john_ries

Thanks Tor and Dan, I already checked with RK as I am familiar with them since I've owned a couple labs in the past. The German Ebay sight might be a good idea, I didn't know there was such a thing. Thanks guys.

 

Any other ideas would be greatly appreciated as well.

Where can I locate used Durst Printo components such as tank with

rack, dryer module and replenishment system? Anybody have any leads

other than Ebay?

Consider the costs, why incur the high costs of technology when film has been and will always meet the needs of all uses just fine and it requires no new investments. It saves time overall. The equipment has higher resale value. It is less complex in nature. To top it off film is photography, digital is electronic imaging. I know the last comment will stir up the waters with those converted to digital. Listen to your publisher and printers, forget all the digital marketing hype unless you are a press photog and speed is everything.

I use a Mk1 Benbo and it is plenty sturdy. I agree with Richard Tynan about it's suitability. If you extend the column out all the way and place a heavy load on it physics tells you that it will not be the steadiest thing in the world. Use a support to steady teh center column at full extension. I use a Bogen articulated arm on occassion if necessary to steady various camera tripod setups. Works like a charm when that little bit of extra support is needed.

There have been 5 different generations in the evolution of these heads. The old versions are no where near the same as the new ones.The outer shell may appear similar but that is where it ends. The internal plates have been redesigned, the friction adjustment is different and there have also been some minor changes as well through the generations.

 

The last two generations no longer suffer from occassional lock up if they are not used properly. Unless you can get a *real good* bargain on an older one and are able to identify which generation it is then you are better off just buying a new one. The used prices on the older heads are ridiculous, for a few dollars more you can buy the latest design with a 3 year warranty.

Fredrik,

 

Contact Precision: http://precisioncameraworks.com/Pages/monoball_core.html

 

They are the US autorized service center for Arca ballheads. Get in touch with Bob, he's a friendly guy and he may have some tips for you. Sorry, I don't know how to take the things apart but I can tell you there is absolutely no play in the new B1 head multifunction knob.

Wimberley!! Their plates are top quality and won't slip out of the clamp if it accidently loosens. The people are great and customer service second to none. They make a brand new design that is a "generic" design that will fit all sorts of different equipment, It has a negative camber to the surface so it grips equipment tightly not needing a lip to prevent swiveling.

 

I use their P10 plates.

Gloria,

 

It sounds like you have the factory Hasselblad back for Polaroid film. It's either a model 80, model 100 or the newer Polaplus or Polabasic. The model 80 takes Type 88 B/W film or Type 89 Color film. Those films are very hard to find and they may not even be available any longer. The model 80 back said "Hasselblad" directly above the opening in front of the darkslide. It uses a quite large darkslide unlike other Hasselblad Polaroid backs. The model 100 does not have a protruding glass plate like the model 80 and it uses a smaller darkslide. There were several variations of the model 100 made. I believe it uses the 600 series films but I'm not positive. The Polaplus and Polabasic are the latest versions and they both use 600 series films. There are also the NPC polaroid backs, the MF1 and the MF2, the model 1 is for standard bodies and the model 2 is for motorized bodies. They use 600 series films. They are the most popular but they also make another model or two. There are also older models made by Arca Swiss and Wisner also.

I can't tell you what would be best for your needs but I can tell you what I have experienced with two different heads. I had purchased a Linholf Profi II ballhead and it was very nicely made but I found it inadequate for a Hasselblad and telephoto combination that weighed 12 lbs total. The problem was with the friction adjustment, there was either too little friction support or it would be too tight. Part of this is caused by the leverage arm of the weight of a long lens extending so far beyond the ballhead axis. I sent that head back. I agonized which head to try next but because I own a Arca 4x5 I knew the quality of their products so I purchased the latest generation B1 which is the 5th generation of this head with the new "PMF" feature. PMF stands for "Progressive Motion-related Friction-control)which is a brand new feature of the latest generation of the B1 heads. These heads are without doubt light years ahead of others that I have handled as well. They are just in a totally different league. Now with that high praise I can tell you as a fact that they have their faults too, although they are minimal. I found that with my Hasselblad 553ELX and 500mm Zeiss telephoto that I experienced a challenge to get the friction set correctly for the 12lb load to allow the camera and lens to move without strain and yet not fall or tilt easily when they were let hold of. The Arca B1 head itself is rated for 90 lbs but I believe that is a rating for a load directly above the ball axis, not on a cantilever but then again it may not be. I haven't tried more than 12 lbs on the head as yet. Again, the friction adjustment is tricky to set at first until you get used to it and understand it. The instructions are a bit confusing on the head and they neglect to indicate that the numerical reference ring for the main control knob can be rotated and set to a specific friction point that you set for any particular piece of equipment. That basically means that "zero" on the tension scale is not necessarily zero for all equipment, you would change it for different equipment loads. It's a nice feature that you can change the zero reference point for particular equipment mounted on the head but they don't even tell you about it. Once you figure it out that the scale can be adjusted then suddenly the head becomes easier and more predictable to use. I don't like the small panning lock knob,I think it should be a lever or a larger knob. It's small in diameter so it's not easy to get a good grip on it. I use the head on a Benbo and it is a good combination albeit not the lightest arrangement in the world but you must have some weight for a steady setup when working with a tele. Some of my experience may be because the head is so new and it still needs to break in a bit. All in all the Arca head is the way to go in my view. It's not perfect but it is next to perfect and better than anything else I've seen. It would handle your 400 and body with no sweat and be rock solid. The new (PMF featured 5th generation) heads come with a 3 year warranty also. I would look for a head that easily handles 20 pounds but remember the friction controls are very different from the Arcas to the others. Also, I can't speak highly enough of the Wimberley QR mounting plates and components, top quality, excellent business. Hope this helps, good luck Ray.

I agree with Ellis regarding what the Markins is. I had a Linhof Profi II and it was a nicely made head and very compact and fairly light but it didn't have the motion arm capability of a head like the new Arca B1 which I have now. It is a fabulous head and deserves every bit of the praise it gets and then some. I have the latest "PMF" version which has the "progressive motion - related friction - control" according to Arca Swiss. Don't ask me what that means technically speaking with the heads construction. All I can tell you is save your $$ and buy a brand new one and I don't think you will ever regret it. Forget buying used ones, they fetch almost as much as a new one and they have no 3 year warranty and they are not the current version with the newer "PMF" changes. This thing supports my Hasselblad 553ELX with a 500mm and a couple extension tubes in rock solid fashion and it can be moved about in silky fashion. The best head, no question about it. Forget the Markins. I don't see how you think the B1 is heavy, I think it is light. By the way I use it on a Benbo and I don't consider the setup heavy at all.

I own a RTS and a 167MT currently and several zeiss lenses. None of this equipment has ever given me any problems whatsoever. I also previously owned a 159MM and that camera also was problem free. I do feel the RTS is the most robust of all that I have owned but I really like the size and smooth operation of the 167MT and it has a lot of bang for the buck. The RTS is without question the dependable workhorse. I have had no experience with the latest bodies but just like any other brands the more electronics the camera has the less dependable it becomes and the harder and more expensive to repair.

Mike........

 

That is not the problem, the slides are mounted in Gepe glass mounts. There is some sort of problem with the autofocus mechanism itself. There are two electric eyes that are mounted in a plastic carrier that apparently slide on two metal rails and there is a sliding mechanism off to the side of that assembly that seems tight to me and doesn't move easily (it seems that way to me at least). Perhaps someone else has one of these rolleis and can tell me how much free movement should exist in these components or give me other tips.

I've got a Rollei P66S medium format projector that is having a

problem with the auto focus function.

 

The auto focus works and so does the manual focus. The problem is that

the auto focus drifts. When the first slide is focused manually the

projector will then start to shift the focus, it won't remain in the

sharp focus setting. It continues to drift the focus until it

ultimately pushes the lens completely out of the projector body. Once

in awhile it can be focused manually and the focus will not drift but

as soon as a slide change is made the drifting starts again. The

slides are mounted in Gepe anti-newton glass mounts.

 

If anybody has any info that can help me out with this problem or

knows someone or a place that can help please reply to this message.

 

Thanks much..........John

I think you have a problem that is not specific to NPC backs inparticular. You may be dealing with a unique situation with your back. I say this because my NPC MF-1 Polaroid back works just fine. The images are sharp. Call NPC and discuss the issue with them.

You have received lots of good advice. I am in agreement with the Rolleiflex TLR for value for the $$$ except it does not meet your needs of an interchangable back. I have one with the 2.8 Planar and the sharpness is astounding. I think it is comparable to if not better than the Hasselblads I have (500 C/M and 553 ELX with several lenses). I would say my Distagon 50mm is a pretty good match to the Planar on my Rollei. The Rollei is simplicity to the utmost degree. The primary disadvantages are the lack of interchangable backs and focal length limitation. Focusing can be tricky since the finder is not bright and it is certainly not a quick process. The camera is lightweight and well suited for street shooting. The quality of the Rollei is second to none. If all you are looking for is a 6x6 frame and don't need all the bells and whistles that a SLR style camera affords then a TLR is a great choice, especially the Rollei. I've used the Bonica ETRSi system before but I was not overly impressed with the lenses nor the quality of some of the camera components. I've owned a RB67 Pro S in the past and it is too bulky and heavy in my opinion unless it is primarily used in the studio or on a tripod, forget hand holding the beast. I also don't think the Mamiya optics are that great (I prefer the Bronica optics, even though they are not great) but perhaps the RZ system is better and I would assume the newer lenses would be sharper. Don't ignore Hasselblad by any means. They are not as expensive as you might think. You can aquire some very nice, very clean equipment at very reasonable prices, just shop around. You can get a nice body, 80 and an A12 back for $800 if you are patient and look around, make sure you get an Acute Matte focusing screen though (easiest to retrofit the 500 C/M and newer). There are some fantastic bargains on the "C" lenses which are superb optics, much better than Mamiya and Bronica. You might want to look at a Pentax 67, just a big version of a 35mm, pretty good optics too (expensive Polaroid back though). There are plenty of other nice medium format systems on the market as well. Best advice is that you go to some stores and shows and look at as much medium format equipment as you can and get a feel for what you like, then ask (not the dealer) about quality, dependability and durability and then find out the weaknesses and then go shopping knowing what to watch out for, be patient. If you are shooting in various formats like 35, 2 1/4 and large formats try and select equipment that has similar optics, in other words if you are shooting a Nikon with Japanese glass then stick with a medium format system like Bronica that has similar optical characteristics. For example I use Zeiss glass on the Hasselblads, Zeiss glass on 35mm Contax and Rodenstock on all the large format gear. When I use various formats on the same subject or scene the results are similar. Standardize as much as you can, eliminate variables as much as possible. When you select your medium format gear keep resale value in mind also. Good luck.

I shoot with Contax 35mm, a Galvin 6x9 view, a 6x7 roll film back, Hasselblad system, a Arca Swiss 4x5, a Calumet C1 8x10, Rodenstock large format lenses.

 

Now, having used all that equipment on various subjects with various films my conclusion on your original question is that the 4x5 wins over the 6x6 or any of the 6x formats, period. To me if the time and situation permits, the 4x5 is the ideal format. The 8x10 is stunning and I can only imagine what an 11x14 or larger would be like.

 

With that said the 6x formats are beautiful in their own right. As one person previously said degree of enlargement is a big issue. A 35mm Kodachrome is stunning in the right situation. The bottom line is applying the right equipment to the right situation to achieve the correct result for the overall objective is what is important. That's why to do various jobs right you need a variety of equipment because nothing does everything equally well.

 

Depending on what you are intending on shooting should determine what format system a person should select. I agree with you the 6x6 doesn't rival a quality 4x5.

Whooops......my mistake I meant that I agreed with Ted, got the names mixed up, sorry folks and Andreas.

I realize this is a belated reply to the original question but I wanted to share my view in case someone else is also looking for similar info. I own a Hassey set with a 500C/M and several lenses and the 250 "C" is among them. My experience has shown that the 250 is an overall fine performer. The images created with the lens are fine. I see no evidence of chromatic abberation and the images are plenty sharp. Due to the limited anti flare coating on the "C" lens one must be aware of the coating limitations in high flaring conditions and shade the front of the lens appropriately but with that said I have had no flare problems. The Compur shutters are extremely dependable in the "C" lenses. Frankly I believe most people considering lenses are too influenced by technological hype and way over spend for their needs. In many cases modern lenses are only at a significant advantage on a optical bench. Apo lenses require the use of a tripod and very careful shooting technique to acheive their ultimate performance limits. There are simply too many variables to influence image quality beyond the lens. In my opinion the aim is to purchase quality glass but don't get ridiculous about what is *needed*. If your work is being reproduced in print or is being digitized, or being projected then you start losing image quality the first generation after the exposed film. The basic Zeiss glass is the objective of owning a Hasselblad, I wouldn't have one if they didn't use Zeiss optics, there is no need for the latest optical technology unless you are a specialist scientific technical photographer or engaged in a similar profession shooting in a highly critical niche. If you are shooting cookie cutter landscape, portrait, commercial and wedding stuff then the old "C" lenses will easily do a remarkable job at a reasonable investment.

I agree with Andreas' remarks and a couple of the others.