massimo_squillace

Hi all,

Can the Horseman Angle Viewer be used on the RFH adapter of an

Arca-Swiss 6x9 F-line?

I searched the site for a definite answer to the above question, and

couldn't find it.

Since the RFH and Horseman Angle Viewer are readily interchangeable on

my VHR I hope the same holds true for the Arca RFH adapter (that

accepts the Horseman RFHs), but before upgrading I want to be sure ...

Bill Maxwell custom-built two *great* screens for the angle viewer

I'd like to keep using.

Is there a large format equipment dealer in Denver?

I am going there in a couple of days starting on a tour of the

Southwest, and would like to know where to turn to for replacements,

should I forget / break something.

Thank you

Leonard,

I work with a 1.5GB Athlon 2000+ system with 400MB images all the time with few memory related problems, and am a big fan of Linux, using it both at work and at home.

While Linux stability is simply a concept most Windoze users cannot grasp and the Gimp is great for smaller size stuff, it *still* isn't optimized for such big images (but things *will* change), and I suffered from the same problems you describe.

Since then I standardized on Picture Window for all my retouching work

(www.dl-c.com).

IMHO it is much more intuitive for a photographer than Photoshop, has a much smaller footprint, is fast and proven, has a price below $90 ... and if you follow the links on the main page to Luca Salgarelli's site you will find it can be run under WINE (and quite well I should add).

I totally agree with the supporters of Paul's work.

His web site is tastefully crafted and his photographs have a dreamy, timeless quality that I really like; I'm especially impressed by the sheer number of shades of green several pictures display.

He is a most charming person too: I contacted him to buy a couple of prints so I could use them as a reference for my beginner's efforts in the computer darkroom and was surprised to receive them free of charge, along with a card expressing best wishes for my endeavours.

I am planning a vacation to the Southwest in June, and would like to

photograph Lake Powell from above water level, i.e. from the top of

the mesas or from a helicopter, with my Horseman VH-R.

Has anyone in this list travelled Warm Creek Road from Big Water to

the top of Romana Mesa to shoot Gunsight Bay and Padre Bay ... how

long does it take with a 4WD, and is it a challenging drive (I'd

like to bring my family along)?

Any good experiences to relate re: renting a 4WD in Page?

What about shooting at sunrise or sunset from a helicopter ... is it

possible to book a ride in Page, and could you advice on the proper

shooting technique?

Lastly, I'd appreciate advice on other shooting locations along Lake

Powell's shoreline that can be reached in a daily outing from Page,

possibly by car or 4WD.

Thank you

The available documentation on Ebony cameras, specifically about

the 23S and 45S since these are the models I periodically lust after

(I shoot 6x9 and would like to try 6x12 one day), doesn't make clear

to me the following points:

1) Is it possible to use a 55mm APO Grandagon with full movements

(according to specs, 40mm rise/fall and 32mm shift for 6x9) on a flat

lens board (flange focal distance is 67.6mm for this lens)?

2) I usually follow the method outlined in "Procedure II" of the

article "How to focus the View Camera" on Tuan's site with great

results, but it relies on some kind of ruler or millimeter scale

attached to the camera. I can see Ebonies don't have one by default,

but from the pictures available I cannot decide where one could stick

one (I made a PDF with a ruler and attached it beside the rail on my

Horseman VH-R ... works fine). Has anybody solved this problem on the

23S/45S, and how?

Ellis,

thank you for answering.

Regarding my first question, I know the monorail folds in two, and I'm curious as to whether one normally detaches the front and rear "function carriers" from the "format frames" living them clamped to the monorail, or vice versa.

Do the dimensions you give include carriers and monorail still attached to the format frames?

Furthermore, how are the format frames carried in the backpack?

I'm studying the Arca-Swiss catalog and it seems that the Extension

brackets coming with their monorails is ready for mounting on a ball

head.

I have an Arca-Swiss B1e and find it very good for 35mm shooting, but

I am addicted to the fine adjustments my Manfrotto (Bogen) 410 mini

geared head allows when using a view camera.

Is it possible to mount the Extension bracket directly on a pan/tilt

head or does one need to interpose a quickset device between the two?

Questions for 2x3 and 4x5 Arca-Swiss FC owners:

1) How do you fold the camera for backpacking?

2) What are the dimensions of a 2x3 / 4x5 when folded?

3) How long does it take to setup and fold it in the field?

I'm evaluating 6x9 alternatives to my VH-R and have some questions

about the Linhof Technikardan S 23:

1) Does it accept Horseman 6x9 RFHs?

2) What movements can one expect with a Rodenstock APO Grandagon 55mm

... does one need a Wide Angle Bellows or a recessed lensboard for

such a focal length?

Hi all,

anyone knows the e-mail address (if any) one can use to contact the

Arca-Swiss people in their Besançon, France factory?

I think the Shen-Hao HZX45 might represent a sensible upgrade option for 6x9 roll film shooters like me, but would appreciate insight from actual users before making a decision.

<p>

Here are my goals for the upgrade:

<p>

a) I plan to continue shooting roll film, with the added capability of

6x12. In the future I could try my hands at 4x5, but for now my foremost interest lies in keeping costs and weight down while changing as little as possible of my current outfit. This implies the 4x5 GG will be staying home most of the time.

<p>

b) I want to continue using my Horseman Angle Viewer for most of my

shooting, including 6x12. To achieve this goal I could buy a Horseman

6x9 Reducing Revolving Back (RRB), which should fit all International

Standard 4x5 cameras and would also accept my current 6x9 and 6x7 RFHs.

When working on a 6x12 image I could focus the 6x9 middle section and

inspect the extra 1.5cm right and left margins by shifting the back (in the Shen-Hao pictures I see a ruler along the back standard that would help greatly).

<p>

c) My shortest lens is a 55mm Apo Grandagon, and like my other lenses it is mounted in a 8x8cm Horseman panel. The small panel size is helpful in keeping volume down in an already crowded backpack, so I'd like to leave a Horseman Linhof Technica lens panel adapter permanently mounted on the Shen-Hao's front standard.

<p>

I have specific questions about this intended setup:

<p>

1) Is it possible to infinity focus the 55mm as described? Its flange

focal distance is 67.6mm.

<p>

2) Using the wide-angle "bag" bellows what amount of movements can I

expect with a 55mm lens?

<p>

3) I'm not sure the 6x12 RFHs (Shen-Hao's is relatively cheap but said

to be good enough, my other option is the high-quality Horseman one)

would place the film plane where the procedure explained in b) allows me to focus. This is because, while the 6x9/6x7 RFhs will be mounted

directly on the RRB, I will have to unmount it to use the 6x12 RFH.

Anyone knows for sure? Are there other alternatives to achieve this goal ... e.g. does Shen-Hao provide a 6x9 reducing back where I could mount Horseman RFHs / Angle Viewer?

<p>

Questions about Shen-Hao cameras:

<p>

4) How do I contact an European distributor for the Shen-Hao?

<p>

5) What are the differences, if any, between a HZX45-IIA and a HZX45-II?

<p>

Thank you all in advance.

I am currently using a 55mm APO Grandagon on a flat panel with my VHR, and I'm pretty sure this is the shortest lens usable on this camera without resorting to recessed boards (which I couldn't find) and/or modifying the camera body.

<p>

Keep in mind that in order to use any recessed board on the Horseman you will have to hack at the lens shutter; this is something I didn't really want to do.

<p>

You should be prepared to accept some limitations; for further information please refer to:

http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=007IaQ

Cokin doesn't sell a 40.5mm adapter for the P holders.

<p>

I had a similar problem some time ago and resorted to use a step-up

ring (by the way, the best quality step-up rings IMHO are those by

Heliopan - and they cover all your possible needs).

<p>

You may risk vignetting ... another option would be to have an adapter

custom made for you.

Paul,

<p>

The product Kevan mentions is probably "Picture Window 3.1".

<p>

It is priced $49.95 for the standard version, but you will want the

"Pro" version at $89.95 since the features you need are there (and a

lot more).

<p>

The trial version (a time-limited "Pro" edition) can be downloaded

from www.dl-c.com .

<p>

This software package was written by a photographer which also happens

to be the programmer who created the first version of Lotus 1-2-3, and

I think it deserves wider recognition than what it already enjoys.

<p>

Hope this helps.

<p>

PS: Congratulations for you Web site. I especially like the natural

quality of the greens in your beautiful shots.

After much thought I eventually bought from Robert White, UK the

Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 55mm f/4.5 together with the Rodenstock

E67/86 center filter, and having used the combo for this little while

I believe I can contribute my first impressions about its usage -

mounted on a flat panel - with the Horseman VH-R.

<p>

I take this opportunity to thank the list with a special mention to

Trevor Crone and Howard Slavitt who found the time to answer several

direct e-mails, detailing their hands-on experience with wide-angles

on the Horseman 6x9.

<p>

1) You can focus to infinity with the front standard firmly grasped on

the edge of the bed rail, outside the camera body. If you clamp it on

the very edge you can also exceed infinity focus distance a bit, which

I find useful for careful focusing.

<p>

2) At infinity you get about 5 mm left/right shift and you can rise

the front standard a little above the red/white dot alignment line

(~1.5 mm) before hitting the camera body. I knew I had to accept

limited movements, but since this is a wide lens I found the smallest

amount does significantly change composition ... not enough for

serious architectural work, but sufficient for my 'cityscapes' and

certainly adequate for most landscape shooting.

<p>

3) At infinity when shooting in landscape (horizontal) orientation the

front bed doesn't show in the picture even with no rise, and you can

also tilt forward some, but just to be on the safe side I decided to

align the red and white dots on the front standard and be sure I can

apply full forward tilt if needed.

<p>

4) According to Trevor Crone it is possible to shoot portraits

(verticals) at infinity without turning the camera on its side, and

true enough if you carefully clamp the front standard on the bed rail

so that the latter doesn't extend any for infinity focus and rise the

front all the way to the camera body, the bed rail doesn't show -

barely. Forward tilt is not an option of course, and failing to follow

the above to the letter immediately resulted in the rail tips showing

in my slides. I therefore resolved to always turn the camera on its

side when shooting verticals, after setting up the front standard as

described in 3): this allows me to use swing to get full forward and

backward tilt, and tilt to get full left/rigth swing - I also get

about 5 mm rise/fall using the little shift available. Since I use a

Manfrotto 410 Junior Geared Head turning the camera on its side is a

quick and accurate operation; I don't use the VH-R side thread because

the big quick release plate of the 410 dosn't fit the space available

... YMMV.

<p>

5) The darkening of the groundglass corners is not much worse than

what I have with my Rodenstock Grandagon-N 75mm f/6.8 ... I am in

contact with Bill Maxwell to fix this once and for all.

<p>

6) Contrary to what I gathered on the net, and perhaps due to the

little movements available, I observe absolutely no vignetting with my

67mm Heliopan filters on this lens ... not even the thick warming

polarizer. With the polarizer you do get uneven darkening of large

monochrome areas (e.g. the sky), but this is typical of wide-angle

lenses and I know how to cope.

<p>

7) Comparing side by side on the light table transparencies shot with

and without the E67/86 center filter clearly shows why you *need* one

(at least for slides) - as Howard Slavitt reports, exposures are

really *much* better, quite even across the frame. If I had not done

this test though, I think I would have accepted the results

nonetheless, and for selected subjects the effect could even be

beneficial IMHO. The only real drawback is the filter eats up even

more than the 2.5 stops engraved on its side - my tests show you

should compensate for 3 full stops, and indeed it is almost impossible

to focus with the center filter in place. Luckily its quality is so

high I cannot observe any focus shift when screwing the E67/86 on

after focusing without it. You also *must not* screw another filter

between the lens and the center filter - the middle of the resulting

frame would clearly show a black round 'blob'. I don't know if a 86mm

filter would do, since I don't have one (polarizers that big have

shuddering prices!) - can anyone clear this point up from personal

experience?

<p>

Last but not least, this lens is *great* - sharp and contrasty, and I

think I will be using it a lot in years to come. Only minor gripe was

the flimsyness of the provided lenscaps, but that was promply solved

(although not cheaply) by a transaction with S.K. Grimes.

Photoshop has never been good at managing PhotoCD ... do yourself a

favour and have a look at Picture Window 3.1 instead (www.dl-c.com).

This sleek piece of software has been written with the photographer in

mind, is inexpensive, you can use it instead of Photoshop or to

complement its functionality, and has GREAT PhotoCD support among a

host of other features ... it only needs a Linux version to be perfect

IMHO.

Hi all,

<p>

I currently own a Grandagon-N 75mm f/6.8 lens and am choosing a

wider one to shoot architecture with my Horseman VH-R.

<p>

From extended use of my 35mm Nikon equipment I found most of my

wideangle pictures were taken with a 24mm lens, a focal lenght I

happen to like a lot, so I am focusing on the 55-58mm range.

<p>

Both the Rodenstock APO Grandagon 55mm f/4.5 and the Schneider

Super-Angulon 58mm f/5.6 XL would fit the bill; I tend to favor the

Rodenstock because it is a little wider and a better match for my

Nikkor's field of view.

<p>

Looks like I won't be able to find any of the 8mm recessed lensboards

Scott Bennet manufactured years ago; this is not altogether unexpected

from what I gathered on the subject, and after all I never liked the

idea of having to hack at the Copal 0 shutter in order to mount the

lens on such a board.

<p>

I am therefore left the only option of mounting the lens on a flat

lensboard and accepting limited movements; from e-mail exchanges with

the owner of a 58mm XL I know it will work (thanks again, Howard),and

I am asking your help with the Rodenstock APO Grandagon 55mm f/4.5:

<p>

1) Is it possible to get infinity focus with the front standard

securely clamped on the bed track? According to published specs the

difference in flange focal distance between the 58mm and 55mm is just

69.3 - 67.6 = 1.7mm ... I tried focusing my 75mm to infinity and then

moving the front standard back 78.5 - 67.6 = 10.9mm and it did grab

securely.

<p>

2) If the answer to 1) is affirmative, is it necessary to rise the

front standard in order to keep the bed out of the picture in

landscape (horizontal) orientation? From experiments on my VH-R it

should be possible to rise the front a little further than what's

needed to align the red and white dots ... anyone ever measured the

available rise?

<p>

3) Is it necessary to turn the VH-R on its side in order to shoot

portraits (verticals), or does the little rise available allow one to

keep the camera upright?

<p>

4) How much forward tilt can be applied without the bed showing in the

picture?

<p>

5) Is it possible to use the E67/86 center filter ... I understand

its front element is 86mm in diameter!

<p>

6) Do the (front) lens itself and/or the lenboard's position make it

difficult to use a cable release, setting the aperture and loading the

shutter?

<p>

7) Any other advice/comments from first-hand experience?

<p>

Thank you

Using a lens shorter than 75mm on an unmodified VH-R is difficult IMHO

if you want to retain good rise capabilities and avoid getting the bed

in the picture.

The corners would also be darker than what they already are with the

75mm, forcing you to have a custom fresnel made by skilled craftsmen

like Robert Maxwell.

To further complicate matters, the recessed lensboards many of you

refer to in previous postings are now unavailable.

Several weeks ago I borrowed for a day a cheap, nameless .42X(!) Wide

Angle Adapter and out of curiosity tried it on my APO Symmar 100mm

f/5.6.

While the image on the groundglass and in the monoreflex viewer showed

some distortion (less than I expected though) and looked a tad soft,

what I saw was *MUCH* wider than what I ever saw through my 75mm and

clear edge to edge, being projected by a 100mm focal length on my

standard fresnel.

Since then I discovered such adapters are widely used for video, and

that Century Precision Optics manufactures some of the finest;

specifically on their web site I found a .6X Wide Angle Adapter (from

their Digital Series) that has a 58mm thread and so could be mounted

on my 75mm to give an equivalent focal length of 45mm - more than wide

enough - with the full movements and brightness of the longer lens,

for a cost of $225.00.

Has anyone tried similar combinations, and what advice can you share?

Howard, could you please detail the reasons why you had 3 different fresnel lenses custom-made by Robert Maxwell?

My widest lens is a Rodenstock APO Grandagon N 75mm f/6.8 and when framing verticals through the monoreflex viewer I often observe 'ghost' images caused by the standard fresnel lens near the corners, which by the way are very dark.

I've always been wondering if/what I should ask of Maxwell to improve this situation, since calling him from overseas without a clear idea of my needs looks like an expensive proposition (given his reported loquacity).

By the way, do you know if he would ship overseas and if he is now reachable via e-mail also?

To contribute a bit to the subject, I have had the VH-R for a few months now and like it a lot; my only addition has been writing a program to generate a PDF file with a ruler which, printed on a sticky sheet of paper and 'waterproofed' with adhesive tape, fits perfectly on the bed beside the rail.

I use it to accurately focus the camera and determine the optimal f-stop ... works great, is easily replaced when worn out and costs next to nothing.

Thank you for the replies.

I asked my dealer to check, and it turned out that the 210mm f/5.6 APO Sironar S won't fit on the VH-R.

The front hole of the VH-R is 66mm while the rear element of the Sironar S is 65mm, but when mounted there is not enough movement to lift the lens enough to fit the bottom of the panel in the retaining clip at the base of the front standard.

I therefore changed my order and am now waiting for a 210mm f/5.6 APO Sironar N, which has a rear element diameter of 60mm and fits no problem.

It also has 301mm of image circle coverage at f/22 instead of the 316mm of the Sironar S, and from Howard's experiences I am now greatly reassured as to the possible effects of bellows flare.

I will consider getting a compendium hood also ... which one do you advice?

Hi all,

I'm rounding up my lens lineup with a 210mm f/5.6 APO Sironar S, and

am a bit concerned with what is normally defined 'bellows flare'.

I think all non-process lenses over 180mm have this potential problem

on a Horseman VH/VH-R because of their large image circle; on the

other hand such lenses are great performers and eventually could be

used on larger formats.

1) Did you ever have shots 'ruined' because of bellows flare (read: is

this really a big problem given the quality of the Horseman bellows)?

2) What about screwing a step-down ring on the front lens to avoid the

problem?

3) How can one be sure a given lens will (or will not) cause bellows

flare on an Horseman VH/VH-R?

Thank you

I know, I know ... this is the kind of questions you should answer

yourself given your shooting interests, but I can't find enough info

on this topic targeted to the 6x9 format, let alone on this specific

brand and, well, I'm just plain curious!

What lenses do you currently use for landscape/nature photography with

the Horseman 6x9 cameras?

If you feel your kit isn't complete, what would be your next buy?

Were you disappointed by any specific lens, and conversely, would you

highly recommend one given your hands-on experience with it?

Struggling to learn using my (used) VH-R here ...

I've read several web articles describing 'optimal' focusing

strategies for view cameras and I'm trying each in turn with some

mixed results, but none of them is specific to the Horseman 6x9s.

How do you EFFICIENTLY focus these cameras, specifically when using

front or back tilt?