michael_kadillak3

As recently conveyed to me from Richard Boulware for Linhof geared

mechanisms from the Linhof Service department, a light coating of

Vaseline and you should be good to go.

Maybe that Canham guy is onto something?

 

<p>

 

My 5x7 metal is as light as a 4x5.

Use compressed air and blow your film holders clean in another room

of the house. If you are using a bathroom, I remember reading another

post on this forum whereby in hotel rooms to keep the dust down

another photographer found success against the dust animal by running

some hot water to put a bit of steam in the air. That will settle the

dust, but you do not want to get to excessive with it so that

condensation starts to occur.

 

<p>

 

Good Luck

I read the same post. As in the past, Kodak has not been very

consistent in the information that they post to the public. As long

as they are producing 4x5 and 8x10 B&W films, the worst case will be

to aggregate enough 5x7 shooters to purchase a 30-35 box batch. While

it is troubling to be on the roller coaster with this format, I found

the best way for me to deal with this situation. I bought a 17 cubic

foot chest freezer for my film and paper last weekend and plan on

using it to the degree that I need to. I can tell you one thing - you

can put a LOT of film and paper in that sucker.

 

<p>

 

There is always Iford. They still offer their B&W films in 5x7.

 

<p>

 

Good shooting.

From a user of the Canham MQC 5x7, I can tell you that after many

exposures with this camera, I had no problems with creep. Due to the

design that placed premiums on compactness and to the degree possible

weight reduction, I can tell you that when locked down the back does

have what I would label as a moderate amount of elasticity since it

is hinged at a low base point. But it maintains its position after

film holder insertion and extraction. A simple act of using two

fingers to assist film holder insertion has become a normal part of

the user process and is almost second nature to me when I use the

camera.

 

<p>

 

The bottom line is simply this. I consistently take razor sharp

photographs with this camera without failure and am always thankful

for its nominal weight when I put it and its monogrammed case into

the backpack.

 

<p>

 

I have also been pleasantly pleased with the continued offering of

B&W films in the 5x7 format. I am waiting on another six boxes of T-

Max 100 as we speak. Good Luck.

While I was within the corporate working world, photography was most

difficult if not impossible. Add the demands for a family, wife and

all of the other responsibilities and the frustration mounts as you

clearly are feeling now. It was nearly 10 years from the date in the

front of Adams "Negative" to where I arrived at a solution that

balances it all. But photography was not the only stimulus for

reaching from beyond the status quo to a better situation for myself

and my family.

 

<p>

 

I got caught up in one of those corporate fiascos where management

was interested in finding out how many employees they could get

another 20% more work out of without a pay raise. Needless to say, I

got my walking papers out the door and had the opportunity to re-

assess my priorities and start fresh. I concluded that: 1) My

corporate job was at an efficieny level of about 20% because of to

many meetings and knucklehead management, 2) I was not involved at

all with my family because of travel and the general feeling of

belonging to my "job", 3) I was constantly stressed out about the

perception (not the actual numbers) of what I accomplished at my

previous job and 4) I needed to find a way to have it all - my

photography, family time and financial freedom.

 

<p>

 

How did I do it? I started my own company two years ago after finding

a service niche that was not being filled that let me work out of my

house making more than I imagined with the ability to set my own

schedule, take my kids to school and my wife out to breakfast when we

want and create the flexibility to build a darkroon and make

photographs at my descretion.

 

<p>

 

I content that anyone that can succeed in the corporate world already

has the skill set to make it on their own. All that they are lacking

is the balls to make it happen. Reminds me of the age old

axiom "Sometimes the Greatest Risk is Not Taking One".

 

<p>

 

My point is that you can attain all that you want to with good

planning and photography does not have to take a back seat.

 

<p>

 

Good luck.

I tend to look at this situation as not necessarily a fork in the

road that needs to be taken, but a very general trend in society

driven by a perceived need to increase business efficiencies for

which photography is simply attached to the wagon. I personally

believe that given the infrastructural cost and the results produced,

the numbers have shown that digital has quickly grown to its current

size and additional market growth is nominal at best projected

forward. It is a large niche market not an upward growth trend. Why

it has drawn so much attention (and concern) is because conventional

photography has been a nominal growth industry at best for decades.

As result, the only way for companies to grow in this environment is

to take market share away from a competitor. That is what is

happening in the battle of Fuji versus Kodak in the color print

markets. Conversely, digital has been a July 4th fireworks display

from purely a business perspective. Once this market peaks out, which

it will, the technological growth component that everyone expects

will continue will also reach its pinnacle because of the fact that

the financial supporters of this product are the first to injest the

realities of nominal market growth projections. Without an

expectation that additional growth will take place, costs will stay

high and business players will go elsewhere with their intelligence

and capital. Those are the realities of todays high expectation

financial and business world. The botton line is that a product cycle

of 8-10 years is reasonable for digital photography. As a result, it

is highly probable these two products can cohabitate perfectly well

for years to come in photography. The largest risk in photography I

feel is for a large player to drop out through market share

consolidation. Is it possible for Fuji to acquire Kodak? Before you

say NO WAY, who would have thought it possible that small Dynegy

would be able to acquire the huge Enron given the fact that Dynegy is

1/5 the size of Enron. It gives me goose bumps to think that Tri-X

could come in anything other than a black and yellow box, but as long

as it comes, who cares?

 

<p>

 

Lastly, I just wanted to personally thank everyone for the great

deals to be had as they make the move to digital. I hope that

whatever medium you chose you find considerable satisfaction in the

expressive arts.

In order for a national publication like Shutterbug to stay in

business, one has to realize that there are certain marketing

requirements. 1) Your audience is the aspiring amateur. 2) You need

to fill a monthly publication so it is required that you gloss

generically over every possible photographic subject to appeal to the

masses in every edition. 3) You are in the business to make money so

knee pads and Chap Stick are always close by and 4) If you want to

see quality photographs, you are in the wrong place.

 

<p>

 

We all know that anyone that takes Bob Shell seriously as an

objective purchasing reference point probably has more money than

brains. Someone once told me that knowledge is where functionality

meets reality. Eventually, the cream always rises to the top.

Can anyone tell me the difference between the Leica BA binoculars and the new BN version? I understand that some form of optical modifications were implemented, but I do not know what and if the change is worth the price versus the older model. The BA's I looked through were damn good. Thanks

I feel the test of a vendor is when things go wrong and what they do

to fix it. I ordered an item from Robert White and it was slightly

damaged. He immediately shipped a replacement for me no questions

asked. I recommend him without hesitation.

The Kodak rep I spoke to told me that B&H Photo is not a registered

Kodak dealer and that they get their Kodak product from other

dealers. I confirmed this from going to the Kodak web site and

looking by state at those corporations that are officially listed.

B&H was not among them as far as I could tell. As a result, I am not

surprised that they did not know about its availability and that it

will take longer to filter to their level. Sorry for not catching

your earlier post as I would have acted on my own earlier and not

posted anything redundant.

Ordered 6 50 sheet boxes this morning from Calumet. It is expected it

will be two weeks to receive the film from Kodak.

I felt that I would share some good news with the forum relative to the subject of 5x7 B&W sheet film availability. I just finished a conversation with a Kodak Technical Sales Rep who, after checking the latest data on their sales computer, indicated that T-Max 100 film in 5x7 size is available as a special order in single box qualities at a suggested price of $71.85 per 50 sheet box. The Kodak order number is #822-6334. You will have to contact a Kodak registered sales dealer to have them special order this for you such as Adorama or Calumet and others. The same 5x7 sheet film in T-Max 400 requires a 30 box minimum so take advantage of the opportunity for T-Max 100 while it exists. I will be calling in my order tomorrow. Happy Shooting!

I ditto the recommendation for the 450mm Fuji C as a quality lens.

Absolutely no reason to consider ANY other 400 mm lens for weight and

size. The requirement for another set of filters is just icing on the

cake. The 52mm filters are chump change and this baby will cover 8x10

with ease. All that said, I find that I only use the 450mm on 4x5 no

more than an optimistic 10% of the time. Distant landscapes may sound

appealing with the 450mm on 4x5, but the narrow field of view is

compositionally challenging to say the least. On 8x10, I go to my

450mm Fuji C nearly 50-60% of the time I set up. Personally, I think

that if you are only going to shoot 4x5, I would go for a Nikon 300m

and save yourself a few bucks. IMHO the 400/450 will sit in your

camera bag most of the time.

Thanks for the great contributions to all. I use the Nikon 120 SW for

5x7 and the Nikon 150 SW for 8x10 so I have plenty of coverage. As a

result, I have not had to deal with the expense of a center filter

(these must be very difficult to produce because they are big $$)for

B&W and the extra exposure requirements.

 

<p>

 

I was contemplating a 75mm or 65mm for 4x5, but may just stay with my

Nikon 90mm f8.

Why do certain Rodenstock and Schneider wide angle lenses require center filters whereas Nikon lenses do not? Is it a design issue specific with the manufacturer or should you use a center filter with all wide angle lenses. I have several Nikon super wide angle lenses (120 and 150SW) and have not noticed fall off problems, although I only shoot B&W. Thanks

I agree with the previous post as per the subject of light leaks.

Test your bellows with a point light source from the inside in a

darkroom. In you have pin holes, they will be very obvious. I would

also add to make sure that your films holders are in good shape and

are inserted fully. Pulling the dark slide should be done carefully

so as to not pull the holder away from the film backafter in the

process. Insert the dark slide squarely to prevent light from leaking

past the darkslide flap. If you are light tight and it is not a

holder or slide problem, I would look at outdated film or exhausted

developer next. Continue to isolate and eliminate a variable at a

time or your frustrations will cause you to blame the format and that

would be a real shame. Hang in there! Your efforts will be rewarded

when you see the results.

Oh yes, the infamous film drying metal clips that the lab technician

uses without considering what it can do to the image area. It can

happen at any lab at any time. I am regularly told that good help is

hard to find. You can talk to the counter person about this situation

till you are blue in the face and it is still pervasive. Fact is that

many labs set up to process their usually in the mid morning and

later in the evening. The faster the lab gets it in the juice and

dryed, the quicker they call it a day. Rarely will a lab technician

take the time to read the comments on the order. If you find one that

does, get to know them on a first name basis.

 

<p>

 

Here is a possible alternative. If you shoot any volume at all, pick

up a good used JOBO processor, a drum and some chemistry and do it

yourself. Several of my fellow photographers that shoot Velvia have

gone this route and the results are fantastic. They buy the chemistry

in various volumes and use a preservative that they spray on top of

the remaining chemistry to keep it in top shape for the next batch.

When you look at what you are paying at the lab and the tima and gas

to and from, you will find it is both economical and very rewarding.

Plus, you will not use those damn alligator clips in the image area

when you dry your film. Good shooting!

I remember reading about T-Max films from an article by Sexton a

while back that was reinforced by others that had previous experience

with T-Max films. The conclusion was that T-Max films are very picky

on the subject of agitation and temprature. As a result, Sexton found

them a good match with the JOBO. I found the same inconsistencies

with tray development and just about gave up on the film. However,

after I had a chance to see how this film could perform consistently

with a JOBO, I got a CPP2. One of the things I love about this film

is its reciprocity characteristics. I second the recommendation for T

Max RS developer.

"Blame" is a pretty harsh word for corporate decisions making and the

associated world of global economics. Schneider knows exactly what

they are doing and if their USA counterpart can't meet thier

financial objectives, maybe they need new leadership and a new

marketing strategy. For a start (when in troubled economic times -

its get back to basics) how about if they initiated a policy to

charge a reasonable fee to repair any non-USA warranty Schneider lens

and started to treat customers like they wanted to stay in business

in the USA? Ironically, I have seen companies turn away business

because they have overpriced labor costs and would rather grind away

at marginal profitability hoping that next year will be better than

bite the bullet and get lean to compete. And the economy is very weak

and probably getting weaker before it gets better that will force

Schneiders hand shortly. If Schneider USA counterpart closed their

doors, it would spawn a whole new breed of independent service

providers that would fill the void admirably and life will go on.

 

<p>

 

I think that you answered your own question. Get your buggy whip

while you can.

I found out that I needed a 15mm spacing adapter to make the lens

focus properly. Thanks

I just acquired a really mint Leica Focomat 1C enlarger with a 5cm Elmar and am stumped. When I try to focus a negative at a mid position of the enlarger head, focusing out as far as the threads go do not give me a sharp negative. I need to manually pull the lens stage further down below where the cam is taking it to get a sharp negative image. Am I missing something? I even have the owners manual and it does not contain any further instructions for this situation.

 

<p>

 

Maybe someone with prior experience with this enlarger can assist me with this situation. Many thanks.

I think that this "incremental" price for a US warranty prices boil

down to two fundamental issues. #1) The cost of insurance - the

manufacturer betting that it will not need service and foolish buyers

taking the hook that it could and #2) What the market is willing to

bear. And at the current time, there must be enough US buyers that

feel that they are willing to take the financial pain of the higher

cost or the practice would have already been terminated. Fact is, the

factory turns out both products and if US sales with the warranty lag

grey sales of the same product, surely this sales data will jell

someone into reality in the corporate office. What photographers want

are superb optics at the best possible price without getting jerked

around. Never bought a USA warranty lens and of the 8 lenses I own, I

have never had a problem with any.

I can only tell you that my expectations to use large relatively

inexpensive lenses for similar applications have simply not occurred.

I found that they just collected dust. Put the horse in front of the

cart. Avoid the urge to acquire a lens that is obviously excessive in

size, weight and coverage for your application. The 300M Nikon is a

tiny footprint relative to the monster you describe.

Thank you Christopher for sharing your experiences with the forum. In

my opinion, your post is probably the most important piece of

information for all traveling photographers to understand. The era of

carrying film with us in any form on airplanes is clearly over. My

concern is getting film shipped to meet us on time at less than

populated areas of the country where we need or want to shoot. Once

again, I feel that Fed Ex and their tracking system will come to the

rescue to and from location, wherever they may be. We just need to

plan accordingly.

 

<p>

 

Welcome to the bold New World.