frankz

Late response -

What troubles me the most is your listening to the peanut gallery.

I've also been told how silly an 8x10 is; my response was " ... then, I suggest you not buy one for yourself to use".

Use what YOU want to. After all, you're paying the bills. When another begins paying your way, then they may have a right to say to express their likes and dislikes, but until that time, ...

Ben Hutcherson, Jul 24, 2007; 09:07 a.m.

I never quite got the hang of loading 120 into a plastic reel.

With 120 at least, I got it on my first attempt loading a stainless reel, and haven't gone back since. I find it so much easier that I can't imagine ever going back to plastic. Plus, it's to not have to wait overnight for a plastic reel to dry before I can use it again.

____________________________________

Waiting for a plastic reel to dry? That's why they invented air compressors - just for us! (yeah - right)

Frank

vital pereira:

I learned years ago when an amateur proclaims the value of his point and shoot equipment, that person is simply looking for an argument.

Leave 'em be - agree with them - or as I say many times, "feed 'em a fish".

Then go back to taking a decent photograph.

Acquiring an old 8x10 to refit and refinish has been a dream I've harbored for years, but it's remained a dream. Haven't found the time nor space to do so.

As to finishing the wood - unless you're willing to try and mix your own according to old formulai, similar to what many modern-day luthiers do when constructing a violin (which would be a good finish, BTW), stick with the commercial stuff.

My plans were to finish the wood as I would a gunstock - base of sealer, then a tung oil/japan (japan works as an accelerator for the tung oil) mix until the pores are filled and no longer exhibit "holes" when dry. Sand EVERYTHING off between coats. Eventually, you'll not have the little 'holes' in the finish after drying; takes 7-10 coatings and 7-10 days. Use your fingers to spread it, not a rag or brush unless you enjoy the sight of lint and bristles.

Sand one more time, VERY LIGHTLY with 600-800 wet/dry paper using a bit of water to keep the paper from plugging up. Add one, final, LIGHT coat of the tung/japan mix using your fingers.

Get a box of rottenstone (fine, abrasive powder) and lightly rub the finish to remove and blend any visible variations or visible in the finish.

Wipe with a damp cloth, let dry, and wax with some Johnson's, Tree, or similar product.

This finish is waterproof where applied. As I said, this is how I finish a gunstock. It produces a satiny finish (not matte, not gloss), very smooth to the touch, and shows off the wood's features.

Sure, it's possible, but it won't catch the full negative/transparency as the other gent noted.

My next scanner will be a 4990 Epson, which I read has the capability of 8x10 transparent media. Check it out - about $325.00. Resonably cheap as compared to other methods.

Another aside - we used to call them "Hemmorhoids".

I'll leave it to you to imagine why.

The quality really isn't that bad, but it doesn't even begin to come near that of real film. Save your money, thenuse PortraVC and make contacts.

As an aside, Mr. Peanut (Jimmie Carter) had Ansel Adams take the presidential portrait with the Polaroid 20X24 (I think that was the size) Polaroid back in the seventies. Really hacked the paintbrush artists.

One of these cases you pictured came with my used P when purchased. I have yet to figure out what these people were thinking of (or smoking, for that matter) when it and the damnable glued-in inserts were designed.

Don't have a pic of it packed as I don't use the wretched thing, but probably will if I get around to making new stuff for the inside.

You may be better off with a larger case or a multiple thereof.

Over the years, I've had both, my present large format tool being an older Sinar P, so I'm rather prejudiced.

It is wonderful to focus one axis, then the other and not have to almost completely realign the camera. I've gotten spoiled rotten using my 'P' model and I happily admit to it.

For your particular application, consider the 'X' model Sinar. It's quite similar mechanically to the 'P2' but doesn't have stuff that you may not use, like the capability to change formats since you use digital, and a few other odds and ends.

Views being what they are, you can adapt almost anything to anything assuming adequate space is available, but Sinar has accessories that some us would never have dreamed of, let alone find a use for, plus some of the most useful goodies I've ever seen.

Sinar's behind-the-lens shutter eliminates many problems, both with the Schneiders and Rodenstocks as you eliminate an individual shutter with each lens (expense also) and can run the cam from the working position (behind - requires 'DB' mounts on the boards). It also frees you to mount whatever manner of barrel lens you can find - even tape a magnifying glass to a board with a hole if you want; you have a shutter available (8 secs to 1/60) with 'x' sync.

Sinar's quailty, however, did surprise me in a negative way. Plastic use on the 'P' I have is extensive (and it's an older model, God knows what they did to the 'P2', 'P3' and 'X'). Die castings so-so in quality and I have a couple of Sinar branded lenseboards (diecast also) I'd be ashamed to put my name on if I were them.

The main pieces are extrusions. There are a few machined parts here and there, but not as many as one would expect in a view camera costing what these things do new-in-the-box.

In short:

Sinar is the most versatile with the greatest selection of goodies to fit. Don't buy a new one - let someone else take the initial value hit like a new car. It will look used as the trim is covered with what looks like speed tape (factory) and scratches easily. If you want something pretty, buy a Deardorf.

Cambo is good quality and costs less, but you'll fight the movements a bit more than the Sinar; bad if you're in a hurry.

SK Grimes can make almost any thing you desire or can dream up in the way of an adapter if you're willing to pay for it.

One other option - Horseman. Many Sinar parts and pieces (lensboards, bellows, Copal Auto Shutter, etc.) will fit on these and while they don't have the asymetrical movements of the 'P', 'P2', 'P3', and 'X' but movements as a Cambo, you get the ability to use Sinar goodies at a lower cost in the used market.

So many option, so little time ...

Frank

To Mike, again -

I did err - yes, 1.2x on 8X10 is correct. I had 4x5 on the mind.

Hey - I'm old and feeble of mind; what do you expect <grin>?

Thanks for the correction.

Frank

To Mike Briggs:

I wasn't trying to be exact, but just close as the question referred to using the 360mm lens on a 4X5 format.

Granted - a rough comparison but one almost all can relate to.

Frank

If you ever have curiousity as to what you lens will do, here's my trick.

Open a window and turn off room lights - if the lens has one, open the shutter and more back and forth allow the lens to project a focused image on a wall. With the tape measurer you should be holding in your other hand extended somewhat, measure the thrown circle of the image on the wall. For 4X5 this circle must be 162mm or 6.4 inches, the film's diagonal measurement. The same applies for any other film format.

This is even faster than looking up specs on the internet.

Frank

Doing the math translates says your 360mm on 8X10 format is roughly equal to a 120mm or 135mm lens on 35mm format; a slight telephoto at 2.4X magnification.

I had a couple Caltars in the past and they weren't a bit shabby in performance, and as the other gent said, mine were rebranded Schneiders.

As for your green monster's performance, remember that a view camera is no more than a highly modified shoebox. Put on a quality lens, use good film (don't forget to focus <grin>), and it will do wonders.

Frank

This won't really be a response to your question, but it's close.

The old lenses are something I want to explore, but there are so many lenses, so little money (God alone knows what it would cost to sample a bunch of these old brass things), and certainly not enough time.

I've purchased a couple of books on photo-optics design (both old and new). Many of these lenses are available through Edmund Scientific and could be mounted in a barrel of aluminum (or brass), a plate for mounting threaded and made, then mounted to the nearest available LF camera. I'm in a position to do this as I've been a diemaker/moldmaker as a trade for 35+ years (basically, my own personal S. K. Grimes).

Should be able to manage a few simple configurations that will simulate the old-timey focus on a pinhead but nothing else type of LF photos with this. Edmund also sells apertures of various sizes that could be incorporated into the design or the waterhouse variety could be simply made. The old guys (Brady, et al) no doubt had to do much improvisation and this probably contributed as much to the desired quality as did the lack of computer designed glass.

Let the experimentation begin!

There's really no "right" way.

It's a lot like shooting a rifle - unless the positon is grossly unstable, doing the exact same thing each time, even if it is "wrong", will get you where you want to go.

With LF, the mechanics can be taught, but as you point out by detailing your so-called "inexperience", actually running one of these beasts is strictly self-taught. Even the "experienced" have the same revelations almost daily. that is, if they're not dead.

I doesn't matter one whit whether you buy new or used equipment - large format is a money pit of the first order. Medium format is the second order.

eBay has A FEW good deals on equipment - the other stores (KEH, etc.) are good places to look. Just understand, you may be purchasing another's problems, and seldom does a camera store have anyone well versed in large format; their knowledge of LF usually comes from the old western movies.

Plan on doing much research into your desired item before you decide you actually need said, then begin looking in every venue you can find.

Frank

Hard to believe anyone has had a problem with Andrew - aside from his wit he's very knowledgeable re: LF goodies.

Lighten up a tad - do what you're supposed to and all works quite nicely.

Frank

Wandering around with an RB (I use one also) is almost a body-building activity. I shot a wedding with one years ago, and bought a Hasselblad within two weeks because of that. Still have both.

I would advise to save yourself a lot of extra work - take a manual 35mm and learn what your light meter or prism metering is telling you about your subject reflectance or incident readings with the meter. Film, regardless of size, works the same way - just make sure the film's speed (ASA/ISO)is similar.

Simply put, learn your equipment well and its interactions. You'll never have a bit of trouble.

Thanks all - I made a purchase from Edmund a few days ago (5 x 7 50% mirror) and didn't even think to look while I was there.

Thanks again,

Frank

I'd like to experiment with some off-the-wall optics. Does anyone make an iris

assembly I could incorporate into a homebrew lense assembly?

Frank