tor_kviljo1

The tech 70 used ordinary Super Rollex or the slightly bigger Cine-Rollex for 70mm film in 15' cassettes. Both backs have advance lever for film transport. However, Linhof made several other cameras with 70mm nacks, and at least some of them had non-lever film advance: one of them had the handle-advance of film, and of the two others: Linhof Elektric & Linhof Aero-Press, at least the former had electric film advance & thus mecahnical connection between magazine & camera body, not standard lever. These "gear-connected"backs shows up sometimes, I have seen them more often on german e bay than on the US one. Usually go for little money due to few cameras using them.

Just for your info: Linhof made so called "saugkassette" in ordinary sheet film formats for better film holding. A modified cassette with a rubber bulb + tube to cassette to apply vacuum to film plane. For "volume photography" & best registration/film plane: the Grafmatics with 6 metal septums arresting film along the edges gives (in my & others opinion) better film holding than ordinary cassettes + 6 shots in rapid succession.

Answer is relatively simple: You need the lenses where resolution is THE major asset. Thus, You are really looking for rather (no pre-war stuff....) modern lenses for aerial photography. These lenses - designed for high-resolution on thin base (only place where LF thin-base film is used) film in vacuum-flattened magazines gives tremendous resolution. I have seen the MTF figures for the "normal lens" for the Leitz 9 1/2" camera used on FOTONOR (Norwegian aerial survey company) airplanes - they were absultely stunning. But then the lens were wery heavy, nearly no back focus, & well above the $$ 20.000,- mark... However, the lens is able to give tremendous resolution (it's used wide open) and readability of ground on pictures photographed in scale 1:10000 or 1:20000 (ttyical scales for mapping photos). Surplus aerial lenses can be found, og the smaller ones readily mounted in front of a Copal-Sinar shutter for LF use. Zeiss (Topogon - the Biogon is a simplified copy of that one), Leitz & Kern (Swiss) is master brands of aerial photography. Linhof made 4"x5" & 70mm cameras for aerial photography, and used Zeiss lenses for those as long as Zeiss did supply LF lenses. When Zeiss left the ordinary LF market, Schneider lenses (Rodagons) were used instead, but the Zeiss sets fits much higher prices used, and are considered superior. Schneider never made any aerial optics as I know about. Aerial lenses is found on e bay frequently & in government-surplus warehouses (http://www.surplusshed.com/ ). Among others, the gigantic 90mm version (4"x5" coverage - but over two kilos...) of the Zeiss Biogon have sometimes floated out from these places for a few hundred $$.... Good luck!

I would (and have...) gone for a Bronica GS1 outfit. It is a 6x7 addition to my 6x6/6x4.5 Rollei 6006/08 system. I enjoy the big 6x7 format so much (even being very satisfied with the Rollei), that when prices on used GS1 equipment fell & became friendly (It's/were hideously expensive new) I bought a set with 65mm WA & 110mm (extremely sharp) macro + mags' & finders. You will have the metered finder, incl. a rotating one ideal for studio shots upright, and You will have a shoe-mounted TTL flash (not to strong, 32, but good for fill inn) with cordless synck trough the speed-grip - which makes the camera as fast as the Pentax 6x7. I have been veryy satisfied with the GS1 so far, trying to find a 50mm superwide for it. I have used Pentax 6x7 & 67, finding the lack of fast-change magazines negative, and having a few dissappointments with the contrast of the lenses (being used to the Rollei-Zeiss stiff...), but the Boronica did not let me down in that department - very superb optics, and leaf shutters = flash sync at all speed in all lenses as +. You ought to be up & go with two lenses + flash, speed grip & a few mags for $$ 1500 if You shop around a little - MF is terribly under pressure these days (good for us!).

The Sinar Six - co developed by Sinar & Gossen, Were the most sophisticated pinpoint-metering possible for view cameras (and about the same today, but surpassed by the Sinar Booster for Minolta flash meter systems + another flash-meter brand (courtnay?). You will find info about it here: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004HgD It uses the now obsolete mercury battery, but this is easily fixed by putting in a wein zinc-air cell instead (+ a little wrapping to compensate for slightly smaller diametre of the zinc-air sell compared to the PX 625. You will find info on this & other replacements by simply searching for PX 625 I guess, as the matter have been treated in deep. The SinarSix does a terriffic job - espesially in ths studio where time-use & the cumbersomeness of a big slip-in meter is not a big part of a possibly 1/2 hour set up. Taking into account bellows factor, light faklloff & givin possibility to do presise measurement in focus plane of a 4"x5" camera is unsurpassed even today, at best, measuring trough groundglass is possible with spesial metres. Newer Sinar P's have a so called "metering back" where only the probe is put in, making the use of the big cassette as well as movement of the GG unneccesary. For outdoor use however, You might find the somewhat big SinarSix a bit overkill... I have the Newer Mastersix-probe, but have not found an inexpensive Mastersik or Ultrasix meter to connect it to (all models after the original SinarSix had separate meter/probe). Since this one do not need the big cassette & the meter can be used ordinary as well, I intend to have it up & go for this season!

 

Good luck.

taking from memory (my GS1 is in the closet, but the cable release back home) I belive You just buy a 2.5mm jack plug, solder on a 2-lead cable, connect a push-button swich on the end (making the cable release as long as you want) to connect the leads to make the exposure. As a lot of super8mm movie cameras had similar release and they were very common, yuo can find them in the more messy drawers in old photo-shops. Possibility to go wrong here is if the Bronica have a 3.5mm plug instead of 2.5mm: use a ruler and measuer (diametre of plug hole). All wires should be soldered for positive connection.

It seems You have what Linhof called "Heavy duty pro" tripod, or a identical but dowsized version of this. The original had large diametre (50 - 60mm or so) geared columnt where the whole column + gear-mechanism could be removed by loosing one bolt. Linhof made heavy dolly's for using these ons on flat floor, but it also had holes in the spikes for attaching metal-string to keep legs from sliding off when used on flat surface & without dolly. Original heavy duty pro vere extremely expensive, perfectly made tripod for studio use, but to heavy for my use.

I belive that B & H have had used Printo parts in their used-equipment web-pages. However, for that expensive equipment, shipping costs will not be the killing cost so You might as well also check the german ebay site, where Durst equipment is most common. go: http://pages.ebay.de/photo2-index.html

In aerials - You need all the speed you can get from Your lens (to be able to use both high shutter speed & fine-grain film) + best contrast/resolution (due to the nature of the subject - being at least a fair number of acres = lots of detail) + least as possible to go wrong on distance setting (tape lens at infinity position - zoom lenses have two possibilities for messing things up here as parfocality is not necessarily perfect..). Using a f 5.6 MF zoom lens with 14 elements is a bad idea if you can shoot roughly the same scene with a 6-lens f 2.8 prime. However, if cropping is absolutely mandatory, you re using a very high quality MF zoom lens (scneiders are good...) & 100 asa film is OK, You ought to get about 1/500 sek f 8 (i.e. at least 1 preferably 2 stops down) with about 1/2 stop (acceptable) underexposure - that ought to work out OK. I would never go under 1/500 sek when in the air & using less than 150mm lens (MF speaking), shorter shutters speeds of cource when going up in fl. I wouldn't HATE to have the variogon 70-150mm available for aerials when using my 6006/6008's...

The 2509N reel do not take smaller format than european 6.5 x 9 cm (in addition to 9x12cm and 4"x5") as I recall, so You will have to find things out for yourself for this one. One option possible if you use a gentle rotating JOBO & stiff/thick base sheet film is to simply slide the 2 1/4" x 3 1/4" film in the JOBO reel adjusted for slightly less than 120/220 film size. I have done that way back in the past, using strong plastic tape to arrest the sliding part half of the reel to correct distance. Only putting a few sheets in each reel worked OK with stiff sheet film as the outwards tension & thickness of sheets prevented the sheets sliding on top of each other during developement, however, I got trouble doing the same thing with sheets cut from (thin base) 120 film. It is a possible option, but if You are doing b & w - it's way easier to find a number of stainless steel frames (common & inexpensive as they are not used anymore, not 4"x5"...) & develope traditional way.. I used the JOBO approach for E6, would not make the fuss for b & w as reels had to be dismounted & cleaned + the retaped for each developement to avoid cntamination (trapped in the groove of the reel inside tape-winding).

Certainly do not use slide film if you are not photographing exclusively for slide-show!. High contrast & need for bracketing for perfect exposure makes reversal film unconvenient. Using a Cessna (I have been photographing from an old 172 numerous times) - have the rod for the flip-up window removed for convenience (so that the window is held up by the airstream when in flight), or the door off if permitted. I use Fuji Superia-Reala 100 for standard aerial shots - VERY sharp film with excellent latitude capturing details in a very wide range from dark to light. However, if You want absolute sharpness & very vivid (but not necessary totally color-accurate pictures), buy the Konica Impreza 50. Bragged about as the sharpest color-neg around, and compairing scan's from Fuji & Konica indicate they may be right (the sharpest ever being the ektar 25, followed by the Agfa Ultra 50 - both discontinued years ago). Both films readily available in 120 format. I belive (but are not shure) that the Fuji is also available in 220 format. If Your Mamiya can run 220 films & Your lab can handle it (check first - not all labs handle the longer lengths of 120 film) it is a great time & fuzz saver over the frequent change using standard 120 film. But maybe You are only goung to take a roll or three - I usually ends up with no less then a few hundred frames - record being 1500... (30 rolls 35mm Superia & 2 Agiflite 70mm mags - but that were form helicopter - better space than in the cramped cessna)

 

Good luck!

 

(don't forget a mild sea-sickness pill if you are spending more than 1/2 hour in the air and are not absolutely shure that the wobbeling cessna will not disturb your stomack... Photographing in rather hilly & windy Norwegian terrain - I take one for every trip with the cessna, but don't need anything using the helicopter).

Being a rotating-drum print processor, it's to expect that it is designed for being used with wery little chemistry in the drum (as the paper is mounted very close to the inner walls). When using it for film-processing using roll-film/35mm film reels, you need the tank to be about 1/3 filled with chemistry to submerge the spooled film. Depending on lid-type - some paper-dev. tanks cant even hold so much liquid when put in working position on the processor, and "inexpensive" paper processors would not have the power to in-length rotate a tank filled for film-developing if designed solely for paper processing (typical 0.7 litre chemistry for film vs. 0.1 litre for paper developing if same tank is used). Thus - try it for film with tank filled halfway with water - & look for clues to how the motor/gears are coping. The othervice good JOBO CPE were often defeated when uesed with the larger FILM processing tanks - no problem when used with paper tanks. This issue were taken care of by the better built CPE2+

This issue have been discussed on photo.net earlier also. I have the lens (cannibalized from a Polaroid 600SE lens - camera & lenses being nearly identical to the latest line of Mamiya Press cameras - the Universal Press) and use it on 4"x5". The lens is veery sharp - best in center, but do vignett a little in the corners when used on 4"x5", also when stopped down (havn't seen figures on image sircle - this is only from my own experience). However - excellent lens for making panoramas (6x12/4x12 etc) with 4"x5" & for roll-film back use. It have very shallow back-focus, being best to use with bag-bellows & on recessed lensboard. On some cameras, this would make possible the only movement this lens can take with 4"x5" - rear tilt (not pushing image circle). However, the home-making of shutter-cable arrangement necessary when lifting it from a Mamiya Press focussing mount for remounting on LF-panel can make it hard to fit on recessed board. I use mine on Sinar P - works nicely with WA bellows & on flat board on this one. Good luck

Thanks alot for Your work! Use 6006 & 6008i, and this should make it easier to customize a few gadgets for them. Great pictures -espesially some of the old characters newsstand-people portraited in "sell"!

Hello Dan

 

I am running a ATL 3000 - not unlike Your ATL 3, for film. But before buying the ATL 3000, I had a ATL 1000 which I also used for developing 8"x10" chromes (fuji) with success, using the 2800 paper drum (largest drum fitting the ATL-1000/1500) with circulation-ribs on inner valls. However, I had trouble with anti-halo backing on the 8"x10" ektachrome when trying to develope it using the same setup. Apparently, unsatisfying circulation of chemistry between backing & tube-walls left uneven purple stain on base. No problem with 8"x10" fuji-films though, and I see the issue about Ektachrome backing is treated in one of the other posts. Luckily enough - the 3000 handles the expert drums...

have a look at e bay using the option ended auctions for De Vere enlargers. Gives a Q & D direction on value. A De Vere dichro 4"x5" w/o lenses reached only $$ 350 (reserve not met) indicating how pressed the marked for such machines are. Lens selection will be important in determining total sell-value, and in case of good lenses, I belive that the unit would earn most money by selling off the lenses for smaller formats separately - selling the enlarger as a 6x7 & 4"x5" unit only.

I had the (plain) Norita for some time - very solid camera & very compact (much easier to bring along than the Pentax 67). I had the 55mm, 80mm & (rare) 400mm f 4,5. The camera were sold as Graflex Norita and Singer Norita also - in addition to my plain Norita, the Rittreck and (- the way the camera were presented first time): the Warner 66. I have understood that all cameras have identical mount. This is also highly probable as the Norita had a breach-lock mount, not a bayonet mount. This feature means that lenses (or rather - aperture coupling mechanism) would be quite different between lenses from bayonet-system & from breach-lock system. My guess is there were only breache-lock lenses produced for that line (would be totally weired if the two cameras - rittreck & Norita were identical but had two different breach-lock systems). My camera finally hit the ground on a defect shutter - working excellent (but see below) until then. Now using Rollei 600x cameras. Check for proper working shutter before buying: my developed fault in the shutter-breakes making the shutter curtain bump partly back after travel. This is seen as a less-exposed ghostly area along one or both of the sides of the frame. I guess a skilled repairman can adjust it, but I would check that out before using very mouch money. Good luck!

The Agfa ARCUS 1200 as well as several other AGFA scanners do transparencies up to 8"x10" without customizing or stitching. I know there is another brand as well using the same duoplate technology as AGFA (which left business on this field two years back). The Arcus 1200 needs a SCSII controller (often came with the set), but this is an easy to install card - cost "nothing" used. Used ARCUS pop up on e bay at sub $$100 as old-new stock - hard to beat. I now run mine on laptop using a PCMCIA-SCSII card - works excellent.

Thanks for info, Dan.

 

My trouble following Your route is to find a printer able to take the uncommon 70mm long-roll variety of color-neg films. At best, they are able to do 120 rolls. However, doing the printing myself and bringing the roll to lab. for developing is a nice thought. I belived it would be difficult as I expected that the printer & processor worked together so that developing a pre-exposed roll and running it uncut through the processor would be difficult to accomplish. Seems You have worked it out, so I will look if that is possible to arrange also here in Norway. You are of course absolutely right about processor-prices (is how I got my Noritsu for 135mm), but I do not have space for another roller transport machine (got rid of an old Kreonite 16 a few years back and saved a lot of space) and are unsure about perfectness of transport when running continous roll through it but - however, You have obviously tested & OK'ed that.

 

Thanks for info!

 

Tor Kviljo

For critical work, I am a strong advocate of using a waist-level finder with its pop up magnifier. For fast work, a prism finder & speed grip of cource. My Rollei 6008i is home with both, and the quick change 4560 magazines (about 3 seconds to change from vertical to horizontal frame & without turning or moving the camera (try that with Your Contax or H1..)) is a blessing anywere - with second magazine about the size of a cigarette pack (as only the central portion of the mag is taken out!). Both 645's is maybe faster in AF than the Rollei 6008AF, but the other features of the rollei, two comprehensive lens-series (Zeiss & Schneider) + a system allready being with us for 25 years (all SLX equipment work on 6008) would probably make a 6008AF w/4560 mag's WL & prism finder a good choice for Your work. And then - when You find out - 6x6 is a VERY nice format also - and You allready have a perfect camera for it (buy a used $$200 Rollei 6006 back & Your' up & go in that format also..).

Anyone out there able to help me with a weird question?

Using 70mm film for aerial photography, I have used low-res scanning

(i.e. fast) & outprinting on epson 2100 to produce small proofs of

the jobs. selected frames then scanned to high resolution when/as

required. There is no production facility for inexpensive RA-4 prints

from 70mm neg.s so that is not an option (checked it befor I went the

digi-print route). However, there is demand for a larger proof print

(8"x8" or so) and both scanning-times & printing times/cost using the

digi-set up makes this approach less appealing for producing proofs.

Thus, I wonder if I should make a setup with my 4"x5" color enlarger,

printing frames in succession on 8"/250' roll paper & developing in

ordinary RA-4 minilab chemistry (which I anyhow uses for the Noritsu

35mm minilab). Roll paper is the option as pictures are square

(6x6cm) and the volume being produced ie easier to handle on a roll

than as 175 single sheets (number of exposures each roll)....

However, I don't have a roll-transport RA4 machine (and I don't know

if these accept unlimited long rolls of paper - as there might minute

differences in roll-diametres & thus transport speeds between racks -

producing transport trouble), but I do have a Zeiss Aerial-film

rewind-developing machine capable of handeling format up to 10' wide

& at least 200 feet. This is intended for film processing, but do

anyone know if these units also can handle paper-processing (or why

not!). Kodak have lots of info on dev. times & adjustments for rewind

processing of the aerial films, but I do not know anything about

number of passes necessary for RA 4 processing. As a developing unit

for long rolls of paper the unit would be close to perfect - small &

easy to put away, rapid chemistry change, low chemistry usage &

corrosion proof (everything of SS). Any help on dev. of uncut RA4

roll-paper appreciated!

The 6006 backs works on the 6008 except the magazines ASA setting is not transferred to camera. However, Rollei supports this and points out that the wide +/- adjustments of metering possible on the 6008 body makes the use of these backs easy on the 6008's. The mag. function with moving pressur-plate assy where the pressure-plate assy do not stop until it touches camera-body should give totally identical result on 6006 vs. 6008 mag's contary to possible magazine differences on systems where film position solely is the function of the magazine. It is an excellent system, and the possibility to use viewfinders, screens, mags & lenses with You if later upgrading to 6001/6008 makes a start-pack of older system-pieces sensible. I started with a 6006 version 1 & SLX versj. 2 as backup - none of them have failed (the SLX-II now have a new owner), and I later upgraded to 6008i and 4560 V/H quick-shift magazines (wonderful invention!). For lenses on a tight budget: look for the Rolleigons. These are older & made by Tokina for Rollei. Have HFT coating & excellent sharpness & contrast, but as they do not bear t the Rollei & Zeiss (-distagon/planar/sonnar) names, they generally fetch much lower prices. I have the Rolleigon 80/2.8 for the 6006, and is not able to view any difference between that one and the 80/2.8 HFT-PQ-Planar on the 6008i

Monopod is absolutely to a great help, espesielly when using WL-finder. I use 6006 & 6008i. Using monopod, I can rest the camera towards my chest to "save" correct framing and then hit the mirror-up button and subsequently release button. Using the mirror-up without the support of monopod + camera rested to body would be a gamble. The monopod of course helps also w/o using mirror up, but i prefer to use that function as the Rollei has the most minute interior-movement due to shutter operation I ever have come about, so I don't want to loose any of the zeiss/rollei sharpness due to mirror slap.

I had the 2000 FC & FCM once. Liked the cameras & the lenses (had 80/2.8, 150/2,8 + adapted others myself..) However, my reason for buying them were that they (camera bodies) were VERY INEXPENSIVE & thus acceptable even if they are prone to failiure. Also keep in mind that these cameras is not built to take the massive turnaround as the 500 series (where cameras regularly sess 100000 exp). The interior (i opened one of mine after titan shutter curtain crashed..) is very delicate, and my sweedish repair-man explained to me that the 2000 series were not built for the throughtput as the 500CM/ELM. The 200 is very similar inside (according to him) but with cloth focal plane shutter. I would go for a 2000 FC only if camera body dirth cheap (i.e. around $$ 200 - 300 or so in VERY NICE condition & curtain with no more than very small bounce) and only if I were not doing very high throughput. I sold my 2000 equipment after having a shutter breakdown during an important session (photographing a large regatta of wooden sailboats leaving port), and ended up (after a brief Pentax 6x7 period) with Rollei 6006/6008i. Never regretted that (the well-used rollei 6006 body costed about the same as a 2000 FC body - but have been much more reliable..).

 

Good luck

What instruction is needed? It is a conventional stainless steel developing tank but fitted with a spiral with slots for inserting 10 (if I recall right) sheets. These are held in place by a stainless-steel band clipsed on after loading. Widt of holder is adjustable for smaller formats. I didn't get any instructions with mine, but loading & adjustments explained itself. However, I abandoned the tank due to the design as the sentral film guide is prone to touch emulsion side when loading/unloading film, and got a JOBO instead.