aaron_wax

<p>Hi all,<br>

I do need exposure times in the minutes. Any ideas?</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Aaron</p>

<p>Does anyone know the reciprocity compensation on Kodak 4x5 portra 160vc? I have been through the archives and haven't found an answer addressing time exposures in the minutes. And, Kodak has only posted exposure compensation for reciprocity through 10 seconds or so. I am looking at exposures of 10 minutes or longer.<br>

Also, does anyone know how to contact Robert Polidori? I believe he used Kodak portra for his book <em>After the Flood<strong> </strong> </em> - some of the interior photos required long time exposures. Perhaps he knows the film's reciprocity.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Aaron</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

In response, I own a Chamonix 45N-1. It is a great camera. I purchased mine with the universal bellows which is actually helpful if you plan on using a 90mm because it will give you some movement. Although, if you plan on using lenses wider than the 90mm with any rise or fall, you should consider getting the wide angle bellows as an accessory.<br>

With respect to lens boards. I have purchased Chamonix's lens boards which are very, very nice. They are lined with velvet to reduce internal reflections and, unlike the Linhof boards, they are center-drilled (meaning, the hole through which the lens is mounted is drilled in the center of the lens board). In contrast, the Linhof boards are driiled offset. My suggestion is either to purchase Chamonix's lens boards, or, if you would like to save money, B&H Photo sells a generic center-drilled Linhof board for about half the price of Chamonix's.<br>

With respect to lens selection. The 150mm is the "normal" lens for a 4x5 camera. It is roughly equivalent the a 50mm lens on a 35mm. If you would like a lens suitable for photographing a wide variety of subjects, I would suggest the 150mm. If you plan on making portraits, consider a 210mm or 240mm. Or, if you plan on photographing architecture, a 90mm will do nicely.<br>

I suggest purchasing a lens on ebay. I have bought quite a few lenses on ebay, and have always been satisfied with the quality - and you'll save considerable money doing so.<br>

Don't forget to purchase film holders or a Fuji Quickload holder for film. For film holder, I prefer the locking Riteway holders because they lock shut and cannot accidently open in transport (you will know the locking holders because they have a small white circular tab which locks the holder closed). If you purchase film holders, you'll also need a film changing bag in order to change your own film. It won't take you long to learn to load your own film, you'll be able to use a wider variety of films, and you'll save 2/3 to 1/2 the money over using readyload film.<br>

Consider also, purchasing a light meter, if you do not already own one.<br>

Finally, consider picking-up a copy of Harvey Shaman's <em>The View Camera</em> . It is an excellent introduction the 4x5 camera.</p>

<p>Enjoy your new camera,<br>

Aaron</p>

<p>Thanks everyone! <br>

I purchased and recieved a Chamonix 45-n1 camera. I tested the camera with different lens boards. What I discovered confirms Kerry's previous statement - the Linhof lens boards only fit the camera in their upright position and cannot be rotated 180 degree to give more rise. The Chamonix's carbon fiber lens boards are center drilled and the portion of the board that creates the lens trap (facing the ground glass) is covered in black felt. I think this is a nice touch as it seems like internal reflections would be reduced - although, I, personally, have never had any problems with internal flair.<br>

My opinion of the camera is that it is an excellent value for the money. I also have a Gowland pocket view which I have used extensively. I love the Gowland, but the Chamonix is almost as light and has some significant advantages. For example, lenses on the Chamonix can be changed without having to take apart the front standard - in my opinion, this is a major improvement over the Gowland. Also, the Chamonix's standards are in alignment when the camera is opened. The Gowland's standards must be aligned each time the camera is assembled or focused because of the use of a round focusing rail instead of a square rail. Having said that, my Gowland has more rise in than the Chamonix. In fact, the Gowland has so much front rise that I can vignette a 72mm Super Angulon XL. All-in-all, though, I think I will stick with the Chamonix, but can 't make a definitive assessment until I receive the Chamonix's wide angle bellows I ordered more than a month ago. When it arrives, I will give you my final opinion.<br>

Best,<br>

Aaron</p>

<p>So, just to confirm, off-center drilled lens boards can not be rotated 180 degrees with the Chamonix camera to provide additional rise? Specifically, the carbon fiber boards sold on their website cannot be rotated for additional rise? So, one is better off purchasing Bromwell technica size center-drilled lens boards?</p>

<p>This is all very fascinating. Thank you for your responses. I had no idea that the boards are drilled off center.<br>

Aaron</p>

<p>Are the Chamonix lens boards offset (i.e. is the whole in the lens board drilled off-center)?<br>

Thanks!<br>

Aaron</p>

<p>Thank you!</p>

<p>Does anyone know where or from whom a Chamonix 45-N1 camera can be purchased? I have reviewed previous postings, but they seem a bit dated. Anyone have any new information?</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Aaron</p>

Thanks. I have seen Kerry's page. It is very informative.

Thanks for your response.

Thanks for all of the feedback.

Michael,

 

I have read that the adjustment levers and knobs on the Canham DLC45 tend to loosen. Thus Canham users are constantly having to tighten them in the field.

I checked out the sinar F. It appears to weigh approx. 8 pounds which a bit too heavy, IMO, for a camera I'd carry around all day. I thought the Canham DLC 45 might be a winner, but the cost is very high. I am still contemplating the gowland. Any other insights?

 

Thanks

Thanks for the response.

Do the movements lock down tight or will I have to worry about tightening the

lens in place and then having it slip? If there is anyone else out there using

this camera I would appreciate any feedback you could provide.

Thanks for the response. I am saddened that the toho will not be able to accommodate my needs. It seems like the perfect camera; light weight , good bellows extension, stable, and good movements. I still thinking about the Gowland, however, the Canham is awfully tempting. Any insights? The reviews seem to be mixed and the camera is very expensive.

Can someone who has used the Gowland confirm that it either has or does not have problems "locking down?"

Thanks for the response.

 

A bag bellows is available for the Gowland, but not the Toho. The Toho uses an eccentric lens panel which allows the lens to rise 15mm or about a half inch. I think at this point the gowland is the way to go assuming all of its movements can be locked down securely. The Canham is an awesome camera, but I am afraid it is a bit out of my price range.

Thanks for the response. Both the toho and gowland have front and back tilt. My concern is that the I won't have the opportunity to even use the tilt on the toho because of the bellows being squashed will prevent me from doing so. In contrast, my concern with the gowland is that I won't be able to really lock the movements in place. Specifically, that after tightening all of the knobs, etc. the camera movements will slip. This concern is based on other users reviews that they have had this problem with the gowland cameras. The longest lens I have is the nikkor 300m. I know that with either the gowland or the toho I can have a top-hat shaped lens board which will give me 4" of extra extension.

I am curious, what other camera do you suggest?

I have also thought about the shen hao because I know it has more movements, but I haven't heard anything about the use of the 72 with full moves, the weight of the camera is a bit of a deterrent, and I've been told that it is not as ridged as the monorails.

Any suggestions?

I am considering the purchase of a new camera and have narrowed it to 2 brands,

Toho and Gowland. I plan to travel through Europe and am looking for a camera

which weighs little and which can be used for architectural photography. My

plan is to purchase a 72mm super-angulon for its extreme coverage and match it

with a camara which has a enough rise to take advantage of this coverage. Does

the Toho have enough rise to fully utilize this lens? Second, I know that the

Gowland has enough rise or could be built to accommodate additional rise,

however, I need a camera that really locks down. Does the Gowland lock down

tight? I have heard conflicting things about the Gowland. Can someone please

set me straight? I also plan to use the camera with longer lenses. So I am not

looking for a special camera just for wide angle photography. Thanks!

Thanks for all of the info.

There have been many discussions about the differences between the f3.5 and the

f4 55mm pentax lenses. In sifting through all of the posts, one question has

entered my mind; which lens is better suited for architectural work? I am

anticipating the purchase of a 55mm to photograph buildings and am particularly

concerned about a geometric distortion. Lens flare is much less of a concern.

I would be especially grateful for feed back from someone who has used both

lenses for photographing architecture and can provide me with thoughtful advice.

 

Thanks!