richard_deimel

It's very adequate for most field work. Technically its only real

disadvantage is the 12" bellows, which is a limiting factor with long

lenses, but it shares this disavantage with a number of similar

cameras. I would recommend it highly as excellent value, but would

also suggest that it only be bought new as my experience would seem

to indicate that it may not stand up well to any rough usage that the

prior owner of a used camera might have given it. Other similar

cameras are better made, but for a lot more money. You can be very

happy with a Tachihara; I was for a long time.

Not much to choose from. Agfa Optima was in my opinion the best, but

it's off the market now, although Agfa promises a "new professional

film" in the fall. Fuji NPS is too low contrast. Kodak's Portra 160

films are about it at the moment. For me their VC is too contrasty,

but the NC isn't bad, at least in bright sunlight. Open shade it

doesn't do too well. Really the only thing for you to do is to try

them, and if you use Velvia, you might just like the Portra 160 VC.

I too used Agfa Optima 100 for years, and while not perfect (a

tendency to oversaturate blues)it was better balanced than and had

more natural contrast than any of the Fuji or Kodak films available

in 4x5. Unfortunately, Agfa has pulled 4x5 Optima from the market and

it has not been available for some time. (They promise a

new "professional" 4x5 product line in the fall, but........)So

what's left? NPS lacks contrast. Portra 160VC has too much contrast.

The best of a bad lot is Portra 160NC, and its reds and greens leave

something to be desired, although they aren't bad in direct sunlight.

So that's what I'm using while holding my breath for Agfa's new

offerering, when and if.

I have actually owned both lenses, a 210 Apo-Symmar and a 210 Apo-

Sironar-S. I currently use the Apo-Sironar-S. I routinely enlarge to

16x20 and have numerous 16x20 prints from both lenses. I would regard

the lenses as being equally sharp and contrasty (and both are very

sharp indeed). The Apo-Sironar-S does have considerably larger

coverage, which I have found advantageous on occasion. I would regard

the 210 Apo-Sironar-S as the finest lens I have ever owned, but the

210 Apo-Symmar is very close.

A few years ago I bought a 210 Apo Symmar (which I used on 4x5) from

a man who had used it on 8x10 and said he was perfectly happy with

it. I saw a couple of transparencies he had done with it, and they

were quite satisfactory,with no fall-off. I don't know if he had used

any movements.

People will notice the art first. If the picture is attractive to

them, they may examine it more closely and see that it's very sharp,

that it has excellent tonality, etc., but they may not. Most will

just see the picture as a picture and not even be conscious of the

technical excellence (or lack of it), although it may well be a

factor in their appreciation even if they are unaware of that. They

are certainly unconscious of the technical work we may have had to do

to get the picture, i.e., rise or fall, tilts, etc. They see only the

final result, and they judge that not on any technical basis but on

perceived artistic merit. The extreme example of this which we have

all seen often is the snapshot of some person; no matter how poor the

technical quality of the photograph, if it's a "good likeness", to

the average person it's a good photo. The argument for LF is not that

it will produce technically superior pictures, but that it will

enable us to get the picture we want, a picture that may have been

unobtainable with any other type of camera. But in the end, any

picture still has to be something that a viewer will appreciate first

for its artistic merit.

There is no good answer. It depends on you. Over the years I've used 35mm, a number of MF cameras including the Pentax 67, and a number of 4x5 cameras including the Toyo 45A. At the moment I'm using a Wista DXII. LF and MF are quite different. A 16x20 from a 6x7, taken with care on a tripod, will be virtually undistinguishable from a 4x5. But a 4x5 has something special that nobody has mentioned: movements. You can accomplish unbelievable things with LF camera movements. But LF is static and unhandy. I have been seriously contemplating going back to a Pentax 67 primarily for the convenience, but I have held back becaause of the movements. 90% of my pictures are taken with some sort of movement, even if it's only rise or fall.I'm not at all sure I'd be happy with the Pentax 67 now.

Anybody know anything about Mido holders? I have heard that they are a type of magazine holder, that there were problems with them, and they are no longer being manufactured. Is any or all of this true?

Try Agfa Optima 100. I find it very satisfactory, besides being

cheaper. I haven't used the new Agfa Optima II yet, but it's supposed

to be even better.

If you want realistic color over the entire palette, without exaggeration of any parricular color and without excessive contrast, you'll be happy with RSX 100.

Take a look at this site:

 

http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/cameras.html

Obviously it goes in the bottomless pocket, which you had to have had in order to buy it in the first place.

Fuji lenses tend to be very slightly warmer than Nikkor lenses, but you would be unlikely to see any difference unless you made a direct comparison test. Optically both are excellent. The lastest Fuji lenses with the EBC coating may be less prone to flare.

Does anybody kniow where Nagaoka or Anba Ikeda cameras are available new in the U.S.?

Call Calumet at 1-800-CALUMET and ask them. The sales people usually know, and have no objection to telling you. I at one time had a 210 Caltar II-S which was definitely a Schneider as it was afflicted with a problem common to Schneiders of the same period, but it did have a serial number.

I bought a Tachihara and lens from them by phone; they sent me a cheaper lens than the one I had paid for, and after several futile lens exchanges I sent the stuff back. Eventually my money was returned. I also bought a Perkeo II from them that was reasonably priced, and as described. I must say that they are pleasant people to deal with, and the apparent owner, a gentleman name Steve Serota, is charming. I would do business with them again only if I were in the store and able to see and handle the merchandise I was buying.

http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/cameras.html

 

You'll find your information there, or links to where you can find it.

Obviously you want a field camera, and there are a number of them available under $3000, some considerably under $3000, that will suit your purpose. Just make sure that the bellows extension is sufficicent to get the reproduction ratio you are looking for in your macro work.

Of course there are differences, but the differences may or may not matter to you. Right now you have no experience, so for you the important fact is that none of the four major lens makers makes a bad lens. Buy any one of them in the focal length you find comfortable working with, and use it. In time and with experience you may continue to use that lens, or you may change as your standards or objectives change. The important thing is to take pictures, not to worry about lenses.

I concur with what has been said about the Toyo loupe and the Toyo folding focusing hood. It's really too short. The Wista might be better, but I have no experience with it. I use the Horseman 7x loupe referred to, and it is excellent, but can't be used with the folding focusing hood as it's too short. Incidentally, I bought the Horseman 7x loupe from Calumet under their name at consideraably less money.

Have been sold.

67mm Heliopan 81A, never used, boxed. $33 shipped.

67mm Heliopan Linear Polarizer, used about five times, boxed. $45 shipped.

F64 filter wallet, space for 4 filters, $10 shipped.

And what about rec.photo.marketplace? The biggest of them all.

I had this lens, and it's very sharp, coated, and excellent in color use. It does, however, have somewhat limited coverage.

 

<p>

 

As to the flash, mine was also in a Compur shutter, but I am certain the Flash Supermatic shutter will handle X-synch.

I have a new Tachihara and I find it quite sturdy. I am very pleased with it. I bought it primarily because I needed to cut the weight of my backpack down, and it's 2 lbs. lighter than the Toyo 45A I had. I previously had a Tachihara that I bought used and found to be unsatisfactiory. It may be that the Tachihara gets sloppy with use, or perhaps recent quality control has improved.

 

<p>

 

My only complaint is that there isn't enough bellows draw, and I am remedying that with the bellows extension. (But that's shared with all the light wood field cameras except the Wisner Pocket Expedition, which was not cost effective for me.)