doug_brightwell1

Kornelius...

Do you think it has to be a Video 18 in order to be absolutely

stable. A DV8 head on DV2 D legs would be about half the price

and less weight.

Since I shoot multi-image panoramas and stitch them in

PanoTools software, I've thought that a fluid head might be the

way to go. The gear head I have is strong and sturdy, and I have

no concerns about camera safety. And I primarily use short focal

lengths... like 40mm.

But, the Gitzo and head weight a ton. As does the Video 18 head

and legs.

And I have noticed that the whole Gitzo unit is suceptible to

vibration from brisk wind. I'm wondering if that's due to the

springiness of the Gitzo metal, and if carbon fiber legs and oil

dampening would minimize that.

For the kind of panoramas I do, I might need to lock down the

vertical tilt so that the pitch axis doesn't change throughout the

series of shots. The center balance of the camera always has to

be to the rea of the center post in order to place the nodal point of

the lens over that center. The weight of the camera body might

make the head drift in the vertical axis unless it's locked.

But I could leave the horizontal pan axis unlocked and set to the

tighest drag.

Do you think this configuration would negate the beneficial

effects of the oil dampening to the point it's not worth it?

Doug

I was liking these tips until I read the part about using an $6-8K

tripod! :-)

What do mere mortals do when shooting in the field for a

tripod/head combination that dampens vibrations?

Are you saying that the oil dampening will dampen the vibrations

from the shutter? I have a 6008i. Is the shutter causing vibrations

that are degrading sharpness?

Doug

As an owner of a 6008i and four lenses, I can testify to the fact

that you're buying into an expensive when you buy a 600x. I was

lucky... I'm financially irresponsible and had a big consulting

check come in. :-)

The 6001 kit w/80mm lens is very affordable from B&H.

Undoubtedly more so from Robert White in the UK. Under $2600

I'd suspect. How wrong can you go at that price? But, be aware

that the next step you take will be a bigger one pricewise.

Depending on where you buy, most lenses fall in the

$2700-4,000 range. From B&H, my 40mm wide angle was about

$4K. Not much more than Hasselblad, but in a different price

category than other MF cameras.

If you plan on buying from Robert WHite in the UK, also plan on

sending the camera back there for repairs. There are long

threads on Photo.net about how Rollei USA won't honor

warranties for cameras purchased out of the country. Otherwise,

he has a reputation for being the best in customer service.

Photography is an aspect of my business, but not my entire

business. I have a very specific kind of shot I want to take, and

the Rollei suited that specific need very well. But if I had

aspiration towards being a commercial photographer where I

had to rely on a camera every single day, and meet a wide range

of assignments, and where operating costs have to be

contained, I would have probably bought a different camera. I'd

have looked at a Maniya RZ67 or a Fuji 680 (or whatever the

model numbers are). Available rentals, easy repair, cheaper

accessories would have been given more weight in my decision.

I would have opted for the ability to have two bodies, several

backs, as wider a range of lenses, and put the savings into

strobes and shipping cases and the myriad other do-dads that

you need as a full-tilt commercial photographer.

On the other hand... if you own a Contax and are used to Zeiss

lenses, and have come to rely on the intelligence built into the

Contax, you might not find that the other MF options feel as

comparible.

If you have a Contax and 12 lenses, it sounds like price is not the

primary factor in your camera decisions, in which case, don't let

people's comments about how costly the Rollei system is deter

you. If you simply enjoy fine cameras and high quality, and you

got the bucks, that's reason enough.

But, if you have to give a passing thought to processing costs,

35mm versus 120, then cost must be an issue, and a cheaper

camera would mean more money left over for film and

processing... for shooting.

Now, for downsides to MF in general...

Be aware that since the lenses are longer in focal length than

35mm, you'll get less depth of field than what you're used to in

35mm. Sure, the 80mm lens that comes with the Rollei will have

about the same depth of field an 80mm lens on a 35mm

camera. But most people compare lenses of similar field of

view, not focal length. Your normal MF lens will have less depth

of field than your normal 35mm lens. My 40mm Super Angulon

doesn't act like a 26mm lens on a 35mm camera (or whatever

the comparable focal length is). Even though it shows me the

same picture angle as a 26mm lens, it acts like a 40mm lens on

a 35mm camera.

The other factor to be aware of is that MF cameras are more

difficult to focus. You don't see dozens of threads on photo.net

about focusing problems and brighter viewing screens for

35mm, but you do for MF. If you're used to auto-focus, or used to

shooting in low light levels, or used to shooting quickly, 6x6, 6x7

and 6x8 MF cameras aren't optimized for that.

That said... once you shoot MF, you'll instantly find yourself in a

higher quality category than 35mm, no matter what your camera

choice -- except for trendy, artsy plastic eastern european

cameras that sell for under $20. :-)

"That being said, I don't think a dedicated panoramic camera is

as limited as some people make it out to be. 5% of shots?

Come on. There are a lot of interesting uses for the swing lens

cameras..."

I agree. It all depends upon your vision. Some people see pano

shots as exceptions to the aesthetic rules they've adopted.

Others see them as being fundamental to their aesthetic vision.

One person will see only 5% of scenes as having panorama

potential. Another will see only 5% of them as not having

panorama potential.

Robert... if you haven't already, you might want to check out

Macduff Everton's book called "The Western Horizon"

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0810945622/o/qid=98

1564054/sr=8-1/ref=aps_sr_b_1_1/107-3880620-1450964

Doug

Scott...

Some of the more technically oriented people might have a

better answer, but just noodling it through...

The Noblex 50mm lens provides a horizontal picture angle of

view of 132-degrees on a 12" wide negative. The rotating lens

does much of the work of achieving the wide field of view, thus

relieving the optics of the lens from that burden.

The 43mm Mamiya lens provides a horizontal angle of view of

92-degrees on a 7cm wide negative. That narrower angle of view

is achieved only through optical design.

The Noblex vertical field of view is 52-degrees. Mamiya doesn't

publish that stat on their web site that I could find, but logic (and

presumably math) would dictate that it is much less.

But, let's say you set-up the two cameras in front on the same

subject so that the horizontal content is identical within each

camera's film frame. I believe that the Mamiya would have to be

positioned much farther back from the subject that the Noblex.

And, if you used the 35mm film "panoramic" adapter, or simply

cropped the 6x7 neg accordingly, the vertical field of view would

be even less. You'd be cropping out all the foreground elements

that give a picture a sense of depth.

Also, you would have also reduced your total negative area

considerably, and lost the benefit of MF.

The same thing happens with a Fuji 6x17. You loose foreground

elements because the camera is essentially cropping into the

vertical center of the image. You don't get the same immersive

feeling as with swing lens cameras. (You also don't get certain

kinds of distortion.) But, because the film size is so big, you all

the benefits of MF.

That make any sense?

A quibble over a subtlety, which I don't think has much to do with

Robert's issue, but FWIW...

The term "panorama" means different things to different people.

Some simply mean that the image has a wide aspect ratio. But

there is another element to panoramic photos, and that's wide

field of view.

Shooting with a fixed lens and cropping the negative to a wide

aspect ratio, produces an image that tends to looks like it was

shot more at a distance. Even if the fixed lens is a wideangle.

There is not a lot of difference in the perceived viewing angle of

objects at the center of the frame compared to the edges of the

frame. I'm not saying this is good or bad, merely the results of

letting the horizontal field of view of a conventional lens

determine shooting distance, and cropping out foreground area

in order to achieve the wide aspect ratio. (This is what happens

when you shoot in so called panorama mode with APS

film/cameras.)

Cameras or proceses designed for panoramic photograpghy

generally tend to provide a film size/lens combination that gives

a wider horizontal field of view than conventional lenses on

conventional bodies. The lens sees more left to right, and you

can get closer to your subject matter, and that closer distance

and wider field of view feels more immersive. There is a

noticeable, and some would say, more satisfying, difference in

the perceived viewing angle of objects at the center of the frame

compared to objects near the edges of the frame.

This immersive quality is further enhanced with cameras or

digital processes that additionally provide a greater _vertical_

field of view. You not only see more left to right, but you see more

top to bottom. You can get closer to your scene, and it feels more

immersive, more panorama like... more like standing

somewhere in the desert Southwest and swiveling you head

around and thinking, "Damn, this country sure is big." You have

more larger foreground elements that work with the smaller

background elements to give a greater feeling of depth. For

example, the Noblex 150 provides a greater vertical field of view

than the Noblex 175, even thought the horizontal field of view is

virtually the same.

Again, neither good nor bad, just the physics of it. It's a subtely of

panoramic photography that may not be immediately apparent to

standard-frame shooters. And, of course, it's all a matter of

preference and priorities.

If you understand what you like about panoramic photos, then

you can select a camera that will achieve that. If it's primarily the

wide aspect ratio, then it can be achieved with any number of

cameras and lenses. If it's the immersive quality, then

specialized cameras or processes are required.

I mention this because for a long time, I regretted my decision to

not buy a panorama camera because it was too specialized and

wasn't "practical." In the long run, being practical felt more like a

compromise. Sure, I couldn't have taken certain types of photos,

conventional portraits, close-ups, whatever. But I ended up not

being able to take the kind of images that was ultimately more

important to me - panoramic images. If someone has the

panoramic bug, has a panoramic vision, then shooting with a

panoramic camera is simply more fun and fulfilling.

Of course, as in all things photographic, no one camera can do

everything, and the real solution is to get a panoramic camera

and a conventional camera. Cha-ching!

Or, for those willing to delve into digital imaging, a conventional

camera can do double duty as a panoramic camera. Cha-ching,

again!

:-)

Doug

You might want to check out the following website for the

Panorama Photographers Association. It has various resources,

including info on different cameras.

http://www.panphoto.com/index.html

Fixed lens pano cameras give a different look to the image than

swing lens cameras (you mentioned both in your post), and you

might want to explore that difference to see if you have a

preference. I discovered that I prefer the look of swing lens

cameras.

If you�re happy with the quality of standard 35mm photography,

you�ll be happy with 35mm panorama photography. After all,

you�ll get a negative that�s bigger in _width_.

But, if you were considering medium format because you wanted

better quality than standard 35mm, I think you�ll be disappointed

with 35mm pano photography. Sure, the negative area is larger

than 24x36mm, it�s wider, but you�ll likely enlarge the image to

the same _height_ as you have been. In my mind, what you�ll get

is a print with more surface area of the lower quality inherent in

35mm.

If you like the pano format, and like medium format quality, I�d

recommend getting a medium format pano camera.

If you�re concerned about flexibility, not wanting to have a camera

that does only panoramas, then you might consider, as I did,

getting a standard medium format camera, shooting multiple

images, and stitching them together in software to form a

panorama. But, obviously, that�s a digital approach, not a

standard darkroom approach. But, at some cost in convenience,

it gives you the best of both worlds: a standard medium format

camera and a pano camera.

Doug

I have to say I've never really understood the concern about the

600x series being electronic and requiring a battery.

I never considered that my Canon EOS was fundamentally

flawed because it was electronic. I saw that as it�s strength. I just

made sure to always have a couple of spare batteries.

And now, I don't worry about the battery failing on my 6008i either.

I have two spares, and carry the charger and car cigarette lighter

adapter with me on trips. That�s part of the costs of owning the

camera, and avoiding trouble.

Unless you're talking about extreme cold weather, which I have

no experience with, I wonder how much the strongly held

mechanical versus electronic mind set is based on actual

electronic failures.

Doug

I emailed B&H and encouraged them to carry Reala in 220. They

claim that it is no longer made in Japan. If true, I suppose the

Canadian stores stock it because the Canadian distributor has a

huge supply in warehouses. Any Canadians have any idea if

that's the case? If true, that means the Canadian supplies will

eventually run out.

B&H claims that NPS is Fuji's replacement.

Anyone have any experience with the two films, Reala and NPS?

What, in your experience, is the best replacement for Reala?

"Marflex is contractually obligated to repair a Rollei with a

worldwide warranty. I suggest you write (email) Rollei in

Germany and ask them to instruct their agent (Marflex) to perform

the repair,..."

Does anyone know that to be true? I thought Marflex's contractual

arrangement was with Rollei USA; that it is an agent of Rollei

USA, not the manufacturer. I always assumed that Rollei

Germany doesn't go into countries and establish relationships

with repair facilities. They contracts with a local distributors who

then contracts with a repair facility. But, I'm just speculating.

I would have thought that if Martin's allegiance was to Rollei

Germany, he wouldn't hesitate to make good on the German

worldwide warranty.

I'm not sure I received any document with my Rollei that said I

was entitled to warranty service at any of a series of worldwide

service centers (as I believe I did with my Canon, where the

names and addresses were listed in the document).

Don't get me wrong, I think Rollei USA's (not Marflex's) history of

customer service is attrocious and needs improvement on all

levels. But I wondering if it's not Rollei Germany who is the culprit

in setting up a worldwide system of distributors who are not

contractually obligated to honor the manufacturer's warranty?

Has anybody ever have a Rollei breakdown in another country

and were you able to get local warranty repair (outside Germany

and outside the country of purchase)?

I bought my camera from Rollei USA. If I were traveling in the UK

and my 6008i went on the fritz, would I be able to march into the

UK Rollei repair facility, show my B&H receipt and demand my

warranty repair?

Doug

Has anybody from the USA ever sent Rollei 600x camera

equipment back to Germany for repair? I'm curious about the

process and your experience.

Does Rollei Germany respond quickly to email? Is there an

actual live person you can call to discuss the problem? Do they

speak English? Do you get the feeling you're dealing with a black

hole, or a responsive organization? Etc.

So far, I've bought everything inside the USA because I didn't

want to go through weeks of waiting and/or uncertainty regarding

repairs. When dealing with Marflex, I know there's a real person I

can talk to. They answer their phone and return calls, etc.

BTW, when I called Robert White and asked about how warranty

repairs are handled for Rollei equipment purchased from them,

they told me Marflex won't do the repairs, and that I would send

the item back to them and they'd get the repairs done by the UK

distributor's repair contractor.

Thomas...

I�m just started leasing a Flextight Precision II. Unfortunately, I

shoot 35mm, 6x6 and 4x5, so other 35mm/120-only scanners

weren�t an option.

There�s no perfect scanner. The really great ones cost too much.

The really affordable ones aren�t that good. In my estimation, it�s

a matter of weighting the tradeoffs based upon your priorities

and method of working.

I disliked having to wait 4+ days for drum scans (packing them

up for fed ex, a day getting there, a day getting back and

x-number of days in house). I placed a priority on being able to

make a scan whenever I wanted, and being able to experiment

more frequently, more often than I ever could with drum scans.

No doubt about it. Well executed scans from a Tango drum

scanner are the best. But the Flextight will handle 80% of my

needs, and the extra flexibility, and increased productivity was a

biggest factor in my decision. And, for the 20% of shots I need

higher quality, I�ll send those out for Tango scans.

No doubt about it, the Flextight does feel overpriced. But until you

spend a _lot_ more money, I don�t think there�s a better option

out there. I decided to lease the Flextight when I realized I only

had to submit 4-6 originals for drum scans each month and I�ve

matched the lease payments.

I like the FlexTight, but it�s definitely not the same experience as,

say, Epson printers where the quality to price ratio is simply

amazing and seems to only get better.

Sure, any day now something better will come along that�s

cheaper. But what can you do?

In case it provides food for thought, here�s some of the things I

liked/was duped into believing :-) about the Flextight:

- The lens does not shoot through glass as with flatbed

scanners.

- The lens does not shoot an image bounced off a mirror as in

most flatbed scanners.

- The CCD is far away from motors and other potential sources

of electromagnetic noise.

- The film is not layered between glass. The entire film to lens

axis is completely air only.

- I don�t have to wet mount any originals (as with a drum

scanner).

- The curved shape of the film as it is rotated around the

(so-called, somewhat mis-represented) drum keeps the film flat

relative to the lens. 4x5s don�t sag in the middle like they do on

flatbeds.

- The software fully supports ICC profiles and simplifies color

management.

- I shoot exclusively color negatives, so the ultimate D-max

wasn�t as critical for me as for transparency shooters.

- Even so, there is a setting for dark originals that allows better

shadow tones/less noise (or better highlight tones/less noise in

negatives). I believe the drum speed is slowed down so that the

denser portions gets more exposure on the CCD, and thus fall

into a less noisy range.

- The light source is diffused, and doesn�t exaggerate the grain

in color negatives (which I hear can happen with poorly done

drum scans).

- Scans are easy to make. Film is easy to load.

- And for me, Imacon is local and if I have any problems, I can

drive the unit over for repairs. Also, you can actually reach the

tech support guy by phone.

Hope that helps with your decision. Good luck...

Doug

Thanks all for your responses!

I sent emails over the weekend to Alt Camera in Toronto and to

Robert White in the UK. Got very prompt replies.

Alt normally carries Reala 220. White would have to order it.

Alts price in USD is $8.68 per roll + 15% additional taxes. I did a

little comparison math to figure out how that costs compares to

the $2.09/120 roll from B&H... which struck me as very cheap.

It boils down to this. The convenience of not having to change

rolls every 12 shots (meaning the cost of 1-220 roll of Reala from

Canada vs. 2-120 rolls from B&H) costs about $5.80.

Since I tend to shoot in rapidly waning lighting conditions

outdoors most of the time, not having to do a roll change could

mean not losing a shot. That would be work $5.80.

Subjectively, I feel like I spend all my time reloading film, even

with the inserts for my 6008i.

I'll check out Vistek today, and probaly order 20 rolls from either

of the Canadian stores and try it out.

Doug

Ken... Thanks. I'll give them a call Monday.

Anybody know who the Canadian equivalent of B&H Photo, or Wall Street

Photo is... a big discount pro store that is fully geared up for, ideally, web

orders, and shipping, and has a good reputation for customer service?

Also, what's the deal on the currency conversion these days? Is it more

expensive, or cheaper, for a USA citizen to purchase from Canada?

Thanks....

Doug

Ken...

Do you know of any mail/web/phone order camera stores in Canada that

carry Reala in 220?

I've been ordering 120 from B&H, but according to their web site, they still

only carry it in 120.

I'd much prefer 220.

Thanks,

Doug

"$1200 is a hell of a price to pay for a warranty.".

I agree!

But a lot of people do it because a lot of people most people in

the USA buy equipment in the USA.

Also, the difference isn't just for a "warranty." Theoretically, it's for

less hassle. Less downtime. Less loss of productivity.

I've talked to Martin Arnst at Marflex several times. He knows who

I am. I don't know how the process works in the UK or Germany,

and I erred on the side of, hopefully, less grief.

I would love to know what the common experience is with

warranty work done by returning the equipment to Germany or to

Robert White.

FWIW... I called Robert White about a lens for my 6008i and was

told that the Marflex would NOT honor the warranty, and that I'd

have to send it back to Robet White who would then forward it to

the authorized UK distributor's repair shop for repair. As a result,

I decided to spend about $1200 more and buy the lens here in

the USA.

I would be interested in other people's actual experiences with

warranty repairs from Rovert White equipment. Their prices are

definitely cheaper.

And, as everyone has said, they were very curteous on the

phone. It would be great if B&H hired Robert White to teach

some customer relations seminars! :-)

Doug

>> excellent Excel spreadsheet contributed by Mr Mike Davis

Where cane one get this spreadsheet. Is it available for

download? Can someone email it to me?

Also, has anyone tried focus-bracketing in MF, shooting a frame

that favors the foreground and a frame that favors infinity, and

then combining the two in PhotoShop? I'd be interested in the

pros, cons, and procedure.

Thanks,

Doug

I would second the comment about "being kind." Any opinion can

be expressed in a gentle or harsh way, and I'm not sure what's

gained by dialing up the rhetoric.

I enjoyed the Flash effects. I have DSL at home, which, IMHO,

everyone should have if they're involved in graphics or

photography. The site was clearly not conceived and designed

for a low-bandwidth connection. Perhaps the site could have

been a little faster. But that could have been expressed in the

form of positive feedback that the designer could have put to

good use (although, he may not even be on this list for all I

know).

As I see it, the designer was attempting a web version of a coffee

table book. The site itself attempted to evoke a mood and tell a

story, not just be a repository for photos, and I don't see that

attempt as a bad thing.

I would be interested in seeing what others think are well

designed photo sites. Some examples would give me a better

feel for why people felt so strongly.

Doug

Thought I'd mention, FWIW, that the cloth is called "Soft Clean"

and is made by ProMaster... www.promaster.com.

That's a cool picture.

Fisheye's are such fun lenses. I really like the gentle curves of

the 30mm.

I recently found a large micro-fiber cloth that's thicker and softer

than anything I'd seen so far. I got it especially for the 30mm so I

can wipe off whatever I get on it.

I don't want to cramp my style by over-worrying. But also want to

protect my investment by not doing anything careless or stupid.

Thanks for the pointers to those articles.

Doug

Just sprung for a 30mm Distagon for my 6008i.

Given that the front element is huge, and hugely exposed to the

elements, so to speak, I was wondering if anyone has

experience with using the lens--or any other fisheye--in marginal

weather situations.

For example, should I be paranoid about getting any rain or

snow or fog condensation on the front element? If the light's

beautiful, but a few drops are falling from the sky, should I pack it

in or keep shooting? How fragile is the front element coating,

and how much should I worry about it?

Thanks...

Ah, yes. I see the connector. Adds some vertical height. I'll call

me camera store today to see if they have one.

Thanks again for taking the time to shoot those photos.!

Who makes the connector 300a... Metz or Rollei? Why is it

needed?

Thanks for mentioning it...

Forgot to mention, FYI, that I discovered that Metz does make a

356 SCA adapter for the 40MZ-3i. Like all the other adapters, it is

a hotshoe module that slides into the bottom of the flash and

provides the actual hotshoe that connects with the camera. Only

problem is that you have to mount it to the Rollei hotshoe in a

vertical position which places it exactly level with the lens, a little

to close for my tastes, and means you can't use the bounce

feature normally.