markd

Jeffrey,

Look at http://www.butzi.net/reviews/readyquick.htm.

Paul has a fantastic site that explains many of the advantages and disadvantages on film holders.

FWIW I have just purchased two NEW (still in boxes with warranty cards and original instructions) Graphmatics in Aust for AU$100 each.

I also have four double darks. I reckon 20 shots per day should be enough to keep me going as I have a 612 RFH for colour also.

Regards,

"If you can bear to hear the trugh you've spoken twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,

or watch the things you gave your life to broken and stoop, and build them up with worn out tools"

Gents,

Much of the light hearted banter here is really immaterial. We should all know by now that there is much more to the prediction of the reliability of any object, be it a camera, television, or any other product type than the observations from isolated viewers. We would have all experienced from time to time a faulty device from what is supposedly a quality manufacturer. Faults do happen with cameras as has been pointed out to me, and you, on this forum. One of the most important aspects for us the photographer is having someone who cares at the end of a phone who is prepared to fix it.

From my observations of manufacturers in the large format market, they are all keenly interested in supporting their product and giving the photographer the best service they can. Having said that I am sure there can be some who would point out bad service they have received from such a LF manufacturer. In line with the market force explanations given by a previous reader, you guys will determine who will be in business in years to come and this is an excellent forum in which we can show the manufacturers we are interested in their service, their products, what is good about them in terms of features and what we would like to see. I don't think they really care who was the first manufacturer: more like who will be the last manufacturer. Whilst we have a democracy and open market that offer freedom of choice we will always get a player who will try to cut the market price by building something cheaper: if it works and you get the service that will be fine; else he will fail.

I have just bought the Ebony 45SU. I was tossing up between that and the Canham DLC and the Gandolfi Variant Level 3. I'm glad I purchased the Ebony but I am sure the others I mentioned and many more could do the job alsmost as well (almost only because of the assymetrical movements).

Good luck to you all, lets give manufacturers our ideas on what we need and like about their services and products for the future; lets keep nit picking about the past out of the forum.

No this is not an urban legend. Here in australia we have a company that sell correctly weighted rocks for putting in the ballast bag that you hang from your tripod to stabilise it with LF cameras in strong winds. You only have to specify what the wind strength will be you expect to be experiencing, the height of your tripod above ground level, the weight of tripod, the weight of the load, and the fulcrum distance the camera load will be above ground level and you can buy the perfect weighted rock. It is handy if you also specify the size of the bag you will be hanging from the tripod so you can get the correct density of rock: heavier densities will give a correspondingly smaller rock so you can be usre it will fit the bag. For a special order item you can specify any particular color you want too. You may need to buy more than one rock if you expect different wind speeds or tripod heights. If you want to buy some please email me the details as listed above and I can advise rock and freight costs. If you have any special color requirement please advise.

Mark

p.s. I have just completed a three month application to our local government train organisation getting a permit to shoot (photographs of course) on their train property.

Gents, thans lots for the info and the pointer to the lens tutorial.

Problem now solved.

Much appreciated.

Mark

Is there a way to calculate what the closest focusing distance is of

a lens, when there is insufficient bellows length to extend to the

maximum (or 1:1) distance capable of the lens.

For example: Take the Fuji 240A with a flange:focal plane length of

237mm. I am assuming that it requires the 237mm to focus at infinity

and 2 x 237mm = 474mm to focus at 1:1. If the bellows can only go to

400mm is there a way to calculate how close the lens will focus.

I am aware one can get/make extension tubes as an aid to reducing

this distance but a method of making the calculation would be a good

aid in deciding which lens may be usable on a camera where the

purchaser does not necessarily require extremely short focusing

capabilities: e.g. landscape photographers.

Thanks in advance for advice.

Mark

Gents, thanks greatly for your advice. It seems as if the Fuji 240A gets the vote for portability, quality and cost. My Ebony 45SU is still on the assembly line in Japan and they can fit Fuji lenses there for me at assembly. That is the way to go.

Many thanks for all contributors.

Happy photography.

Gents, that is great advice and much appreciated. How do things like Goertz Dagors, Red Dots, Tele Artons, Wollensaks, Voitlanders go. I hear alot about the Red Dots. Are they as good as the others you have mentioned, though by the looks of things the Fuji 240 seems to be a pick. How does one tell the difference between the Fuji 240A and other Fuji 240's. How do they compare with the newer APO from the schneider and Rodagon offerings? I have seen these second hand/used in Adorama and Calumet & B&H from US$700 approx. A bit high but I may be able to stretch it if they are worth the extra.

Thanks again.

Mark

Having just purchased tne 72XL, 150XL and an Ebony camera (still

waiting for it to be built) I am slightly short of funds but want to

get a good lens from 210 - 270 range. I see many used lenses in the

US market (I am in Oz) but do not know the qualities. Obviously, the

XL's are great but I dont have the funds for one and I see posts that

say it is an overkill (weight, cost & coverage) for a 45.

Can anyone please suggest reasonably priced lenses in the price range

of approx US$400 - US$600 (and reputable sources in the US) that

would give good reproduction. We mainly shoot landscape colour or

Ilford SFX or street scenes in B&W.

Thanks in advance,

Mark

Ed, That is a fair comment. However, who were the people who were looking forward to it? If they were professionals then I expect they will be a bit disappointed as they are probably used to a more technically advanced product. If a new comer to the market, then it will probably serve their needs quite well. If it is used with thought it will perform as required, after all, who doesn't check the view on the GG before taking the shot? Again, it is a matter of you get what you pay for. It would appear to me that if you are a professional and were hoping for a fantastic camera for a small price then you have been listening to too many fairy godmother stories.

Plastic is not the main point: suitablity for purpose at a low price is.

Regards,

Mark

Mark

"Cameras consist of only four essential parts: a camera body, a film holder and/or transport mechanism, a lens and a shutter" The Ansel Adams Guide, Book 1 - Basic Techniques of Photography, p 23. And further "The body of a camera is simply a light tight box that serves as the supporting structure for the lens and the film holder" ibid p 23.

I own a 45CF (Eric, thanks for the God Bless), a Super Angulon 72 XL, a Super-Symmar XL Aspheric 5.6/150mm, horseman 6x12 RFH and a sturdy Manfrotto tripod. When I first received the 45CF there was a slight movement in the front bed which I remedied by adjusting the front rails: loosen four screws move rail in, tighten four screws. I use the camera for panoramic and landscape use. It is fine. If I had purchased a more expensive camera, I could not have afforded the lenses or the RFH, both of which are vital for my needs. The tripiod holds the camera steady, especially if I put my bag suspended from it with a couple of rocks in it, the shutters on the lens are accurate, the glass is perfect, the RFH and the dark slides work easily, the intense screen gives good GG viewing (I even use a dark throw over cloth around the GG for extra vision). The box is a light tight box.

My photographs are good (at least I think so) and I can carry it all with my Pentax 67II and two lenses quite easily. That is what I call hands on experience. Eugene, I can't see where in your message of December 6th you said you had "actual hands on experience". You did say that you have talked to trusted dealers, three of them, but have they actually used it and would they make more profit by selling you a more expensive camera??

And again, I support another member of the forum (sorry I can't remember where I saw it) but formula 1 racing cars are made from similar "plastic". So are a miriad of other highly technical instruments and optics.

It is a good and useful camera for what you pay for it. Do you think those who own a Rolls Royce or Lincoln Continental say all other cars are junk just because they did not cost as much or use similar type of materials.

This site is a good forum. Lets keep it that way with objective reports, not hearsay.

Best wishes to all,

Mark

As it is publicly known, the Pentax 67 only shows approx 90% of the

FOV in the TTL viewfinder. I have heard there is a method of

obtaining a Pentax WLF, attaching to it a Bronica GS1 prism and

voila, there is a TTL adaption for the Pentax 67 with 100% FOV. Has

any one heard of this method that has further details on how to

construct the adaption.

Thanks,

Mark

I have heard there is a method of obtaining the full 100% viewing area for the 67. Something like getting a WLF and attaching a Bronica GS1 Prism to it to make one TTL unit with 100% viewing area. Can anyone help with the precise details.

<p>

Thanks,

<p>

Mark