adam_friedberg

i always wish ebay would show a warning (THIS DESCRIPTION IS

MISLEADING) on the countless items unscrupulous dealers push

on what must be a legion of suckers and the uninformed. it's good to

hear bob is trying in that arena in addition to his assistance on

this forum.

the tenba 264 has better dividers for lf than the 265 pba. i use this

when travelling by plane and take as much as i can fit. i was warned

off the 265 by a photog who didn't get on a plane with one. tenba

advertises it as the maximum legal size (maybe if it's not too full?).

<p>

i use the lightware bp1420 for all other purposes. it's great but i

wouldn't risk a gate check. the harness is just ok, not enough for a

long hike. i can go for a mile or two with it fully loaded.

<p>

i checked out the lowe protrekker and liked the harness but hated the

dividers. ok for 35, terrible for lf. others love them, though.

bob has more precise info but the kardan bi was made from the late 60's

(68?) until the early 80's. i haven't seen an all silver one, only

tan paint. the one i had was from '72. i would guess yours is one from

the first years of production. rail accessories are out there but not

easy to find or cheap. lensboards and bellows aren't hard to find.

the current kardan bag bellows is much better than the one you have.

jeffrey at lens&repro 212.675.1900 has some accessories and many used

boards. louis at photogizzmo 212.463.0130 often has bi stuff.

<p>

the bi is a great camera, possibly the best made camera i've seen.

my 110 is the same way and i haven't had any problems. i've never

seen this on another copal shutter before. strange. unless yours is

so loose it moves without touching it i wouldn't worry, just be

aware when you are setting the lens.

for some reason 420 is an uncommon focal length, while 210 is one

of the most common. schneider made a 420 repro claron (artar type)

which just covers 8x10 with approx.375mm i.c. otherwise many use

a 450 nikkor or fuji or a 480 apo ronar or (apo,red dot,etc.) artar.

i usually stay with shorter lenses in 8x10 and would go to a 355/360

instead.

bill,

<p>

you don't need to tilt the loupe with a 210. the tilting feature is for

wide angle lenses. re. the superscreen: although a good general

purpose combined screen/fresnel, i no longer use it with my linhof

as the long sides are unsupported and tend to sag. this will happen

with any plastic screen. some put matchsticks in for support but

this wasn't a good solution for me. a real glass screen with fresnel

has proved more accurate and reliable. watch for bowing in your screen.

<p>

as for dof tables, they are more suggestions than anything else.

paul,

<p>

don't worry, i don't work for toyo. adapt as much as you want.

if anyone can find a way around toyo's (or mac's) rediculously

expensive accessory system, more power to them. i think the b&h

cat. was referring to the robos system rail, which isn't sold in

the u.s (as far as i can tell). the new black g/gb rails have a

female end, but it won't accept extensions, only the rail cap.

the old rails are easier in use and make much sense.

<p>

jeffrey,

<p>

i stored my 810g on the 150mm extension rail. this made it very slim

although still monstrous in all other dimensions.

i'll repeat the advice i've given in similar threads. dof with 8x10

is an important consideration. with a 300 @ 1:2 or so (for a tight

portrait) you'll need to stop down quite a bit (f32) to carry focus.

figure in bellows factor and even at 400asa you'll need a lot of

light. the old guys used pretty powerful lights and many of them.

i've shot editorial portraits (head and neck only) with a 360 on

8x10. i had a lot of strobes. i just managed to keep both eyes,

chin and forehead in focus at f22 1/3, but i had to use front tilt

and swing (i was using a p2 with auto shutter and 2 assistants and,

yes, i have very long arms). the ears were way out of focus. the

distortion/compression was not objectionable. i wouldn't have been

successful with a longer lens nor would i want to attempt to shoot

a portrait with a 480 or longer.

<p>

my recommendation is a 14" commercial ektar. they are good quality,

easy to find, cheap (relatively) and hold their value if you resell.

actually, the g system 250mm basic rail is female on both ends.

there are 150mm, 250mm and 500mm extensions which are male on

one end and fixed screw knob on the other. the rails are 39mm

in diameter. the new black extensions look different but work

essentially the same. used chrome rails are cheap and plentiful

especially 250mm ones (louis at photo gizzmo 212.463.0130 has a

couple). toyo usa numbers are made up by mac, most likely to cause

confusion and delays in filling orders. i would buy a used one

unless you must have a black rail. which camera is it for?

the g series rails fit g, gII, c, cx, one of the vx125's. i don't

know if they will work on the d or e.

mark,

<p>

i'm glad we understand each other. i see now what you mean about

book specs, theory and real world application. there is, in many

instances, a big difference between what item x is "supposed" to do

and what it can actually deliver. this shall we say flexible

performance limit or specification allows me to solve unexpected

problems creatively and meet (a.d.'s) often (photographically)

unreasonable requests.

<p>

experience is the best teacher. one can still learn a lot more out

there than in here.

<p>

regards,

<p>

adam

i use the big metal gitzo (1504 i think), the one that has 5 leg

extensions, with a sinar p 8x10. no problem at any angle or height.

weighs about 10 - 12 lbs. without column. the foba is made by gitzo

and costs nearly twice as much. i've used a 1548 once and it was

completely solid - it felt like it would hold anything and everything.

i didn't get it because it's max extension wasn't enough for me.

i personally don't like manfrotto tripods (they feel cheap) but i'm

sure the big one is good.

ok mark,

<p>

i understand what you are saying. my replies were too negative

and i realized it. that is why i ended up encouraging jan to try

it.

as for armchair conjecture, i have experience with color paper.

i know ilfocolor. it isn't cheap. balancing a box will use

several sheets of paper. figuring reciprocity will use more.

making a daylight exposure of f64 @ 8 secs will result in a

very blue picture. going back out and correcting daylight to

tungsten will give a base exposure of (approx.)f64 @ 30 secs and use

more paper. but will reciprocity have an effect @ 30 secs? i can

theorize it will. will there be a variation in color correction @ 30

secs? i would test for it. what will happen under other light

conditions? on an overcast day or on a particularly clear, high ct day?

luckily, ilfocolor has great latitude with small cc variations. if

photoshop can correct any small, or large, variations is there a

limitation on the size of the original (can you scan an 16x20 flat art

original)?

<p>

it will be a lot of work. the question is, is it worth it. to jan

it is. that is great. i want him to try it. i want him not to have

the problems i am conjecturing. i even want him to have excellent

results. you advocate empiricism (as opposed to rationalism). i

recommend empiricism, but worry rationally (or irrationally, as the

case may be).

i understand what you are saying and, in many ways, i agree with

your attitude. encouragement can be much more productive than

dissuasion. that said, considering very possible problems is

realistic. i don't see how alerting someone to these problems is

worse than telling them to go ahead and not worry about it (you

admit you haven't done it either).

<p>

as for the example of the "will this lens cover.." question,

this type of question brings many subjective answers and

opposing answers can both be correct. coverage for one person

is not coverage for another. for an ulf user soft corners may

not rule out a lens as suitable. they may not even notice the corners

are soft. there is a difference between circle of illumination

and circle of good definition, though. if your lens works for

you it doesn't mean it will work acceptably for all. i certainly

wouldn't agree with the many posters who claim their 300m nikkor covers

8x10 (it's got a much bigger circle than advertised), but my purposes

are obviously different.

<p>

this isn't personal. i have no problem with you. as i see it we're

opposite sides of the same coin. as i said before, in the end our

advice is the same.

mark,

<p>

could you give me an example of an empirical theorist?

if nothing else the warnings of how it may not work should

alert him to the potential pitfalls and problems that can be

expected. i don't need to have empirical knowledge of his specific

usage to extrapolate more general concerns. i don't know what

will happen but i'd like to. the dearth of experienced respondents

also may be telling.

<p>

in the end our advice is the same.

nps quickload has been out for about a month now. fuji said

they do not have plans for npc quickloads. at least not for now.

<p>

unofficially, i was told by a sinar rep (will remain unnamed)

their precision holder wasn't better than fuji ql in fuji's

holder for film flatness. and, yes, i know this is just hearsay.

i have a tk 45s and use the 72xl without problems. get a fresnel.

i use the linhof one, although one that is designed specifically

for wa use might be easier in the corners. i have started using

the focus/metering bellows and find they help a lot. a btzs

cloth would be a cheaper option. and definitely get a flashlight.

i carry the brightest one i can fit in my case and they're not

very expensive.

<p>

by the way, do you really use a 210 super angulon on a tk or is it

a typo? or does sa stand for something else?

i would think that even if you had the same batch you would be lucky

to match filtration well enough to not notice the difference.

in my color printing experience i have been lucky to maintain constant

filtration box to box even within batches. it's been my understanding

the manufacturers do not make paper to the same tolerances as film.

also, i would doubt any paper could acheive anything close to 60 lp/mm.

paper negs seem to always look like paper negs, that is, nowhere near

as sharp as film. i have never seen results from what you want to try,

but i have heard the question many times. as always i could be very

wrong. why not try it if you already have the materials? i'd like to

hear what happens.

there was a recent thread about this. most thought it was a bad

idea if i remember correctly. color paper is slow and made for

exposure with tungsten light. filtration might be hard to determine.

unlike color film, color paper is not balanced box to box, so

you would have to redetermine filtration with every new box,

not just new emulsion. all in all it sounds like a lot of work.

the only real disadvantage of a p as opposed to a p2 is it's age -

the newest p is from 1984, the oldest from 1970. functionally

they are nearly identical with the main difference being in the

swing tilt controls (the p2 has separate knobs, the p a single

knob with a switch to change function (the operation is still

independant)). p2's come with a metering back and the rail clamp

II, whereas most p's, i think, will have a nonmetering back unless

an upgrade was made (i could be wrong about this but my p and others

i know all have nonmetering backs) and the standard, open rail clamp.

p2's have nice rubberized grip knobs, p's have plastic knobs.

p2's are all black, p's are black and silvery. both take all the

same accessories. other than that, unless i'm forgetting something,

they are basically the same camera.

<p>

i think the p is better made than the new p2's. mine is probably

20-22 yrs.old and is as solid as a new p2 if not more so. the new

sinars appear very plastic-y to me.

<p>

forget about the f1/f2. you can get a very good p for the price of

a new f1. if the weight is a problem (my list shows the 4x5 p at

13.1 lbs. w/o lens or shutter) check out another camera such as a

linhof tk45s or arca swiss. personally i don't mind the weight of my

810p (about 15 lbs.) but then again i was using a toyo 810g (20lbs.)

and i usually have an assistant.

<p>

also, in my opinion, forget about the x. it doesn't have indexing

click stops (the p does, and plenty of them) which i find to be a pain.

you can convert formats (whether sinarbron admits to it or not) but

it's not nearly as convenient as the p/p2. and the lack of metering

back is only a problem if you think you'll ever use it (i know i

won't).

<p>

you should look at the gearing and see that it is smooth with no

backlash. the swing/tilt switch should be crisp. make sure the

bellows are in good shape and the release levers on the standards

don't have too much play. check the bubble levels - usually one

is dry. make sure the gg is an original sinar if you want to use

the asymmetric movements. check that the rail clamp tightens properly

and check the coarse focus locks are tight. new sinar accesories aren't

cheap, neither are replacement parts, so the less that is wrong with

the camera the better deal it is.

<p>

i think the p is a great camera and, unless you are backpacking around,

would recommend it highly. accessories are easy to come by both new

and used. sinarbron offers great support on new (current) equipment

but they don't care much about older models (they will gladly service

them, though). sinar in switzerland is much more helpful regarding

older cameras. you can email questions to info@sinar.ch and you'll

get a quick and cheery reply. i've emailed identical questions to

switzerland and sinarbron - so far the swiss have answered every one

while the locals have yet to respond at all.

<p>

on the other hand, if money is no object get a new p2. not having

to switch between swing and tilt might just be worth the extra $4-5k

and there is something nice about having a brand new camera.

... or look at the groundglass through the stopped down lens (from

in front of the camera). if you can see the corners of the groundglass

....

try a compendium shade with a mask and see the difference for yourself.

toyo has been giving away compendiums with new 45aII's. most, if not

all, manufacturers sell some kind of lens shade, even if they don't

promote them.

i don't know which polaroids those are on ebay but i'm guessing

if they have leaf shutters and are cheap they are unconverted

110a's or 110b's. if so there is no film for these. they can be

converted to take available pack film but, again, this is money

(about $250 last time i checked). the converted ones usually

sell for $450 or more.

<p>

i don't know everything about polaroids but i have seen a lot of

them. i have never seen or heard of a cheap polaroid with x-sync

and a leaf shutter (with adjustable speeds) that takes modern,

available polaroid material.

<p>

maybe you will be lucky and find someone who doesn't know what

they have selling a 180 or 195 cheaply.