adam_friedberg

check out january's ART FORUM magazine - cover story on gursky

and two critical reviews. also te neues just reissued the big

coffee table book for a reasonable price (unfortunately the

reproduction quality is far below the original schirmer/mosel

edition but you get what you pay for). gursky's work is not

hard to find, nor is the work of his contemporaries thomas

struth, axel hutte and thomas demand, all of whom shoot large

format and print "big." see the work yourself and you'll

understand the scale. i don't see it as big for big's sake.

i don't need to defend gursky but this discussion has gotten off

the subject. gursky is an artist who makes photographs for

exhibition, not publication. he does not need to please photo

editors at magazines. like it or not, i don't think one can

lump it in with glossy "pattern and colour." he is currently

one of the most celebrated artists in the world and is having

a major retrospective at moma (this alone should afford him

some artistic credibility). i have seen his large prints and they

are very impressive, but of course if you view them from 1 or 2

feet they look grainy (many are shot on 8x10 and are more than

10x enlargements). while there has been a "dumbing down" of

society and culture, i don't see how it relates to gursky's work.

if anything a background in art history is needed to fully appreciate

the photographs (usually met with charges of being too intellectual,

not too dumb).it may not be your cup of tea but it is hardly content

free. if you are in nyc i would suggest seeing his show at moma and

reading a little background information, then judge for yourself.

just to note - i wear glasses and have no problem using the reflex

finder. weight is minimal. volume on the other hand is roughly

equivalent to five 4x5 film holders (although i'm sure some could

pack it smaller than i do).

i stand corrected - sorry for the misinformation. the 2x/4x

capability makes the focussing/metering bellows even more

attractive. as for their bulkiness you should ask bob salomon

directly as he can give you the dimensions and probably the

weight. it should be only slightly heavier than the bag bellows

and roughly equivalent in size.

i use the reflex viewer and would recommend it. it disassembles

into 2 pieces that are somewhat compact to store. you will

need a fresnel or superscreen with it. the folding focussing

hood is not great. the bellows viewer - a bag with a 2x loupe

built in - is a very good option if you like the inverted image

(it is also more compact and probably cheaper than the reflex

hood).

i'm not sure i understand the question. infinity focus is just

that - the lens is one focal length from the film plane (42")

and the lens will be focussed on infinity. but you are asking

how far into the landscape the lens would be focussed. do you

want to know the hyperfocal distance or what the near focus

would be if focussed on infinity? if you want to calculate

the focussing track should you then be more concerned with

the highest reproduction ratio you plan to achieve? it could

be lack of sleep keeping me from understanding what may be a

simple question but now i'd like to know.

schneider in germany just sent me some specs on this series (w.a.

g-claron). the 210 is f11, i haven't heard of an f10 but there

is a faster (f8?) 210 w.a. g-claron at lens&repro which no one

seems to know about. the angle of view @ f22 is 86 deg. image

circle @ f22 and 1:1 is 800mm - thus should be 400mm @ infinity.

the filter size is 105mm. they are only listed as barrel lenses

so if in a shutter it was most likely done afterwards. recommended

for between 1:2 and 2:1. 4 elements in 4 components. the BIG

problem seems to be performance at infinity - distortion grows

rapidly as you get about 10 deg. out from the center of the

i.c. it seems this lens is really only good for repro work.

david,

what are "compressible cue sticks" and where did you find them?

i have used a superscreen for a couple of years and think it is

a good compromise. it can warp under certain conditions - it is

plastic. check the focussing screens threads for previous discussions.

i also use a similar screen made by bill maxwell. it is better than

the superscreen but also a little more expensive. i think it's worth

the money.

as the previous answer stated, the main difference is the yaw free

base tilts on the GX. while these are nice to have - especially

if you are doing mostly tabletop - they are not necessary. i know

many pro still life photographers who can afford (easily) the GX

but use the G and don't care about base tilts. if you're concerned

about money don't get the GX or the GII, just get a used G (there

are always several very good examples on the used market for about

$1000 to $1500). the only differences between the G and GII are

the knobs - rubberized on the GII - and the color of the rail and

front and rear "U" frames - chrome on the G, all black on the GII.

to me this doesn't justify a $1500 difference.

the shutter you have will most likely go beyond f45 even though it is

not marked. you don't need a new shutter. if you need to be more

exact than estimating one more stop from f45 you can get a new

aperture scale, perhaps from steve grimes.

1. for fuji: yes for kodak: i don't think so and i wouldn't

try it (at least not the double sheet packets).

2. ditto to the tupperware. get one just a little larger than

the neg and about 1 1/2" to 2" deep. fill with water. put first

neg emulsion up, the rest emulsion down. tip: put a layer of

paper towel inbetween each neg and you won't have any scratches.

after many years of doing it this way i haven't lost one neg.

through various threads it seems the 210 g claron will cover

8x10 (reportedly an i.c. of 345 @f45 at infinity). hyperfocal

setting will bump it up a little higher. my question is to

anyone who has actually used one - are the edges sharp? will

it withstand a 5x or 6x enlargement or is it contact print

only? the other lens i'm looking at is the sironar s 210.

it will cover and give maybe 328mm i.c. at an average hyperfocal

setting (22ft @f32), but this doesn't give much room. is it possible

to increase the i.c. by stopping down more on the rodenstock?

is the only real solution the 210xl or super angulon? i do color

work almost exclusively. any insights are greatly appreciated.

i don't think it's possible. the rear element is too large. the regular

90/5.6 will work. call hp marketing and they can give you a definite

answer.

i have lenses in both of these shutters and have noticed they both came with and are mounted with spacers (on toyo and technika boards).

the compur doesn't seem to need the spacer but the copal looks as

if it must use it. does the spacer effect the lens' nodal point on

either shutter or are these shutters designed to be the length of

the spacer in front of the lens board?

in re to john's question:

i've never left the bellows on and they are as good as new.

i've seen other tk bellows with pinholes and crimps - due to

mishandling. i decided to store the camera without bellows

after another user recommended it (after replacing his with

6 months of use).

if you end up with the toyo 810m look for a toyo pro pan head II and

the anti twist plate. mac still has a few of these heads. i got one

for my 810g and it's great - it will hold any camera, is lighter and

more compact than the big manfrottos, and the anti twist plate makes

the connection much more secure than any qr and almost as fast.

it's a little pricey but worth it - if you look you might find one used

for nearly the same as the 3057 new.

the best is linhof 3 way levelling head 003663. i use it and love it.

i wouldn't use a ballhead but agree with the previous choices.

i also agree the 1228 is too small. i've tried it and found it

unstable. get a 1325 or 1348. the gitzo levelling base (1321) is

a very useful accessory.

one word of advice: fold and store the camera without the bellows

attached (or with the bag attached if you have it). it takes an

extra 45 secs or so but you'll save yourself having to buy a new

bellows (around $550). linhof says it's designed to be left on,

and it is, but you can screw it up if you're not good at folding it.

better safe than sorry. also you will save corner wear as there's

nothing stopping the side of your case rubbing the bellows every

time you use the camera.

i carry mine in either of two packs - a lightware bp1420 for around

town and a tenba p264 for travel. the lightware is not compact and

it's not particularly good for long hikes but the interior space and

protection is hard to beat. the tenba should be more up your alley.

it has a good amount of space and protection, a better divider system

than the lowe packs, is much lighter than the lowe packs, and fits

airplane overhead compartments. the harness is ok at best, not as good

as lowe, but good enough for loads under 40-50 lbs. anything smaller

and you'll have a hard time fitting everything.

i have used mine on a tech iv. although expensive like all linhof

products it is worth it. very compact and easy horiz/vert switching.

you'll need a fresnel or superscreen.

i am looking for a lens in this focal length for 810 use. any comments

or recommendations from users of these lenses?

the standard calumet bellows will not allow much if any movement

with a 90. you will probably need to use front rise to shoot buldings.

i'm pretty sure you won't need a recessed board until you use a 75

or shorter (i never have). get the bag.

you'll want a mamiya 7. since the II came out used ones are easy to

find and not that expensive. it is the only camera, i think, which will

satisfy your requirements. 645 is too small (except the contax -

amazing image quality but too big a camera). fuji 690's are great

but the rangefinder is not easy to work with, at least not as easy to

focus as the mamiya. plaubel makina 67 would be perfect if not so

delicate. 4x5 press/technical cameras are faster than fields or

monorails but are still slower than using the mamiya and much less

versatile - if you don't use movements, if you shoot mostly handheld,

etc. (really, how often will you be in a situation with a press

camera when you can shoot handheld? those i know who use and love

their graphics never seem to handhold).

the mamiya has great image quality, is lightweight, has a very good

rangefinder, and is reliable. rent or borrow one.

i'm not trying to turn you away from lf, it just sounds to me that

it's not currently appropriate for your needs.

has anyone on this forum used this 210 for 8x10 and if so what are

your impressions?

i know the specs say it won't cover but i have heard schneider

underrates its lenses i.c.'s. i assume it will just cover at

infinity but the corners may be soft. a previous thread mentions

people succesfully using 210 g-clarons which have significantly

less coverage (at least on paper).