neil_poulsen8

I've always preferred using a handheld meter, typically a spot meter, with medium format. I have an RB67 with a metered prism. I doubt that I would ever use it.

It's been my understanding that the 150mm lens for Mamiya press is a weak link in Mamiya press lenses. Would a blue-dot 150mm f5.6 lens necessarily be any better?

I'm pretty sure that I have one. Send me a private message. Oops -- I see that this is a fairly old thread.

The best camera for architecture is a view camera. Relatively inexpensive, medium format VC's show up on EBay now and then. An older style Cambo can be very reasonably priced, especially if it comes with a reduction lensbaord to, say, a Linhof Technika board. You would need both the standard and bag bellows. Medium format Arcas are more expensive, but easier to backpack. (Perhaps over your price-range, if with lenses?) A reasonably priced selection of lenses might include some of the following Super Angulons: 47mm f5.6 (w/recessed lensboard), 65mm f5.6, 75mm f5.6, or a 90mm f8. (For my purposes, f8 versions for focal lengths under 90mm have insufficient image circles.) Longer focal lengths might include a 120mm, 150mm or a 180mm Symmar-S lenses. They're excellent quality, yet reasonably priced. The same can be said for Nikon lenses in this range, especially if you like contrast. There's something about MF view cameras with roll-film backs that I enjoy using. They can achieve excellent results; yet, they're economical in dollars, size, weight, and in processed film.

If you don't have a Norma back that conforms to the Graflex standard, you can find one. I'm not sure if this is true about all Normas, but mine will accept Sinar F backs. Once you find one that conforms to the above standard, you can use the 4x5 roll-film adapters that are available on EBay.

<p>I recently bought a clean Wista SP and two lenses on a sweet deal for $500 and sold the lenses for $600. :-) Maybe it's cause and effect, but I'm really happy with this camera. My original thought was to turn it over. But having had a chance to become familiar with the camera, I'm keeping it. Note that, I've never used a Toyo folder. Personally, I would not get a Toyo CF, because of the poor build quality. </p> <p>As for movements, the Wista SP has interchangeable bellows. My camera has close to 292mm maximum extension, and at full extension, it's pretty solid. A Schneider Symmar-S 300mm lens may be barely usable at this extension, since it has about a 280mm flange focal length. One can also get an extended lensboard, for more convenient use of this lens. </p> <p>Being interchangeable, a bag bellows is sold at an almost prohibitive price (over$600) at B&H. At least, if one uses super-wide lenses, movements won't be bellows limited. Mounting a 90mm f5.6 lens on a flat lensboard, I can get about 0.75" rise without over-stressing the bellows. Since at this focal length, the front standard clears the rear, this could probably increase to 1.5" (or so?) with the bag bellows. With either bellows, this rise would go up a little by using a Technika, recessed lensboard. I've seen Toyo folders, and they do not have the capability of interchangeable bellows. I'm keeping my eye peeled on EBay for the bag bellows.</p> <p>One can also get both a 300mm extension (600mm bellows) and a 600mm extension (w/appropriately sized bellows). I bought and tried the 300mm extension for a 355mm lens, and ended up sending it back. Too prone to vibration. The extension itself has a tripod mount for extra support from another tripod, or maybe a monopod, that would probably steady it fine. But, that goes contrary to the convenience that I want with this camera. Besides, I have a HUGE and HEAVY Wollensak 15" f5.5 Tele-Raptar with about a 230mm flange focal length, and the SP supports this lens without problem.</p> <p>For me, I was a little annoyed by the one-piece, combination ground-glass/Fresnel that comes with the SP. Using glasses (a must for me) for viewing, if I move slightly to the right, the right side goes a little dark. To the left, the left side goes a little dark. It's hard to position my eyes to keep both sides bright. Moving back helps. None the less, in a side-by-side comparison, I find this screen easier to use for composition than either my Arca or Sinar cameras, and Arca has one of the finest viewing systems available on any camera. I was kind of surprised. The Wista seems brighter. (Neither the Arca, nor the Sinar, have a one-piece viewing system.)</p> <p>There's a connection for a Wista lens hood, which I consider a necessity on this sized camera. I plan on using a Lee, flexible hood with some mat-board masks that I cut. This will work fine above 90mm. </p> <p>I'll comment a bit on the extension system. It's true, one can only focus on the bottom rail. But, the secondary rail above has an effective locking mechanism. In fact, depending on the degree of extension on the top rail, it has two locking mechanisms (forward and rear). The lower rail has it's own locking mechanism. Not that it would necessarily be a problem, I'm careful not to over-tighten them. (This is good advice for any view camera adjustment on any camera.)</p> <p>Compared to the VX, the SP have a knob on either side to fine tune rear swing. I like having this adjustment available. If you check out the camera on a demo, adjust only one side at a time. The SP has a rotating back. It's quick and easy to alternate orientations.</p> <p>Given the convenience of this camera for back-packing and otherwise, it's likely to become my primary 4x5.</p> <p>I would say that my camera weighs right around 6.7 lbs. </p>

<p>The word that caught my eye is architecture. How much of this do you plan do to do? Will it be exterior, or interior. </p> <p>For this kind of work, you may need a camera capable of more movements than a typical flatbed, something that can accept interchangeable bellows. </p> <p>Sinar F series cameras can be reasonably priced and work well for architecture. It's pretty easy to find a front adapter Sinar lensboard to accept Technika boards, to keep boards small. This setup will accept most all lenses. Bag bellows for these cameras run about $50 or $60. (Note bad, comparatively.) While not great, they're reasonably backpack-able.</p> <p>I find the following brands, with some notable exceptions, run from least to most expensive: Fujinon, Nikon, Schneider, Rodenstock. I've concentrated on Schneider, and have been quite satisfied. Symmar-S lenses are high quality and sell for reasonable prices. (Avoid those with silver speckles on the front optic.) Even the Super Angulon multi-coated lenses can be found for reasonable prices. The "XL" Schneider lenses are a different story.</p> <p>For architecture, a 90mm Super Angulon is typically the most used lens. For exterior, I usually don't need a wider lens. (e.g. 75mm.)</p>

<p>I've always thought of black as more recent, so I favor that color. I have a 121mm black version, and it works out well for me. Bear in mind, the 121mm SW lenses are single coated; 120mm SW lenses are multi-coated.</p>

<p>How about S. K. Grimes. I sent a 240mm Symmar-S lens for a aperture repair, and at that time, they outsourced them. But, i was satisfied with the repair. Consider giving them a call.</p>

<p>I'm trying to understand, as others have asked, what's driving you towards large format? From the size of photographs that you print, are you looking for greater resolution? Or, is it movements that you need?</p>

<p>If weight isn't much of a problem, my vote would be for an RB67 system. </p> <p>For my medium format camera, I had decided on an RB67/RZ67 system camera. I initially selected the RZ67, because of their electronic shutter system. But, my repair service convinced me to go with RB67, because of their improved reliability. He explained that the RZ cameras are very complicated and more prone to breakdown.</p> <p>As for the weight, I have a nice cart that I built from a golf cart. The cameras system is in a backpack, which can be attached to the cart. In a pinch, I can heft it on my back. Besides, I found an excellent carbon-fiber tripod, which substantially reduces the overall weight.</p>

<p>Personally, I would purchase any medium format camera that didn't have interchangeable backs, especially if you plan to photograph with black and white. I'm not sure which models, but there are Mamiya 645 cameras that have interchangeable backs.</p>

<p>I've had a couple of opportunities to become familiar with Sinar Norma cameras. A friend bought one a few months ago, and I recently purchased a late manufacture Sinar Norma 8x10 camera for a great price at a swap meet. Being machined as they are, Normas are elegant, precise cameras. They are certainly a step up from Sinar F cameras, and from a practical point of view, one might draw the same conclusion about the "P" series cameras.</p> <p>Having the 8x10, I only have the "4x5" front standard, so I was interested putting together some sort of 4x5 conversion kit. Individually sold rear Norma standards are pretty rare, especially in black. (Versus gray or brown.) So, I found and bought a rear F standard on EBay. It's clearly not the build quality of the front standard, but I think that it will work fine. It also gives me the depth of field gauging of the post Norma models.</p> <p>Ironically with this combination (F rear, Norma front), the front and rear standards can be brought physically closer together than with either an all "F" or all "Norma" combination, and that's using the low profile, Norma clamp. In practical terms though, the minimum distance is limited by the thickness of the Sinar bag bellows to that which can be obtained with the all "F" camera. It's about 50mm, and this means one can use a 47mm Super Angulon with a flat lens board.</p> <p>Being somewhat vintage myself, had I been better acquainted with these cameras, I would have purchased one years ago.</p>

<p>I'm having trouble advancing film in my recently acquired C330 Pro TLR. Following the instruction manual, I've loaded the film just as instructed, and I've begun cranking the film advance system.. </p> <p>The manual states that I should advance the crank until it stops. My problem is that, it never stops. It continues to crank until all the film has been pulled through the camera. I notice that there is no change to the film counter.</p> <p>Am I missing something? Is there something that I'm not doing? Note that the exposure dial is set to single, not to multiple.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. My worry was that this might suggest that the viewing lens could be out of alignment with the taking lens. Wheh!</p>

<p>Playing with this C330 Pro, I notice by focusing thought the viewfinder that one can mechanically focus just a shade beyond infinity focus. That is, infinity is is focus when the focusing mechanism hasn't quite reached it's limit.</p> <p>Is this a problem?</p>

<p>I just bought a box of a bunch of 35mm and 6x6 cameras for $300. Some of the equipment has some issues. Not being familiar with some of the brands/models, I'll be trying to address some eclectic issues with the medium format cameras.</p> <p>First up is the Mamiya 330 PRO TLR. I can't get it to trigger an exposure. Is there a lock of which I'm not aware? Removing the lens, the shutter work fine. It's the triggering mechanism of the camera that's locked in place. </p>

<p>My problem with the Mamiya 6, 7, TLR, etc., is that they don't have interchangeable backs. If one's using color film, then it doesn't matter much. But if black and white, for my purposes, interchangeable backs are essential to match development to conditions at the time of exposure. </p> <p>Have you considered a Mamiya Press camera or a Koni-Omega? They're both rangefinders, and they both have interchangeable backs. As for the former, they can be reliable cameras, if one has the finder adjusted and the lenses checked. (I don't own, and can't say much about Koni-Omegas.) The backs hold film extremely flat. However, a Mamiya Press Universal (for example) is a bit klutzy. No automated features like auto film advance, auto-shutter cocking, double-exposure protection, etc. But, it's a well designed system with parallax correction and internal frames (6x7 & 6x9) for 100mm, 150mm, and 250mm lenses. Wider lenses, like a 50mm, 65mm, or a 75mm require their own finder.</p> <p>There is some variation between the lenses. The 150mm isn't as sharp as one would like. But, the 100mm f2.8 and the wider 50mm are quite sharp. For street photography, motion is also going to have it's own set of consequences. One does have the larger 6x7 or 6x9 negative on these cameras, which won't require as much enlargement.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. I'm feeling pretty encouraged about hand-holding my RB. I also have a monopod that I can use. But in particular, I think that I may purchase an RB pistol grip that I've been eying. </p>

<p><em>Neil:</em><br /><em> Annie usually works with strobes, so that alone takes care of most of the problems associated with hand held cameras. If you're doing still life, certain types of portraiture, or landscapes, the tripod becomes more of an asset. I love my tripod, but for certain situations, it gets in the way. Especially with things that move while I'm shooting them......</em><br> <em><br /></em>Of course; that explains her choice of hand-held. </p>

<p>This is interesting. I appreciate the insights.</p> <p>I'm coming from a Bronical S2a (kerrr-PLOP) as my previous medium format camera. At the same time, I saw a video of Annie Leibovitz photographing the Rolling Stones hand-held with an RB. (I recall that the lens was probably a moderate wide-angle.) So I was wondering. Plus, I was aware that Mamiya made a special trigger release cable that pre-releases the mirror. <br> <br> The more that I learn about this camera (a new acquisition) and its excellent lenses, the more impressed I becomes.<br /></p>

<p>Aside from weight, what are the issues hand-holding a Mamiya RB. I know that it's possible to find handles that fit the RB. In particular, how bad is mirror-shake for this camera? </p>

<p>My response to this query is a bit into left field.</p> <p>Probably what I hate most as a characteristic of cameras is flare. Let me repeat: I HATE FLARE! FLARE RUINS PICTURES. Yet, all 35mm cameras by their design appear to me to encourage flare. The sensor chamber of 35mm cameras is so tightly wrapped around the sensor, that flare becomes inevitable in, say, snow or overcast situations, or in any situation where there is a preponderance of highlight. </p> <p>If ever I get a digital back, and I'm being driven in that direction, it will be to better control flare. There is so much room around the sensor that's mounted on a medium format view camera (e.g. Arca 6x9), that one can easily control the excessive amount of highlight that might otherwise enter the chamber as flare.</p> <p>It would be excellent to have a camera that had high megapixel (36mp, or even 20mp+), the low light capabilities of many 35mm cameras, and sufficient room in the image chamber to adequately control flare. And while I'm at it, I would include a 4x3 image ratio that's characteristic of medium format sensors, and no anti-aliasing filter. With a few "minor" design changes in a 35mm body, this could easily be accomplished.</p> <p>But of course, this will likely never happen, if camera manufacturers continue to prioritize image quality behind compactness and continue to be stuck in a 2x3 paradigm. (I also hate 2x3 image ratios!)</p>

<p>Do you prefer them optically? </p>

<p>Is there any kind of observable performance difference between the multi-coated "C" lenses and the more recent K/L lenses? Does the answer to this question depend on focal length.</p>