morey_kitzman

Thanks for your responses...I will keep it!! This is one family heirloom that must stay. Happy New Year.

Any idea of the value for a IIIC wartime model, serial: No 380439. Vulcanite

missiing in places, but the camera has no scratches or signs of wear and the

works perfectly. It belonged to my father who served in WWII and purchased it

while stationed in Germany. Thanks.

Thanks Darin. Best advice I've heard in a long time. Thanks for the laugh, very clever.

I actually carried my Mamiya 7II with a complement of lenses inside by large format backpack this summer in Venice and the Dolomites. Large format Linhof Tech V, so you can well imagine the weight. I did not use the medium format camera once, but I shoot mostly scenics. If you were doing street photography I could see a potential use. I guess what I am saying is that I seldom run into a situation where I need to use the medium over the large and the quality difference is such that I would consider the medium a signficant step down. However, the Mamiya 7 is top gear, portability and lenses.

Jesse,

 

I use the Microtek 1800f for 4x5 and 6x17. The quality is very good, but not as good as you would get with the Imacon or more pro level.

With the multisampling the quality does improved considerably, yielding more detail in the shadow. 1800f has good holders for 4x5, but not for the 6x17. It is not easy to get the 617 to lay flat, but you can also make your own holder. All and all a good workhorse, I use it to get initial impressions of an image and than take the slide in for professional scan. Hope this helps. Good luck.

Beau

 

I have great results from the Slideprinter in Denver. Slideprinter.com

I don't think you can be the price, $30.00 per scan burned to CD.

 

Morey

John

 

Your comments are not out of line. I see large format lenses with a Macro designation and would like to know how they perform differently from the lenses without that designation. Specifically, do the macro lenses allow for greater magnification, do they give you more depth of field, and can they be used for shooting non macro. Thanks.

What lens and how much bellows extension is needed for Macro with the

Linhof V? Thanks.

One more time...

Peter

 

Hope this one works. You cannot go back and edit in the critique forum. I might add that many 4 x 5 images are shot in bw and in this particular forum, it is my impression, that color is preferred.

I am coming to the opinion that the lack of appreciation for 4x5 on the internet is not an issue of the quality coming across. I think it might have something to do with being intimidated by the inadequacy that 4x5 brings out in smaller formats, especially when shooting landscape. I see a difference in 4 x5 over digital or even medium format right on the monitor. I have included a recent image to make that point.

Any help in identifying this camera, value. It works quite well. The

vulcanite is missing in several places. Does replacing it affect

value? Serial #380439, Leica D.R.P. Ernst Leitz Wetzlar. My father

purchased in Europe in the 40's. Thanks<div></div>

Wayne

 

I have a folder for large format on photo.net (just created). I believe you can convey a great deal of the beauty and subtlety of large format on a 72 dpi monitor. There is a website associated with Anselm Adams where the artists display large format images and they are very striking (Burkett, McNeil, etc.)

 

Ralph

 

Thanks for sharing your 8 x 10 contact print. Stunning image and it comes across quite well. Of course, I am well aware that you cannot capture the impact of size. I have images enlarged to 48 x 60 and I quite agree that the image on the monitor does not come close, but those experienced with large format no well how to imagine what it would be like.

Why is it that so few names in the large format forum have actual

photographs posted? It would nice to see images submitted that have

met particular challenges of lighting, interesting camera movements

and the use of various lenses. I love the forum and I feel it has

advanced my own photography several years, but I would like to see

actual images. Anyone share this concern? Thanks.

Robert

 

Thanks for the link. We can learn a good deal just by studying his images, very inspiring!!

I have a river scene recently posted that has great tonalilty from

the scan. Should I print from the scan on a lightjet or go to

traditional wet chemistry? As a follow up, can I assume that the

traditional process will produce results similar, as good as or

better than the scan? Thanks.

Antonio

 

I use Heliopan's 67 mm polarizer with the 110 XL and there is no contact between the filter and the lens. I place a small pieice of paper on the lens and see if the filter will rotate it when screwed in place. So some filters will work. You do not need a center filter when shooting 4 x 5. Good luck.

John

 

Have you considered the possibility that something in the camera might be misaligned? You can see that the unexposed part of the film appears to be properly positioned.

Marco

 

I bought the new version. If it helps the trademark is 2001 and the Cat number is 893 7542. This number is right off the holder. Also, the release button is red. Good luck.

Thanks for all your input. I considered your input purchased the Linhof Fresnel (John convinced me, thanks). Anyway my first impression is that it works great. The image are uniform and bright, real bright and it is very easy to focus the image. I focused with the reflex viewer and than check focused without the Fresnel and reflex viewer and the focus was identical. I took a several shots and will see how the they look tomorrow. At this point I must concur with John. Cheers.

I just purchased a new Linhof Reflex Viewer and the image quality is

significantly inferior to direct viewing on the ground glass. It is

very difficult to focus the image. Does anyone have any suggestions

as to how to improve the quality or is this just the nature of the

beast. Would Fresnel make a difference over ground glass? Thanks.

If you are shooting 4 x 5 it does not make much sense to process it through a low end scanner with dubious dmax. I have my slides scanned at The Slideprinter where they have a new rate of $30.00 flat, whether you have a 35, medium, panoramic or large format. Best price I have seen and it is one of those $200,000. scanners. So why compromise? I have pushed my Microtek 1800f and it does not do the slides any justice. I imagine the Epson's result are as marginal. Epson and Microtek are great for proofing and the ocassional inkjet, but no where close to high end scanners. Hope this helps.

I have a Linhof Tech V and the 40 x 48 Lightjet enlargements are tack sharp with little grain visible. I am told I can go to 50 x 60 with similar quality from these scans. So what would motivate us to move up to an 8 x 10?

Any thoughts on the quality of the Nikkor 300M compared to the

Schneider 305 G Claron? Thanks.

The Slideprinter in Denver, CO. Nice work, reasonable price. They only do slides.