marike1

<p>George, a good way to see shots from a specific camera is <a href="http://www.flickr.com">Flickr</a>. In the search field on the upper-right of the page, type in "Olympus E-PL1". Often times people will upload full-size images. <br>

According to <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusepl1/">DPReview</a>, who reviewed the Olympus E-PL1, it has a lighter anti-alias filter than the more expensive EP-2, and is therefore able to capture more detailed images. <br>

So all DSLR's a definitely not created equal as certain factors can contribute to performance and image quality. </p>

 

<p>I use Efke 25 as my main film for 4x5. I like to develop it in PMK Pyro best, but have gotten good results from Rodinal, Xtol, and HC110. It's a great film for low light as grain is minimal. </p><div></div>

<p>You can buy a new Tachihara from Midwest Photo Exchange or Badger Graphic, so I'm not sure about your claim about them not being in production. It's a good wood field camera to start with. Some others (particularly if you don't want to spend a fortune) would be a Wista DX (love this camera), Shen Hao, Zone VI (used only), and Chamonix (my current camera). </p>

<p>Since you are interested in landscape photography, a folding wood field camera will be lightweight, and easy to pack in a Lowepro type backpack along with a couple of lenses.</p>

<p>A monorail like a Sinar F1 will offer a variety of movements, but are usually heavier and more awkward to pack. And if you like wide-angle lenses, you'll often need to use bag bellows, as a camera like the F1 will not support wide angle lenses with the standard bellows. This of course varies from camera to camera, so make sure you check maximum and minimum bellows extension and the movements offered when you are considering purchase of a specific model. </p>

<p>Check out the <a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup4x5.html">4x5 Camera Round-Up</a> for tips on choosing various cameras. Also, a book I like is <em>Using the View Camera</em> by Steve Simmons. The book as a bit older, but since view camera designs haven't changed much at all in a hundred years, all the info in this book is relevant. The three Ansel Adams books a <em>really</em> good as well. </p>

<p>For lenses, you can find some excellent deals on ePrey if you are patient. I would avoid lenses with "No Return" option. A 150 mm lens of recent vintage by either Nikon, Schneider, Rodenstock (Caltar) or Fuji will be of great use to you. Also most of the better camera shops sell used Large Format lenses. You can also add a 90 mm or a gentle wide angle like a 125 mm since your interest is in landscapes. Hope this helps. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I don't have the times for DD-X, but I agree with Robert regarding Efke in Rodinal. Efke 25 in 4x5 is my standard film, and developed in Rodinal 1:50 (1:100) or a Metol developer like PMK Pyro or for slightly sharper negatives, WD2D+ it produces negatives with outstanding sharpness, good shadow detail that are easy to print. </p>

<p>For film/developer combinations that are not listed on the <a href="http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php">Massive Development Chart</a> I usually find a film with the same ISO, and use the listed time as a starting point. </p>

<p>I'm a big fan of Efke 25. Developed in either WD2D+ or Rodinal, for extremely sharp, grain-less negatives. For a little more speed, which for landscapes really isn't necessary, Delta 100 in Xtol is an extremely sharp film. </p>

<p>

<blockquote>

<p>Mr. Bora...<br>

Fellow Photonetter Mr. Perez and associates have kindly posted some results here:<br>

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html" target="_blank">http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html</a></p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>First, I may be wrong, but with a lovely name like Leonora, I don't think Ms. Bora is a Mr. Second, the OP referenced the Chris Perez tests in her question, and is correct that they do not test the Symmar-S. </p>

</p>

<p>If I were buying sight-unseen, I'd buy the Rodenstock as I have yet to see any Schneideritis issues with Rodenstock lenses. If you were talking about the APO Symmar, the choice would be easy as it is reported to be one of the best 210's ever. While the Symmar-S MC lenses are excellent, there is a good chance that the APO Sironar-N is a newer lens, which would probably make the shutter a better bet. <br>

It's a tough call, but I think you are making a good choice, which is not all that hard as it is very tough to go wrong with either lens, providing they have no issue. </p>

 

 

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>FYI - I checked the Chamonix website and it looks as though they're going to introduce a new 4x5 camera soon, the 045N-2. I wonder what changes they're making.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I spoke to Hugo Zhang, the US Chamonix rep, about the 45n-2 and the only thing he said was that it would have minor improvements, would be 10% more expensive, and they will finally have Teak in addition to the other woods available. </p>

 

 

 

<p>I agree with Bob that the Ries tripod's lack of leg lock detents make if very easy to level, but Wendell asked about a lightweight tripod for backpacking and none of the Ries tripods can be considered "lightweight" by any stretch of the imagination. I love my Ries J100 and use it regularly. The freedom to set the leg angles, and the ability to do so without bending down to change the leg height, makes the Ries a snap to level. But at 3.6 kg / 8 lb, without a head, the J100 is heavy. </p>

<p>I have been using my Feisol for 3-4 years without a single problem. At 1.36 kg / 2.99 lb my CT-3401 is very light, but will support a 4x5 wood field like a Tachihara easily. To shave off more weight, it's center column can be removed as Feisol includes the flat plate hardware to do so. Keep in mind that removing the center column will make it impossible to hang a camera bag under the tripod in windy conditions. But for LF in particular, a center column is more of a hinderance than a help. Unlike the Gitzo, the center column will occasionally twist when you don't want it to. Good luck.</p>

 

<p>I would also vote for a Chamonix. I use a Chamonix 045n-1 and couldn't be happier. I've used a Wista DX and briefly a Tachihara, and the Chamonix has longer bellows extension (if can focus with a 300mm and longer lens) and seems much more rigid due to the carbon fiber base. That being said the wood field 4x5 camera like the Wista, Zone VI, Tachihara and Shen Hao as good choices to starting with LF. </p>

<p>I have a Feisol CT-3401 (and a Ries J100 that is great) that I use with a Chamonix 045n-1, which is similar in weight to a Tachihara. The CT-3401 will hold a lightweight 4x5 with no problem and would be a good choice for hiking. If you want a tripod that will only be used for hiking the 3401 at 1.36 kg / 2.99 lbs is an excellent choice. In windy conditions I sometimes wish I had gotten the larger Feisol, the CT-3371, which would probably make a better all-around tripod for 4x5 than the CT-3401. But for hiking you can't get much better than the CT-3401, unless you look at the more expensive Gitzo, which have a slightly better leg locking mechanism. An Arca Swiss type ball head like the Arca Swiss, Markin, Kirk, is a good match for the Feisol tripod legs. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Bruce, he shoots a lot of color. Where can he get 11x14 color film, let alone 16x20 or 14x17? </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Badger Graphics has some 11x14 Provia <a href="https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_list&c=262">https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_list&c=262</a><br>

so film is available. Ultra Large Format or even banquet cameras do produce results that are simply amazing and film is available if you order in advance. That being said, I agree that 8x10 will probably be more than sufficient for your needs and will give you many more options as far as film, quality modern lenses, enlargers, cameras, tripods, etc. Good luck. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>A few of the retailers mentioned on this thread are a bit pricey, but I'll definitely second KEH. And although I haven't used him yet, Igor's Camera has some nice older lenses, and fairly good prices on lenses from the big four. </p>

<p>I agree with Bob that the double-tilt Ries head is probably more convenient, but the single tilt is not a problem <em>at all </em>to<em> </em>use, providing it is mounted on a Ries tripod. With the controls of the leg angle located directly under the head, you don't even have to bend down to level the head/legs. </p>

<p>Aside from how specifically lensboards are cut, if I were to buy a lens mounted in an Acme 3 (Ilex?) shutter, would I then order a blank lensboard from Bromwell (for example), and then find a place to "cut" a 52 mm hole? <br>

Can anyone recommend a place where I can get this done? <br>

Or does it make more sense to stick to Copal shutters? This options seems to exclude a ton of fine older lenses. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>On my J100 Ries tripod, I use what I think is the J200 single tilt head. The single tilt has not presented a problem since I can pan the head for side to side movement. It is a very solid, well made head with a large mounting surface. It also has a bubble (spirit) level. And since the tripod has controls at the top to control the angle of each leg, it is very easy to level the tripod with the legs. In other words, the J200 single tilt head might be limiting on another tripod, but works great in concert with the Ries J100 tripod. </p>

<p>I forgot to thank everyone. Thanks guys. I appreciate all of the help. </p>

<p>That is what I thought. It seemed crazy that the guy at the shop was suggesting that I remount the Artar in a Copal 3 shutter, but I guess he misunderstood my question since I mentioned that I was trying to stick to Copal 0/1 <em>size</em> shutters. Not that I only want to <em>use</em> modern Copal shutters. </p>

<p>And even though I don't have anything but modern lenses yet, I am <em>really</em> interested in older, vintage lenses like the Comercial Ektars, Goerz Dagors & Artars. Not that's that's all they are good for, but I have been shooting tons of B&W lately, and I would imagine such lenses give a certain "look" that cannot be achieved with modern lenses. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Yes. My Ilex #3 Acme Synchro shutter with f:4.5 6 1/2 Paragon lens needs a 52 mm hole cut in a standard Linhof 4X5 board.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So your saying I can use older lenses mounted in Acme 3 shutters, but would need to buy a blank linhof technika/wista board, and have it drilled to 52?<br>

I can't tell how large of a shutter the Acme 3 is from pictures, whether it is too big for my camera (a Chamonix 45n-1, a small wood field) or not. I get the idea that most people who use 4x5 wood field cameras tend to stick to copal 0 and copal 1 shutters when choosing lenses. I can't really get an answer from the guy at the camera store, so I thought I'd ask here.<br>

There are some great older lenses, and I would like the Goerz RD Artar that interest me, but I simply don't know if I can use a 12" lens like this one because the shutter is too big for my camera. <br>

Any further info would really help me out. Thanks John and thanks in advance to anyone else. </p>

<p>I am interested in a Goerz 12" f9 RD Artar lens that is mounted in an Acme 3 shutter. Can this lens be mounted directly onto a Linhof/Wista board? The guy at the store said I would need to re-mount it in a Copal 3 shutter. Any info would be greatly appreciated. </p>

<p>Thanks Vlad. I appreciate the comments. That is why I ended up ordering the Universal Bellows, even though the Standard would have probably served me well for 90% of the photography I do. </p>

<p>I have the 90 6.8 Grandagon-N and am extremely happy with it. I sometimes think I might like to try the Nikkor-SW 90 f8, but as it is, the Grandagon-N is not the easiest lens to focus, with a fresnel screen or without. I would expect the Nikkor-SW 90, at a half a stop slower would be even more of a challenge to use, but since I have never used it, I can't say for sure. </p>

<p>The easiest way to find out is to put both standards as close as they will go, and measure from the film plane to the front standard. I can't imagine that the Omega 45D can't take a 120mm lens with the standard bellows. However, finding a 120mm lens in a Copal 1 shutter is not common. The Schneider Super Symmar XL 110 5.6 comes in a Copal 1 shutter, but I would imagine that it is extremely expensive. <br>

It is much more common to find a 180mm lens in a Copal 1, so either look for a 180 5.6 from Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, Fuji or Caltar or purchase a Copal 0 lensboard, and your choices for wider lenses will be increased. </p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Brij's question mentioned "good stater kit without spending thousands of pounds" then folks here on this thread mention Ebonys; a 3 or 4 thousand dollar body; 3 or 4 years wages in India. How is it helpfull to bring up bodys that cost 4 times a persons price target?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, Jim mentioned Ebony in the same sentence with Tachihara, Chamonix, and Shen Hao all of three of which are lighter-weight bodies that are more modern cameras offering more movements, and longer bellows extension. And all three cost significantly less than a Canon 5D Mk II or Mamiya 6. </p>

<p>As far as wages in India, not everyone in India makes 1,000 a year. That is an absurd, provincially minded statement. The OP has a $3000 DSLR but because he is from India, you have him making $1000 <em>a year</em>. </p>

<p>Kelly, if you want to use a Speed Graphic, go for it. Many fine images have been made with Speeds and Crowns. I might even buy one. But I wouldn't recommend it over a good quality wood field. And I wouldn't trade my Chamonix for a Speed Graphic in a million years. I may not always use movements, or use a 300mm lens, but if I want to I can. </p>

 

<p>Eric, I think I am like you in that it will bug me forever. (I had a Schneider Symmar-S that made the sharpest, most beautiful images. But it had a touch of "Schneideritis", so I couldn't stand looking at it). <br>

However, Ries is going to sell me a new leg section for $45, so it is worth it to me to keep it. I'm not sure why it was listed in 9+ condition where I bought it, but it really is like new. As long as you don't look at the bottom of one leg, that is. </p>

<p>The Ries J100 will probably will be overkill for my Chamonix 45n-1 (I'll know next week when I receive the camera), but I plan to add a 5x7 or a lightweight 8x10 in the near future, so I'm gonna hold on to it. It <em>is</em> a beauty. Thanks everyone. </p>

 

<p>

<p>Have an Ries tripod users experienced extreme warping? I just bought a Ries J100 tripod in 9+ condition and when I received it today, I noticed that one of the bottom leg sections is badly warped. I contacted Ries to see what I can do, and they will sell me a new leg. </p>

<p>I'm interested to know if this is a common occurrence. If so, maybe I'll just return it and invest in the largest size of the Feisol tripod that I know use, or a Gitzo. Thanks in advance for any thoughts/comments. </p>

</p><div></div>