil -- (I really enjoyed your gallery, BTW), yup, the potential for vigenetting is what led

me to the 105mm on the front approach originally. I think I also need to assess which

camera will be used more on this trip, certainly the D2x, but I've been enjoying the

Hasselblad so much that I don't want to slight it. If I went with the 105mm approach I

could easily use that polarizer on the D2x "straight" with just a 77-105 step-up. The price

difference between the two approaches (77-based vs 105 based) is about $100 in the end.

Given what I have spent on film camera gear lately (including a user M3 and a 50 DR

Summicron <grin>) this is not a big deal when measured over the lifetime of the gear and

the fact that I don't have to obsess over vignetting.

As David pointed out, chances are I may end up having to spring for a dedicated polarizer

for my Hassy at some point -- maybe go with a bay60 - 67mm, then a nice heliopan linear

polarizer. Up until now I have only shot B&W in the Hassy -- and I don't normally use a

polarizer for that. But I will be shooting some color with it out west, and the ND grads will

be very useful. It would be nice to just be able to pop the polarizer on, putting the

adapter on the polarizer sounds fiddly.

And I'm definitely holding off on the hood for now.

One additional question for you folks using the Lee with the B60 (esp. the 50mm CF) -- do

you use the "regular" Lee B60 adapter? They don't seem to make a WA version of it. Or do

you step-up to 77mm and use the 77 WA ?

Oh, David-- good points about the fit of the HiTech's, actually the HiTech I have on loan

doesn't fit very well in the Cokin P either. I will probably stick with Lee for the most part,

but I really like the Singh-Rays as well (big bucks).

Thanks to all for the continuing input. Turned me into a subscriber!

JT

It sure is nice to know that I am not alone in trying to work this out!

I think I am leaning towards the 77mm approach that Curt and Nikos are using. It seems

to me that you are both doing basically the same thing-- using a 77mm Lee adapter in

one of the filter slots? This seems like what Lee does with the 105mm attachment, am I

correct? I am not 100% sure about the geometry. I should probably go ahead and invest in

the basic setup and a 77mm polarizer to experiment, but that is a very good idea that I

hadn't thought about. Any problems with vignetting?

And I think I will start off with the hat as hood method -- always worked for my dad...

Curt-- that's a great idea about the standard Cokin P, I have an old setup on semi-

permanent loan that I should just try with the 67mm.

I feel like I am making some real progress!

JT