 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Large Format / November 20042 lens system
Hello again, I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on the Shen-Hao at BadgerGraphic for the camera. The lenses are more difficult to decide on. I enjoy wide angles, but with the Shen-Hao, anything wider than 90 would require the wide angle bag bellows, and so I've decided on 90mm for one lens. The other's focal length is up for grabs. I would want to use it for portraits, some landscapes, and quite possibly some macro work. I understand that a 150mm will do 1:1 at 300mm extension, where the Shen-Hao offers up to 360mm. The 150mm's are all reasonably priced, new, too, but 50mm in 135 format is not my favorite lens. Still, price and functionality are swaying me that direction. I will probably buy one lens new from BadgerGraphic, and one off of ebay. I don't want to spend more than $2000 on the whole rig, but want the best bang for my buck when it comes to the glass. The 150 offered in the Shen-Hao kit at BadgerGraphic is the Rodenstock APO-Sironar-N 150mm/5.6. Its price is right, but I wonder how good it is. I don't need the very best (certainly can't afford it, even if I did), but I don't want to be complaining about it later. I'm used to fairly good Nikon glass for my 35mm equipment, including several well regarded primes, and the top of the line f2.8 zooms, if that helps you any. I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions.  SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on > the Shen-Hao at BadgerGraphic for the camera. [...] I've decided on 90mm > for one lens. The other's focal length is up for grabs. I would want to > use it for portraits, some landscapes, and quite possibly some macro work. I doubt you can make a two-lens kit if you are accustomed to long lenses for portraits, unless you eliminate the normal (150mm) lens. >> Hello again, >> I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I doubt you can make a two-lens kit if you are accustomed to long lenses > for portraits, unless you eliminate the normal (150mm) lens. Fair enough, do you know some 90mm's you can recommend? I see I can get a Grandagon N 90 for (gulp) $1000... Perhaps there's some decent priced gems being bandied about on ebay? Even if I am used to longer lenses for portraits (I am, 80-200 f2.8 and 105 f2.5 are my favorites in 35mm), 4x5 gives me plenty of room to crop. It's just going to take a little more concentration/imagination to compose. I think I've talked myself into it... ;-) So, I've read that you need about twice the lens focal length in extension to reach 1:1, ergo 150mm reaches 1:1 at 300mm of extension. Why don't I hear of people simply using, say, a 90mm lens at 180mm of extension for macro work--no working distance to speak of? SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com > Even if I am used to longer lenses for portraits (I am, 80-200 f2.8 and > 105 f2.5 are my favorites in 35mm), 4x5 gives me plenty of room to crop. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > hear of people simply using, say, a 90mm lens at 180mm of extension for > macro work--no working distance to speak of? Matt, for roughly equivalent to the 105 on 35mm you'll need a 300 for 4x5. This is arithmetic - it's a guide but don't take it too seriously. I happen to like my 105/2.5 for 35mm as well but I rarely reach for a 300 as often on 4x5. The 90mm Grandagons and other wide angle lenses are not designed for macro work. Some mfg make macro lenses optimized for 1:1 through 1:5 macro photography e.g. the Apo Macro Sironar are Rodenstocks macro lenses. Douglas > Matt, for roughly equivalent to the 105 on 35mm you'll need a 300 for 4x5. > This is arithmetic - it's a guide but don't take it too seriously. [...] Which reminds me to ask - what are the dimensions of the Shen-Hao's lens board? Is it large enough to take the big shutters some big and beautiful old portrait lenses require? I have a beautiful old studio camera - you know, the huge thing on iron wheels that has an 11" square lens board and some long lenses for it that I don't use. They sure won't fit on my field cameras. -- jjs - looking for the longest lenses I can use on a Technika 4x5 > "jjs" <jjs@x.x.com> wrote in message >> I doubt you can make a two-lens kit if you are accustomed to long lenses >> for portraits, unless you eliminate the normal (150mm) lens. > > Fair enough, do you know some 90mm's you can recommend? I see I can get a > Grandagon N 90 for (gulp) $1000... Perhaps there's some decent priced > gems being bandied about on ebay? Sorry. If I knew of a better 90mm than the Super-Angulon at the same price I'd go for it, too. > Even if I am used to longer lenses for portraits (I am, 80-200 f2.8 and > 105 f2.5 are my favorites in 35mm), 4x5 gives me plenty of room to crop. Sure. Crop. Gosh I hate to do that. 50% of 4x5 is getting too close to MF. May as well go MF. You aren't likely to be using perspective controls for head-n-shoulder portraits. > So, I've read that you need about twice the lens focal length in extension > to reach 1:1, ergo 150mm reaches 1:1 at 300mm of extension. Why don't I > hear of people simply using, say, a 90mm lens at 180mm of extension for > macro work--no working distance to speak of? Matt, there were many good 'flat field' lenses made that fit the Polaroid shutter used in the old MP cameras. They were very inexpensive when I got mine. (The local big printer litterally threw their process camera and MP cameras in the dumpster. Have I no pride? :)) > Even if I am used to longer lenses for portraits (I am, 80-200 f2.8 and 105 > f2.5 are my favorites in 35mm), 4x5 gives me plenty of room to crop. It's > just going to take a little more concentration/imagination to compose. I > think I've talked myself into it... ;-) When I had a 4x5, I had one lens, a 210 triplet. You would be fine anywhere between that and 250 or 300 for a portrait lens (remember depth of field is shallower the longer the lens and stopping down means you'd want more light on the subject). My cheapish 210 mm took wonderful upper torso shots. And as someone else said, there are a lot of 210 mm lenses out there. > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > at BadgerGraphic is the Rodenstock APO-Sironar-N 150mm/5.6. Its price is > right, but I wonder how good it is. I have one of those and I am very happy with it. I don't think you should have any problem with it. P.S. 50 mm is usually considered a normal lens for 35 mm format, but according to the usual definition, it is actually a bit long. The usual definition takes the diagonal of the format as the normal focal length. For 35 mm, that would be about 43 mm. On the other hand, the diagonal of 4 x 5 format is only slightly larger than 150 mm, so that is a closer match. > I don't need the very best (certainly > can't afford it, even if I did), but I don't want to be complaining about it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. I > understand that a 150mm will do 1:1 at 300mm extension, where the Shen-Hao > offers up to 360mm. I can't figure out what the extension is on the Shen Hao, perhaps someone can straighten me out. Sometimes I see 12 inches, other times I see things like this (over 14 inches). Is it possible that it is really 12 inches but can get to 14 inches by utilizing base tilt? > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. > I >> understand that a 150mm will do 1:1 at 300mm extension, where the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > like this (over 14 inches). Is it possible that it is really 12 inches but > can get to 14 inches by utilizing base tilt? Perhaps the graphics on this page will help? http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=2594 SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com >> I can't figure out what the extension is on the Shen Hao, perhaps someone >> can straighten me out. Sometimes I see 12 inches, other times I see >> things >> like this (over 14 inches). Is it possible that it is really 12 inches >> but >> can get to 14 inches by utilizing base tilt? 14" > Perhaps the graphics on this page will help? > http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=2594 Interesting - no shift. > > Perhaps the graphics on this page will help? > > http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=2594 Thanks, it looks like they do in fact use a combination of base tilt and axis tilt to obtain 360mm of bellows extension as opposed to what I believe is the "real" 12" extension. It seems a little misleading to say a camera has 360mm of bellows extension when it can achieve that only by using base and axis tilts since once the tilts are used for that purpose they in effect become unavailable for the usual purposes. So what you really then have is a camera with 360mm of bellows extension and no front tilts. At least that's what it seems to me but I've never actually used a camera this way to gain the extra extension, am I perhaps missing something? > >> I can't figure out what the extension is on the Shen Hao, perhaps someone > >> can straighten me out. Sometimes I see 12 inches, other times I see [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Interesting - no shift. Regarding the 2 lens system--You could go with the 90 mm (I'm a Fuji fan) and a 210 mm (a typical 4x5 lens and I like the perspective for portraiture)--I'd buy used on both. Go for a 90 mm f/8 Fuji w/67 mm filter thread --very sharp, about $300 (5,6 version is a bit expensive but easily covers 5x7 too ) and there are plenty of 210 mm lenses on ebay. Shen-Hao! Couldn't tell you as I'm a Deardorff kinda guy. Buy a Used Deardorff!! Just kidding--Sort of! They're fine cameras! My lens preferences for 4x5--90 mm , 135mm, 250 mm (Fuji), 300 mm for a long portrait lens but the 250 is great!! Yea, I have a Nikkor 210 W but rarely use it-(thats why the big gap in focal lengths--that 250 Fuji really shines)! Deardorff--Well, I happen to have an extra 4x5 Special needing a home! Even a spare 250 Fuji (6,3 version)!! J Burke > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. > Regarding the 2 lens system--You could go with the 90 mm (I'm a Fuji fan) > and a 210 mm (a typical 4x5 lens and I like the perspective for [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Even a spare 250 Fuji (6,3 version)!! > J Burke What would be the advantages of the Deardorff over the Shen-Hao? http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=2594 (for reference) SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com ""What would be the advantages of the Deardorff over the Shen-Hao? http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=2594 (for reference"" "Quality and Class" Like comparing a Hasselblad to a Kiev!!! There is not a cheap/poorly made item on the Deardorff--Easily accepts a 5x7 back and the design that set the standard for View cameras. That's why Deardorff cameras are rather pricey! You get what you pay for in the long haul and the Deardorffs retain their value (ever wonder why!!) I had a Wista 4x5 once!! Nice camera but no Deardorff! Movements! The Deardorff has all I could ever use!! I think 22 inches of bellows/extension! I'm just a tad biased--does it show? J Burke > ""What would be the advantages of the Deardorff over the Shen-Hao? > http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=2594 (for reference"" [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > J Burke I'm not looking for "rather pricey"--I wouldn't be looking at the Shen-Hao if I were. SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. Pretty camera. Make it a try and buy if you can.... (get return privileges). If you like longer lenses e.g. Fuji C 450, you're missing bellows extension. You'll have to buy heavier & more expensive telephoto lenses. You will accumulate lenses over time - believe me. The 150mm Sironar is a plasmat. It wasn't designed for use at 1:1. Don't buy it as part of your 1st purchase unless there is some other use for it. You'll soon be selling it otherwise. For portraiture (and maybe some Landscape) you're probably in the 210-300 range. There are many many choices in this range - 210's proliferate on eBay. I happen to love the look of my 8.5" & 10" commercial ektars for portraiture. My ektars seem to get used more than the modern lenses I own. However, lens choices become personal in a hurry so YMMV. Good luck! ...Douglas > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on > the Shen-Hao at BadgerGraphic for the camera. The camera's certainly a very good deal for the money. Only concerns (very very mild) are: - bellows extension - it's not 14" w/ controls neutral, it's 12" only - don't kid yourself, - lensboards - many of us make our own to save $, it looks like it might be difficult to fabricate your own, - lensboard - looks smaller than 4x4, means it won't support bigger shutters, can it support copal #3 or ilex #4? - Ask Badger! - balance on the tripod with a heavy lens - w/ front focus rails only how stable would it be w/ a heavy lens fully extended? All of this is really very minor. If you like LF photography it is very unlikley to be your last LF camera anyway. It looks like it is a very good first one. See comments at this link: http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/499131.html > I would want to use it for portraits, some landscapes, and quite possibly > some macro work. The 150mm's are all reasonably priced, new, too, but 50mm > in 135 format is not my favorite lens. Still, price and functionality are > swaying me that direction. No one lens will perform adequately for macro+portrait+landscape. Recommend you leave the macro as option for later. Of course nothing stops you from trying it with a short lens. We all try this at least once (without a macro lens). ;-) > The 150 offered in the Shen-Hao kit at BadgerGraphic is the Rodenstock > APO-Sironar-N 150mm/5.6. Its price is right, but I wonder how good it is. I think you'll find that all of the current plasmat lenses are all very very impressive. The results, in 4x5, will completely blow away anything you can achieve in 35mm with any optics. Whether it's modern Nikkor, Schneider, Rodenstock, or Fujinon - the biting clarity & sharpness of modern LF lenses is not a concern. In fact the biting clarity can be a real problem in portraiture. Instead coverage, weight & size (if you carry it any distance) and of course cost become the issues. There are many web resources. Check out Kerry Thalmann's LF site: http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/ I don't need the very best (certainly > can't afford it, even if I did), but I don't want to be complaining about > it later. I'm used to fairly good Nikon glass for my 35mm equipment, > including several well regarded primes, and the top of the line f2.8 > zooms, if that helps you any. > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. Starting w/ a modern 90mm WA plus a 210mm plasmat is fine. Do it. Whether new or used (ebay) is up to you. I doubt you'll complain about it later. Don't forget the classic older lenses like the Kodak commercial ektars. In fact older Tessars (like the EK Com Ektars) can perform extremely well in normal to longer focal lengths. You can revisit this later. Enjoy!....Douglas [SNIP] > No one lens will perform adequately for macro+portrait+landscape. > Recommend you leave the macro as option for later. Of course nothing stops > you from trying it with a short lens. We all try this at least once (without a macro > lens). ;-) Going from 35mm to 4x5, a 'non-macro' lens used at big extension is still going to look pretty good, simply due to the acreage. However, the frame filling shot on 35mm is sooo many times more enlarged if you shoot the same subject to fill the 4x5 frame that you will find a whole new world of problems... But don't be put off trying LF macro. I've used a Symmar-S 150mm and been pretty happy with the results, and also a Rodenstock Sironar-N 100mm (which doesn't cover 4x5 at infinity, I normally use it on 6x9) and been very happy. The latter I've used up to about twice life size and it is pretty impressive: a macro-sironar would be better, sure, but it still blows away anything I could do on 35mm. Come to that, I've even used a 47mm Super-Angulon (ust for fun) to get a pretty big magnification, and the result is stunning. And for a cheap macro lens, there are always the lenses for the Polaroid MP-3 and MP-4 copy cameras, which are surprisingly good. You could add one of these to your two lens kit for very little extra money (the 127mm Ysaron seems especially good, as a macro, to me and it is dirt cheap.) Peter For your ShenHao, http://www.mpex.com Midwest Photo does have a better price. For lenses, I've got two that might interest you. #1. Rodenstock Ysarex 135mm. I shot this portrait with it: http://members.safe-t.net/dpconsult/ashley.jpg $160 + shpg. #2. Fujinon-W 125/5.6. This si a modern EBC multicoated lens. Extremely clean. No marks on the glass, coatings, or the shutter. $260 + shpg. Generally, you will be pleased with any "plasmat" lens you get. And most of the tessar and triplet designs are pretty good as well. Anything that's new enough to be multi-coated will be excellent in terms of resolution and contrast. If what you want is the best color correction, look @ Rodenstock & Schneider. For B&W I like Fujinon. LF isn't like 135 in that we don't have too much to complain about. All of the 135 camera makers have to fuss with lens design because of the mirror and because of the small neg. In LF, just get a plasmat if you want the best design, unless you're backpacking or carrying a lot and require something more compact or lighter. Then pick the ones you can afford. And enjoy. For the two lengths I'd suggest looking at the following: 90mm Ilex. It's a copy of a Super Angulon and really good. They're around and reasonably cheap. 210 Fujinon. Even the old 5.6 will give you lots of coverage. Single coated but still excellent. The newer ones are outstanding, but pricey. Shooting colors. Schneider. Nothing else. (imnsho) Collin > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. > Hello again, > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I am therefore looking for specific lens suggestions. Matt, IMHO a 150mm is too short for "head and shoulders" type portrait work. If your portraiture is more full-length then it works OK. Having said that, I have currently have 3 lenses for my 4x5, the "standard troika" of 90, 150 and 210 and I use the 150 about 65-70% of the time, the 210 maybe 25% and the 90 gets the rest. For macro type work you might look at getting a lens like the Caltar 150mm f6.3. It is a Rodenstock Geronar type lens and is a process type lens that does really well at macro distances and also performs very well at infinity. New, it won't break the bank and they show up on eBay used for under $200 pretty regularly. In fact, look for the Caltar II N line of lenses. They are relabeled Rodenstock lenses identical in every way to the current Rodenstock lenses. New they are substantially less than Rodenstock and used they go for even less comparatively. Mostly don't worry too much about the lenses, get one or two that work and go make photographs! Sherman http://www.dunnamphoto.com I understand that a 150mm will do 1:1 at 300mm > > extension, where the Shen-Hao offers up to 360mm. The Shen Hao's normal bellows extension is right at 300mm, maybe very slightly more or less. The 360 number is obtained by using a combination of base and and axis tilts to move the lens forward of its normal postition but once the tilts are used for that purpose they can't then be used for their normal purpose (changing the plane of focus). > > Hello again, > > I am still planning on putting together a LF system, and have decided on [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Sherman > http://www.dunnamphoto.com >I understand that a 150mm will do 1:1 at 300mm >> > extension, where the Shen-Hao offers up to 360mm. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > once the tilts are used for that purpose they can't then be used for their > normal purpose (changing the plane of focus). I'm no large format guru, but if you study the images I linked earlier, from which you draw your conclusions, there appears to be some tilt going on, even at the 360mm extension of which you/they speak. One could therefore conclude that @ 360mm there are _some_ movements to be had, though no doubt limited. SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com So I've got $2,000 to play with. What is the hangup with a 2 lens kit? Buy an old Calument CC410 (20 inch rail and built like main battle tanks and costs $150 and has all the movements) and 4 used lenses designed for what you want to do. Lenses: 150mm G-Claron f9 in shutter for $250 max, this is a macro lens (and enlarger lens) that can be used also as a main lenses at infinity and f22, 300mm f9 M Nikkor, $500, 90mm f8 Schneider Super Angulon ($350) and maybe a 210mm f5.6 Schneider($300). Get a shutter tester so you know what your actual speeds are (Calumet). Any lens built in the last 40 years that is in good shape will likely be way better than your technique. Then don't forget the spot meter, dark cloth, focusing loupe (very very important), good solid tripod, orange or red filters if you shoot B&W outside and film holders (none of these things are "optional"). After that the developing tanks and film scanner or enlarger. After you have made a couple of hundred pictures with this equipment you will either give up or know what you really want and be able to sell what does not work for you for what you paid for it, and get what you want. If you buy brand new super duper APO (and it is not really apo) stuff you are going to take a real bath if you have sell it. Good luck and have fun. kirk > I understand that a 150mm will do 1:1 at 300mm > > > extension, where the Shen-Hao offers up to 360mm. [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > Sherman > > http://www.dunnamphoto.com >So I've got $2,000 to play with. What is the hangup with a 2 lens >kit? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Good luck and have fun. kirk From a complete newbie amateur .........my $0.02 (see post above) Exactly !!!! That's what I did - Calumet 19" monorail, Schneider 210/5.6, Elwood 5x7 enlarger, Microtek Scanmaker5 scanner, filmholders, dark cloth, all the B&W darkroom stuff including trays, BTZ tubes etc. I can go from film in the box to a finished print and I don't have $1000.00 CDN spent yet - heck I barely have $750.00 CDN spent yet. It's all out there if you look What I have learned from this economy stuff I've bought and used is that I have sooooo much to learn, my equipment is waaaay better than I am so far, and I enjoy this hobby, so I can begin to upgrade a bit at a time. Next quest ::: a lens, w/shutter in the 100mm - 135mm size for under $100.00 Signatureregards from :: John Bartley 43 Norway Spruce Street Stittsville, Ontario Canada, K2S1P5 ( If you slow down it takes longer - does that apply to life also?) > So I've got $2,000 to play with. What is the hangup with a 2 lens kit? > Buy an old Calument CC410 (20 inch rail and built like main battle > tanks and costs $150 and has all the movements) What is a CC410? I have a CC-400 which has a 20" rail. There was a CC-401 with a 26" rail, and a CC-402 with a 13" rail. The CC-400 has 16" bellows draw. The CC-401 has 22" bellows draw. The CC-402 has 7 3/16" bellows draw; these bellows are sort-of bag bellows. I like the camera, though I mostly use a Wisner 4x5 Technical Field when hiking around, and the Calumet when doing portraits at home. While the CC-400 may be built like a tank, and feels like one when I used to try carrying it up the Appalachian Trail in a backpack, it is not as rigid as I would expect from something that heavy. It is not wobbly, just not an optical bench. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 10:05:00 up 28 days, 12:59, 4 users, load average: 4.37, 4.36, 4.27 > So I've got $2,000 to play with. What is the hangup with a 2 lens > kit? I've had to amend that amount somewhat. I'm now shooting for around $1500. > Buy an old Calument CC410 (20 inch rail and built like main battle > tanks and costs $150 and has all the movements) Not interested in a rail camera that has to be transported in a box the size of Davey Jone's locker, or broken down and reassembled... >and 4 used lenses > designed for what you want to do. Lenses: 150mm G-Claron f9 in > shutter for $250 max, this is a macro lens (and enlarger lens) that > can be used also as a main lenses at infinity and f22, That's exactly the kind of advice I was fishing for. Thanks. >300mm f9 M > Nikkor, $500, 90mm f8 Schneider Super Angulon ($350) I'm hoping for something faster, like the f6.8 Rodenstock 90mm (or Calumet version of same). >and maybe a 210mm > f5.6 Schneider($300). Your prices are a bit lower than what I've been seeing on ebay. >Get a shutter tester so you know what your > actual speeds are (Calumet). Any lens built in the last 40 years that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > outside and film holders (none of these things are "optional"). After > that the developing tanks and film scanner or enlarger. I have many of these things, and the dark cloth and film holders come with the Shen-Hao. >After you > have made a couple of hundred pictures with this equipment you will > either give up or know what you really want and be able to sell what > does not work for you for what you paid for it, and get what you want. > If you buy brand new super duper APO (and it is not really apo) stuff > you are going to take a real bath if you have sell it. I've noticed that. They go for $1200 new and $400 used. Ouch! > Good luck and have fun. kirk SignatureRegards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com Matt Clara wrote (in part): >> 300mm f9 M Nikkor, $500, 90mm f8 Schneider Super Angulon ($350) > > I'm hoping for something faster, like the f6.8 Rodenstock 90mm (or > Calumet version of same). I have both of those lenses. It turns out that they are both bright enough to focus in the field. Unless you wish to reduce your depth of field by opening them up more than f/9, you will probably find them bright enough for 4x5. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 17:10:00 up 28 days, 20:04, 3 users, load average: 4.39, 4.29, 4.31 Matt, At $1500 you will have to start with a couple of lenses to keep the price down. The Calumet was the only quality camera out there I have any experience with that keeps the price down. Yes it is not beautiful and it is heavy, but it gets the job done for very little money. I would like to thank Mr. Beyer for putting me straight on the rail lengths. The problems with the CC40? numbers is that they are not actually printed on the cameras. The black ones were the last ones made and thus are only ~25 years old as opposed to the gray ones that might be ~30-40 years old. The same model was designed and sold by Kodak ~50 years ago. So there is another problem, to use a 90 mm on the longer rail cameras is hard. You have to use a recessed lens board. It works but you don't have a bunch of movement. I have no idea what happens with the short rail ones (never used one). Another cheap altertenative in cameras is a Tachihara or Calumet Field something (same camera). This is a fold up wooden field camera. It is light and built just the opposite to the Calumet, more like the Wright Flyer. It will not work for a 300mm lens (12 inch bellows draw) unless you have the extension back which was made for it some years back and is very rare (for good reason). It is also not wonderful for 90 mm lenses although it will work straight on. To stabilize this one I put some velcro on top of the front and back standards and have a short stick that also has velcro on it and I stick that down on the standards after I have everything set up to stabilize the standards. Mabye the newer ones are better but mine is floppy. This one will travel easily and is very light weight. (I bought mine for $150 as the front focusing knob was broken off and I got parts from Calumet to fix it. ~$350-600 on ebay.) My main camera is a Basic B ARAC (~30 years old). Wonderful for the field. Just set it up on your tripod when you get off the airplane and off you go. $500 or so used. Just because it has a rail does not mean you can't use it in the field. With a bag bellows it works great with wide angle lenses. There is a whole world of old ARCA stuff out there. The old stuff does not in general work with the new stuff (F-line). The problem is finding what part you need. Waste some time looking for these things on Ebay. Have fun. > > So I've got $2,000 to play with. What is the hangup with a 2 lens > > kit? [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > > Good luck and have fun. kirk > Another cheap altertenative in cameras is a Tachihara or Calumet Field > something (same camera). This is a fold up wooden field camera. It [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > years back and is very rare (for good reason). It is also not > wonderful for 90 mm lenses although it will work straight on. There's a lot of misinformation crammed into a couple sentences with the above as it relates to any Tachihara made since the late 1980s and that has been properly cared for. It looks like he bought an old beat up Tachihara since he says he paid $150 for it and the focusing knob was broken off. That price is about half to a third of the usual going price for a used Tachihara in good condition. I bought mine new around 1996. My 300mm Nikkor M lens worked fine on it. The Tachihara's 13 inch bellows extension allowed me to focus to about 10-12 feet, plenty close for a 300mm lens for most purposes. My Fuji 400mm T also worked fine. Second, the Tachihara actually is wonderful for 90mm, I used a 90mm F5.6 Super Angulon on my Tachihara all the time and had plenty of room for movements. Maybe the bellows on his has become stiff with age or perhaps all that velcro and other stuff he's stuck on it are interfering with the movements. In any event, there's something wrong with his camera if he can only use a 90mm lens straight on. The Tachihara actually works with some room for movements with a 75mm lens and will go as short as a 65mm lens though I'm not sure about movements with that lens. I ended up not buying the 65mm I tested on the Tachihara so I didn't have a lot of experience with the lens but it did work on the camera. Finally, the Tachihara is a very nicely built camera, about the same quality as any other wood field camera that I've used except for the Ebony SVTe for which I paid about five times what I paid for the Tachihara. The "Calumet Field something" that he's groping for is the Calumet Woodfield. That camera was a Tachihara on which Calumet affixed a Calument decal and then charged a couple hundred dollars more for it. I don't think Calumet sells these any more. The Tachihara used to be a clear "best value for the money" among wood field cameras until the Shen Hao came along. Now there's something to be said for either of them as best value, the Shen Hao has a couple movements that the Tachihara doesn't have and also will take a bag bellows. OTOH, the Shen Hao weighs about two pounds more than the Tachihara. > Matt, > [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] > > > > > Good luck and have fun. kirk |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.