anthony_harrison

What I think about it is that it's an OLD camera, Monika. Don't understand why you would shoot snapshots on rollfilm: it's quality overkill. Carry a compact digital (I find a Coolpix 5000 perfect for this) or if you prefer film, something like a Ricoh GR1S/V or, if MF is essential, a Mamiya 6. Zeiss Nettars are charming antiques - mine was bought s/h for ten pounds in 1947, by my dad - but carrying one to use in earnest doesn't make sense. Many years ago I tested the Nettar (a 6x9 folder with 105 Novar) for maximum quality, on a tripod, shooting Pan-F at f16, and the 15x10 prints were sort of acceptable but in comparison with anything from a modern MF camera they were, unsurprisingly, crap! I think you'll be disappointed by the image quality (not to mention handling) compared with your Bronica or any other modern camera.

Great lizard joke, Jonathan! Love it. Actually I was mildly curious about the Autocord thing, what makes buyers of it tick, and so on. And recently I investigated a s/h Yashica on behalf of a friend, first time I've handled a TLR for a very long time, and it reminded me just how cumbersome and limiting the TLR format is. But that's just my opinion of course, and if people like using them, fine, good luck. BTW I withdraw my offer of the Retinette & Zeiss Nettar - going to have them refurbished in sheepskin, great for winter handling.

When I glance at MF Digest there's always something about the Autocord. But do you all actually shoot pictures with the things, or just keep 'em in a showcase to look at? Thirty-one or thirty-two years ago I borrowed one, and sure the lens was good and that under-the-lens focussing lever proved handy, but so what? There are lots more useable MF cameras around that don't need completely refurbishing. Would you like to buy my late-1950s Kodak Retinette or WW2 vintage Zeiss Nettar? Cumbersome & inefficient to use - haven't used them for years, actually - but you could have lots of fun replacing the leatherette skin...

Kevin, the difference between 1/400 and 1/500 is so small that differences in metering technique are more significant. In any case, you'll be bracketing your exposures, won't you? Just think of it as a third of a stop, if you want to be precise.

I've visited Scotland from England on many occasions, mostly to the West Coast - Argyll is beautiful. You take a gamble on the weather, which has mostly been very good for me at the time you're planning to visit. When the weather is really bad, the rain can be so heavy it makes you suicidal and inclined to run away... I second the tips about less than perfect weather being great for photography, and watch out for the midges & mosquitos - take lots of repellent. Also bring your own Scotch Whisky from the US, as you'll find it 50% more expensive in Scotland. There are some good restaurants these days but they're few and far between - traditional Scottish catering is stodgy & dull, same for the pubs which can be nice if they're overlooking a sea-loch (watch the sunset over a glass of Guinness) but there are still lots of crude smoke-filled beerhalls. More to the point, in the Highlands you're a long way from pro-level camera shops, so carry everything you need. Have a good time!

The bottom line is that tripod choice is not critical here, beyond the fundamental requirement for stability and ease of use. But I recommend against using a TLR: you're likely to get too much upper thigh in shot, unless you employ a parallax corrector of some sort like the old Mamiya Paramender. My choice would be an SLR - in MF I use an RZ-2 with the 180 lens, which takes beautiful bottom pictures, and because the WYSISWYG screen image speeds up composition and makes you more confident, your models are less likely to get impatient. Besides, you can stop down to check DoF very precisely, and (depending on bottom dimensions) this can be critical. Good luck - or, Bottoms Up!

The Lee WA hoods, like the standard types, don't have a "rear ring" -

they have clips that fit into the front slot on Lee holders, including

the push-on type you have. That WA hood looks very wide indeed, and

though you'd have to try it yourself, I would guess it should be fine

with the lenses you describe. Trouble is, it's fiendishly expensive,

even more so than the push-on holder, which I am thinking of getting

myself to fit over my (unthreaded) Rodenstock centre filter. Lee stuff

is excellent quality of course, arguably the best, but it's hard to

justify the cost of the non-optical bits such as holders & hoods.

Fogg are indeed made in France, by a couple of expatriate English people, to very high standards - at least as good as Billingham, though admittedly they're expensive. I know Robert White used to be agents for them. If I wanted something fancy & prestigious to carry my kit in, and wasn't worried about attracting thieves, I'd get one myself.

"the meter to believe" says someone, and therein lies the rub: I find

your questions frankly unrealistic, and do not understand your quest

for such an improbably high degree of metering veracity. The Gossen

has a solid reputation, I used Minolta Spot-Fs for years, and

currently I'm using the Sekonic 608, and they're all excellent meters.

Like any meter though, their readings have to be interpreted, rather

than taken literally. They are machines, so they are stupid. Sorry to

be so brutal but I think in seeking a meter that will give you totally

reliable readings under such highly specialised (arcane, even)

lighting conditions, you're on a wild goose chase.

Scott Eaton's extreme suggestions about Velvia's pictorial qualities are amusing but unwarranted, and perhaps indicative of too brief an acquaintance with UK weather. Alas, too often the light here is flat and dull, issuing from grey skies; it might be considered "subtle" by some, but too much subtle weather makes you want to cut your throat... When the sun shines brightly, Velvia is often too contrasty (RMS, Astia, and even Provia 400F come into their own) but otherwise it's a wonderful film, with unrivalled saturation & punch combined with a rich & interesting palette producing saleable results. Velvia is the "best" film, i.e. the most striking and rewarding to use, that I've known in over 35 years of photography, and saying goodbye to it will be a downside of digital, for me and many others.

Personally I'd use Velvia, and I know nothing of colour neg film. For processing in your area, if you don't want to use a local pro lab (quick, easy, efficient) then contact Colab in Coventry or Peak Imaging in Sheffield.

Have you tried calling Fuji UK on 0207 586 5900? And I think last time I was in Teamwork (Foley St, 0207 323 6455) they had 220 which as you have obviously discovered is not widely stocked.

I like the answers by Edsel and Natasha. Discussing the "art" of photography or individual photographs is fruitless - I am distrustful of those who habitually use the words "art" and "photography" in the same sentence. On the other hand, this forum can be very useful for getting in touch with those who have an answer to some knotty technical problem, and on occasion I can help someone else out. That way, we can get on with the business of taking pictures that people will like, and continue to pay us money for. Michelangelo & da Vinci meeting in the street? They'd probably talk about politics, the declining quality of apprentices, the price of wine, whatever the hell this obscure word "bokeh" means...

The RZ-2 might be an excellent studio camera but I use mine mostly for indoor location work, and a few landscapes. I do not find it bulky or heavy. I wouldn't expose the bellows to rain, but it's a rugged reliable camera so I would expect it to hold up well. I use the 50, 65 and 110 lenses routinely, and hire the 75 shift and 180 lenses. All are excellent: in order of optical impressiveness I rank the best as the 75, 65 and 110. I've never heard of the paint chip problem. I tested the tilt-shift adaptor and the special 75 USB lens, and though they work very well, they're extremely expensive for what they offer; for the same money you could buy a used 75 shift lens, and a cheap used view camera offering more movements than the t/s adaptor. It's a very satisfactory workhorse system.

What remedies are there for the extremely dim ground-glass image on my Cambo Wide with 65 S.Angulon? Shooting an interior recently, brightly lit with multiple overhead mercury vapour lamps, I could hardly see any GG detail centre screen, and the edges (I use a 6x12 RFH) were all but invisible. This makes things intolerably slow and difficult, and if I can't get a radically brighter image I shall dispose of the thing. Any suggestions for a fresnel lens, whatever?

Thanks very much for your prompt advice. Terry, I am no sort of

machinist, and I take your point about the possible expense of getting

a panel made up. But since Ren & Stimpy (two people? one?!) say they

got a bare panel, I hope maybe the UK distributor will also be able to

sell me one. Very encouraging - complete Cambo Wide panels with lenses

seem pretty rare on the used market, so doing it myself could be my

best option.

What alternatives are there to buying the special lenses ready-mounted in focussing mounts, on a complete front panel, for the Cambo Wide (original type)? Is it possible to do it yourself, by getting a lens in a Copal-0 shutter, buying a focussing mount (think Schneider and Rodenstock make them), buying a Cambo panel, and sticking them together? I could do with something longer to complement my 65 S.Angulon, maybe a 90 or 110, for shooting with a 6x12 RFH.

It's a shame if Astia is going the same way as RMS, both of which not

only give great skin tones but are my films of choice for shooting

interiors. The suggestion that Provia F is "superior" is a

considerable generalisation: superior in what way? Yes, it's even

finer grained, but slight over-exposure (yes, I've done that) in no

way produces results similar to Astia. I dislike F's colour balance -

I've found consistent yellowish-greenish overtones on rollfilm and

35mm - and its coldness. I still have lots of RMS in the fridge, but

when that's gone there might be no more. Then, if I can't get Astia

either, I might just have to use one of the ever-changing Kodak

emulsions, until that too gets binned... By which time we'll be

shooting digital full-time anyway, then these particular arguments

will be of interest only to reactionary pedants.

When last I owned Lee items (they got stolen and I haven't replaced

them yet) I was using them on Bronica ETRSi lenses, and the standard

Lee hood that incorporates a single filter slot did not vignette on

the 40mm, when fitted via the Lee W/A adaptor and compressed to

minimum or nearly so. If memory serves, this lens on 645 is similar to

24 on 35mm, i.e. around 85 degree viewing angle. Perhaps this helps.

Stopping down the lens is only a rough guide, and no good for critical use. Instead use the millimeter scale on the RH side of the bellows: first, focus on the nearest thing you want to be sharp, and note the reading on the mm scale, then focus on the furthest ditto, and note that; subtract the one from the other, and divide the result by 0.15, to get a number that translates into an f-stop. So if your closest focus requirement gave you a 2.5mm reading, and your farthest a 1.0 mm reading, the subtraction result is 1.5mm - dividing this by 0.15 gives you ten exactly, so f11 is a suitable aperture. You now actually set the bellows for a mid-point between your two extremes, i.e. 1.75mm. Sounds more complicated than it is, once you get used to it. The mm scale is very small of course, so setting it to 0.25mm accuracy is tricky, and I advise you to bracket your focus settings. Also use the calculation conservatively, and set maybe a half-stop smaller than you calculate is necessary. It works for me, though I need new bifocals to read that little mm scale clearly...

RZ 75mm shift lens - It's big, heavy and expensive, and I would find it more useful in a shorter focal length - say 65mm. I've rented one a few times and found it to perform extremely well, using it at apertures between f11 and f22; it's sharp with even performance across the frame, quite well corrected against flare, though ghosting can be very noticeable when close to point light sources, e.g. street lamps at night. It shifts across a useful range, from memory I think 15mm max each way, enough for most normal applications indoors and out. The filter size is a scary 105mm... Rather than buy one - tempted a few times - I recently got a used Cambo Wide with a RF back, for around the same price as the RZ 75mm, because I think it offers more versatility for the money.

Given the above, the Mamiya Tilt Shift Adaptor and its two SB (short barrel) lenses would be irresistible, except they are even more fiendishly expensive - I think the Adaptor plus the 75mm SB lens (still not short enough!) cost over 2000 UKP here, for which one could buy a seriously good view camera. And yes, I have actually used this kit, on loan from the UK importer. It functions well and easily, and is very useful, but the price is silly. I do not understand Mamiya's pricing policy at all. As others have commented, since the RZ uses geared bellows focussing already, why didn't Mamiya build tilt & shift into an updated RZ? They could have beaten Fuji's giant hernia-inducing 680 on price and had a real winner: one of the world's premier MF pro camera systems, with movements too! Ah well...

You say nature & landscape, but of course you might have other photographic interests too, now or in future. I advise getting the most powerful & versatile meter you can afford, which rules out the Pentax (I know it's popular with keen USA hobbyist photographers) and the Gossen Starlite. After years of using a Minolta Spotmeter F professionally, with some reluctance I went over completely to the Sekonic L-608 following an extensive trial, and I thoroughly recommend it. Unlike the 508 it has readings visible in the viewfinder, and its ability to switch between spot and incident modes is enormously useful. The Minolta was renowned for its accurate one-degree field of view, extremely well baffled, but I must say my work has not suffered from using the Sekonic (always on its one degree setting) as a substitute - it certainly does not over-read to anything like three or four degrees as someone suggested. I suspect Sekonic rushed the 508 into production to test the water, since they brought out the much-improved 608 not too much later; Gossen is an excellent brand (mine is 40 years old, bought new in Germany!) but I don't think the Starlite is a pro-spec model; if you want a pure spotmeter, get the Minolta or the Gossen Spotmaster.

Well Peter, I can't offer the same experience of rugged field use as Lucas, whose post made me feel like a total softy, but I've had an RZ Pro-2 system for a few years and regard it as the best camera I ever bought. I use mine principally indoors, for house interiors, with 50, 65 and 110 lenses - each of which is excellent, though the standard 50 suffers at the frame edges, and the 65 performs better. I also use my RZ in the field for landscapes, and though some people seem concerned about its bulk one just gets used to that, and in terms of weight it's not bad at all. (Think how heavy a Nikon F5 feels first time you handle it...) After some quick familiarisation the RZ handles very intuitively - it's basically a very simple camera. The millimeter scale is very useful for DoF settings - better I suggest than the usual DoF scales on a helical-focussing lens.

I haven't gone digital yet, but the great thing about RZ is that it's one of the world's most widely used pro systems, so RZ-compatibility is built into any major digital add-on, and you can rent lenses etc anywhere.

It's a thoroughly tried & tested workhorse that I can recommend unreservedly. BTW if you find yourself missing the movements of your 5x4, I can vouch for the quality of the RZ 75 shift lens, a top performer.

Congratulations Ellis, very superior-looking site and stylish images.

I especially like "arch-b" in Buildings (wish I'd shot it myself), and

"trav-03" in Faraway Places - re the latter, a major stock agency

recently told me that water in scenes like the latter has to be blue,

and absolutely not green, which is how it looks on my monitor! No

doubt opinions differ - anyway, I like it. Looking at your site makes

me realise the benefits of getting a custom-built website, rather than

buying someone's off-the-shelf design then customising it, which is

what I did. Everything loaded fast and worked fine on my PC, Win98,

Netscape 6.1 setup. ps is there really a word "complexly"? Just being

pedantic... Best wishes -

I don't know whether the photo-opportunities in Europe are any more "endless" than in the USA, where I guess you are based - the grass is always greener - but the camera alternatives you mention are confusingly disparate. I'd say if you're used to 35mm, stick to that, and forget Sigma and other off-brand stuff, get yourself a decent Nikkor or two. I am perplexed by your repeated references to long waits for colour neg film processing: do you live in a remote area? Here in UK I get colour neg film processed & printed in one hour, to a high standard, and for reversal film (which I use most) my local pro lab does E6 in 2 hours. These services should be found in any reasonably urban part of W.Europe.

The D30 has a very high reputation with those pros who've used it, and should prove more than adequate for hobbyist use; but you only get "instant results" if you have access to a computer and colour printer. Stick with your F100.