 |
 | 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 / April 2006Value of various view cameras by brand
Based on a very small sample of what I've seen on eBay and a few ads in Shutterbug, the selling price (and presumably the value as well) of, say, 4x5 view cameras ranges over a 5:1 range with IIRC Omega on the low end and other, more prestigious, names on the higher end of the scale. What exactly could make one 4x5 view camera worth 5x or 10x another, assuming both are pretty much metal framed and mounted on a metal column? TIA Norm Some are better than others. > Based on a very small sample of what I've seen on eBay and a few ads in > Shutterbug, the selling price (and presumably the value as well) of, say, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > TIA > Norm How? A view camera is just an empty box? What makes one better than another? Norm > Some are better than others. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> TIA >> Norm > How? > > A view camera is just an empty box? > > What makes one better than another? Materials - determining weight, rigidity, durability, etc. Design - determining ease of use, flexibility, rigidity, how many movements are calibrated, whether movements are yaw free, fancy stuff like built in DoF calculators, etc. Engineering - determining smoothness of movement, rigidity of locking, repeatability of settings, movements that don't 'move' when you lock them, etc. Name - determining availability of accessories and spares... and snob value, of course! For example: Materials - my Arcas use duralumin so are light and rigid. Costs more than steel or plain aluminium, and less than carbon fibre. About middle of the range. Design - the Arcas are very flexible, with a wide range of movement. Everything on the monolith is calibrated, and most things geared - not so on the lighter field versions. Lots of interchangeability of parts allowing customisation. No built in calculators (on the models I have). Middle to upper middle of the range. Engineering - the Arcas seem to have been built by unemployed Swiss watch gnomes. Top of the range. Name - for the Arcas spares are readily available and there are a lot of accessories, though not as many as there are for a Sinar, for example. Cambo has easy very parts availability too, for example. So yes, a view camera is just a box - but there are well made easy to use and service boxes, and cheaply made hard to use boxes - and just about everything in between! Peter > What exactly could make one 4x5 view camera worth 5x > or 10x another, assuming both are pretty much metal > framed and mounted on a metal column? Chevy: $20,000 Rolls: $200,000 Two bedroom shack in rural Ohio: $35,000 Two bedroom shack in Palo Alto: $1,000,000  SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com Fstop timer - http://www.nolindan.com/da/fstop/index.htm >> What exactly could make one 4x5 view camera worth 5x >> or 10x another, assuming both are pretty much metal [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Two bedroom shack in rural Ohio: $35,000 > Two bedroom shack in Palo Alto: $1,000,000 So? The examples you've given involve familiar items with known quality/location differences. What are the differences in view cameras that are important? Norm > Lindan wrote > > Dresner wrote > > > Blah > > Blah Blah > What are the differences in view cameras that > are important? That has to be up to you to determine. There isn't any consensus and so there are ~100's of different view cameras to choose from. In a field camera all the asymmetric, rotating, twisting contortion features are so many back-aches and shin-splints. In a studio camera light weight construction is just another word for unreliable. First question is: what are you going to do with a view camera? SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com Fstop timer - http://www.nolindan.com/da/fstop/index.htm >> Lindan wrote >> > Dresner wrote [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > First question is: what are you going to do with a > view camera? Except for unusual circumstances, I'm not going to travel -- at least not in the field -- with it. I've got 35mm, 2-1/4"sq, and baby crown graphic for that. What I envision using a view camera for is to photograph the HO-scale dioramas that I build. The one being designed now is going to be about 3 foot square and illustrate a Maine seacoast. To properly photograph buildings and other things requires either getting a camera down into the middle of the diorama or standing above it and finding some way to eliminate the distortions caused by the viewpoint. Yes, I can do some of that with the Crown Graphic, with the bellows for my Bronica, and with the bellows for my Nikons, but I think that the absolutely correct way to do it is with a "view" camera. Norm "Norm Dresner" <ndrez@att.net> wrote in message > [...] What I envision using a view camera for is to photograph the > HO-scale dioramas that I build. IMHO, if you use 4X5, then you are on track for spending far more than necessary, and many difficulties with placing the large format, and of course DOF issues. MF with full movements and a wide lens that provides movements, and another wide distortion free lens for straight-on work is best. I hope you have a lot of lighting equipment. You're gonna need it. Placing a view camera "into" a diorama is the last way I'd shoot something similiar. I used to do a lot of model photography for the Walt Disney company. I wouldn't have used a view camera for that on a bet. You'll have a much easier time with a 35mm film or similiar sized digital camera and a good macro lens or bellows set-up. For an overhead view maybe the view camera will give you the perspective controls you need but you'll need to pump a lot of light into the scene to get a decent f stop. I used to put my Canon 35mm camera into the scene with a 14mm lens, it gave very nice "guest POV" with some distortion. That's how I'd do again if Walt ever calls me back. Have fun. John Emmons > >> Lindan wrote > >> > Dresner wrote [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Norm John Emmons spake thus [responding to the proposed usage of a view camera to photograph HO scale dioramas]: > I hope you have a lot of lighting equipment. You're gonna need it. Placing a > view camera "into" a diorama is the last way I'd shoot something similiar. I > used to do a lot of model photography for the Walt Disney company. I > wouldn't have used a view camera for that on a bet. Now why is that necessarily so? With a view camera on a good tripod, one can use slow shutter speeds, so I don't see why lighting should be a limiting factor here. Reciprocity failure can be compensated for. If anything, I'd thing lighting requirements would be less of a problem because of the close working distance. You (or perhaps someone else that proposed it) may be correct that MF would be a better solution here, but I see no reason why a 4x5 shouldn't produce great results for the O.P.s intended use. Or am I missing something? Signature... asked to comment on Michigan governor George Romney's remark that the army had "brainwashed" him in Vietnam—-a remark which knocked Romney out of the running for the Republican nomination—-McCarthy quipped, "I think in that case a light rinse would have been sufficient." (Eugene McCarthy, onetime candidate for POTUS) The depth of field requirements for shooting models is substantial. Lighting a scale model is tough to do, adding in the fun of trying to fit a large format camera into the mix would make it that much tougher. I wish the OP luck but it's the hardest way possible to do what he claims he wants to do. As for the lighting, he'll either need a fair amount of wattage from strobe heads or some good quality hot lights and then he'll be dealing with the color balance and reciprocity issues. I've done model exposures that were measured in hours due to the above. Just for fun, we had to shoot the "dark ride" models under black light. Even more exciting. John Emmons > John Emmons spake thus [responding to the proposed usage of a view > camera to photograph HO scale dioramas]: [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > (Eugene McCarthy, onetime candidate for POTUS) > >> What exactly could make one 4x5 view camera worth 5x > >> or 10x another, assuming both are pretty much metal > >> framed and mounted on a metal column? > So? The examples you've given involve familiar items with known > quality/location differences. What are the differences in view cameras that > are important? If that was the question you wanted answered, it might have been better to ask in the first place and leave the dollar values out of it. There are any number of differences between the boxes that hold a lens and film. Wood versus metal may be the least of it. Which ones are important depends on what you want to use the camera for. Some I can think of: Available movements Bellows draw limits (short and long) Rigidity Weight Portability/setup/bulkiness Graflok back quality of focusing screen geared/ungeared movements independent controls for movements interchangeable bellows fancy stuff like scales and calculators compatibility with other stuff like hoods and focusing aids overall fiddliness/ease of use smoothness of movements/operation Name value/bragging rights/aesthetic appeal The sets of virtues desirable for different uses may be disjoint or even opposed. Many of these things are explained in books about view cameras, often available at your local library. Or http://www.lfphoto.info. Or http://www.lfphoto.info. I'm getting a "Gateway Timeout" error. SignatureM Stewart Milton Keynes, UK http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm > Or http://www.lfphoto.info. > > I'm getting a "Gateway Timeout" error. I have no problem at all reaching this site. I was amused to see an old post of mine explaining what you might expect to find in a box of sheet film, and how to load sheet film holders in the dark. There are a few tiny mistypes there, but it is useable. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 07:55:01 up 18:24, 3 users, load average: 4.26, 4.26, 4.13 > > Or http://www.lfphoto.info. > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > find in a box of sheet film, and how to load sheet film holders in the dark. > There are a few tiny mistypes there, but it is useable. Could be browser related,...I tried just now and worked fine in Safari, a few minutes prior the pages wouldn't load using Mozilla. Signature"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 www.gregblankphoto(dot)com >>> Or http://www.lfphoto.info. >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Could be browser related,...I tried just now and worked fine in Safari, > a few minutes prior the pages wouldn't load using Mozilla. I used FireFox 1.0.2 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 system. Firefox is a lot like Mozilla. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 08:20:00 up 18:49, 3 users, load average: 4.36, 4.30, 4.26 Jean-David Beyer spake thus: >>>> Or http://www.lfphoto.info. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I used FireFox 1.0.2 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 system. Firefox is a lot > like Mozilla. Firefox *is* Mozilla. Signature... asked to comment on Michigan governor George Romney's remark that the army had "brainwashed" him in Vietnam—-a remark which knocked Romney out of the running for the Republican nomination—-McCarthy quipped, "I think in that case a light rinse would have been sufficient." (Eugene McCarthy, onetime candidate for POTUS) > Jean-David Beyer spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Firefox *is* Mozilla. We may be splitting hairs, but my distribution comes with Mozilla and I later installed Firefox. Mozilla does not work with my stock broker, and does not work well with Intel. Firefox works just great with both. Those sites do not give a message saying the browser is incompatible with their site. They just do not work well, and do not even load some pages. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 17:15:00 up 1 day, 3:44, 3 users, load average: 4.37, 4.31, 4.27 > Or http://www.lfphoto.info. > > I'm getting a "Gateway Timeout" error. It's OK now. SignatureM Stewart Milton Keynes, UK http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm > What are the differences in view cameras that > are important? > > Norm The only significant difference between view camera models (within the same format) is WEIGHT. > The only significant difference between view camera models (within the > same format) is WEIGHT. Poppycock. The differences are profound! Axial tilt, degree of movements, YAW FREE or not, sturdiness of lockdowns, and far more. > > The only significant difference between view camera models (within the > > same format) is WEIGHT. > > Poppycock. The differences are profound! Axial tilt, degree of movements, > YAW FREE or not, sturdiness of lockdowns, and far more. Poppycock. Those are nitpicks. I can't think of any photographer worth his salt who couldn't work equally well with axis or base tilts, or with yaw or no yaw. And how much tilts, shifts, and swings does anybody ever use, for Pete's sake? I love to see those advertising pictures of view cameras twisted all out of shape. The other items you mention, degree of movements, sturdiness, and so on, are all WEIGHT dependent. If weight is not a consideration, you can add gizmos and gadgets at will and make the camera as heavy as a pachiderm. >> > The only significant difference between view camera models (within the >> > same format) is WEIGHT. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Poppycock. Those are nitpicks. I can't think of any photographer worth > his salt who couldn't work equally well with axis or base tilts, We were talking about camera models, not photographers. > > > The only significant difference between view camera models (within the > > > same format) is WEIGHT. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > add gizmos and gadgets at will and make the camera as heavy as a > pachiderm. I don't know what connotes a separation of nitpicks,...but I like lots of movements doing architectural's otherwise the work outways saving pennies on buying a cheaper camera. And doing landscapes having a lighter 13 lb camera sure beats carrying the 25 lb mono rail. Signature"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 www.gregblankphoto(dot)com : > > The only significant difference between view camera models (within the : > > same format) is WEIGHT. : > : > Poppycock. The differences are profound! Axial tilt, degree of movements, : > YAW FREE or not, sturdiness of lockdowns, and far more. : Poppycock. Those are nitpicks. I can't think of any photographer worth : his salt who couldn't work equally well with axis or base tilts, or : with yaw or no yaw. And how much tilts, shifts, and swings does anybody : ever use, for Pete's sake? I love to see those advertising pictures of : view cameras twisted all out of shape. I have both base and axis tilts on my front standard and never use the base tilt. I make very liberal use of tilts and swings on both front and rear standard. Earlier today I needed to use both tilt and swing on my front standard to properly focus a scene. : The other items you mention, degree of movements, sturdiness, and so : on, are all WEIGHT dependent. If weight is not a consideration, you can : add gizmos and gadgets at will and make the camera as heavy as a : pachiderm. I would gladly add a pound to a camera to get reliable lockdowns. While there is always a weight/feature trade off with a field camera. There are some features worth an extra pound or two of weight!! Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you : > The only significant difference between view camera models (within the : > same format) is WEIGHT. : Poppycock. The differences are profound! Axial tilt, degree of movements, : YAW FREE or not, sturdiness of lockdowns, and far more. Agreed!! A camera with a front standard that shifts swing or tilt when I cock the shutter or a rear standard that moves when I load the film holder is less then worthless. It's bad enough when I get enough out of focus image because something shifted while loading the film holder or cocking the shutter because I didn't lock the movements down. I would hate to think that was going on because of flacky lockdowns!! Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you The best LF camera is the one you will use instead of leaving it on the shelf. : > What are the differences in view cameras that : > are important? : > : > Norm : The only significant difference between view camera models (within the : same format) is WEIGHT. You also want to consider the available movements. Is the front tilt an axis tilt or base tilt? Does the rear standard have tilt, shift, rise and fall? To me a camera without rear tilt or swing is worthless and I never liked base tilt for the front standard. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you > Based on a very small sample of what I've seen on eBay and a few ads in > Shutterbug, the selling price (and presumably the value as well) of, say, > 4x5 view cameras ranges over a 5:1 range with IIRC Omega on the low end and > other, more prestigious, names on the higher end of the scale. What exactly > could make one 4x5 view camera worth 5x or 10x another, assuming both are > pretty much metal framed and mounted on a metal column? User? Collector? Polisher? So now that we've got that out of the way. Some are lighter then others. It seems to me that most of the interest in LF is from people that are taking the cameras out doors. Light easy to carry increases the price. Some of the cameras get glowing reviews by owners. Soon enough they turn into a mini cult. Often pricing them against better models. Flexibility. Some of the budget choices have other issues then just weight. Maybe they've got fixed bellows or just don't handle short lenses well. The real budget choices are so cheap now that they can't go much lower and still be worth selling. The other cameras have just held thier values better. Nick Signature--------------------------------------- "Digital the new ice fishing" --------------------------------------- > So now that we've got that out of the way. Some are lighter then others. People who seek the lightest camera aren't willing or able to suffer a couple pounds for quality. What stupidity. > Some of the cameras get glowing reviews by owners. Soon enough they turn > into a mini cult. Often pricing them against better models. Nick, let's name names. I'll begin with Deardorf - way overrated. Wista - same. Linhof Super Technika - heavy, exceedingly well designed, impossible to duplicate - and spendy as heck, but prices are falling like lead. > The real budget choices are so cheap now that they can't go much lower > and still be worth selling. Whew! You nailed it. Truth hurts. >> What exactly could make one 4x5 view camera worth 5x or 10x another, assuming both are pretty much metal framed and mounted on a metal column? << Higher price can result from the following... Demand: Relative scarcity Relatively higher price tag when new Intrinsic value: Increased flexibility/variety of camera adjustments Increased precision of mechanism Well, I use various large format cameras and IMHO, Linhof is simply the best. Not because of its nice label and name, but my Master Technika lived through absolutely everything I did to and with it - snow, ice, rain, storm, heat, sand, temperatures between minus 15 and plus 125...an no sign of any problems. It is very heavy, bulky and built like a tank..do this to most other brands and you see the difference. For me, Arca Swiss and Sinar are overrated, Toyo, Cambo and Wista are nice toys, Horseman is fine for occasional use, Wisner has got agricultural design, Canham is an interesting alternative (very interesting...the metal ones), Lotus is a very attractive light jewel (don't use it with heavy hands) and John Layton's new 4x5 would be my first choice if I would not own already two Linhof's. So, that is my view - George Nyman (www.gnyman.com) > Based on a very small sample of what I've seen on eBay and a few ads in > Shutterbug, the selling price (and presumably the value as well) of, say, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > TIA > Norm George Nyman spake thus: > Well, I use various large format cameras and IMHO, Linhof is simply the > best. Not because of its nice label and name, but my Master Technika lived > through absolutely everything I did to and with it - snow, ice, rain, > storm, heat, sand, temperatures between minus 15 and plus 125...an no sign > of any problems. It is very heavy, bulky and built like a tank. [...] So you're saying it's pretty useless as, say, a backpacking camera, right? Signature... asked to comment on Michigan governor George Romney's remark that the army had "brainwashed" him in Vietnam—-a remark which knocked Romney out of the running for the Republican nomination—-McCarthy quipped, "I think in that case a light rinse would have been sufficient." (Eugene McCarthy, onetime candidate for POTUS) > George Nyman spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > So you're saying it's pretty useless as, say, a backpacking camera, right? Aww. If it is built like a tank, he needs the big Majestic tripod, right? And if he can carry that in his backpack, surely he can carry the camera too. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 17:20:00 up 1 day, 3:49, 3 users, load average: 4.28, 4.29, 4.27 OK, I admit, you are right, I use a wooden Berlebach tripod which is not only super for the camera but also for fighting off bears and mountain lions...! I also use a Lotus view camera, it is light in weight, but as a previous comment mentioned - these light cameras need very soft hands and no wind and no bad environment - but they are light (lbs.)..I prefer my not so light Linhof (lbs.) Cheers - George Nyman >> George Nyman spake thus: >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > And if he can carry that in his backpack, surely he can carry the camera > too. hmmm, backpackable? I have a graflex view, and a gitzo studex set of legs, with a custom platform to screw the integral pan/tilt head/rail holder to. along with a handful of holders, it's eminently backpackable, total investment si less than $250, including a 90mm raptar and a 150 mm sironar. erie >>George Nyman spake thus: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Aww. If it is built like a tank, he needs the big Majestic tripod, right? > And if he can carry that in his backpack, surely he can carry the camera too. > George Nyman spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > So you're saying it's pretty useless as, say, a backpacking camera, right? You guys and your obsession with a little weight just amaze me. Are you all wimps? > > George Nyman spake thus: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > You guys and your obsession with a little weight just amaze me. Are you all > wimps? A Master Technika is a *bitchin'* field camera. T'ain't as light as the wood cameras but not all that heavy. Wide angle use is not its forte (no bag bellows and 90 mm or shorter lenses are a little hard to focus and use due to the design of the body. Stable as a solid block o' granite and movements that lock down tight. It's almost as good as a monorail in the studio, too, with its double extension focusing bed. The aformentioned wide angle limitations might cause probles in some studio situations. IMHO. the Technika IV and V are almost as good and, if you can get aroung a few things like lack of direct forward tile, the II is pretty good. (Forward tilt can be achieved by dropping the bed, applying rise and then adjusting the forward tilt by using the backward titl function. It also have full back movements.) raoul > Based on a very small sample of what I've seen on eBay and a few ads in > Shutterbug, the selling price (and presumably the value as well) of, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > TIA > Norm Is it a valid assumption? But ... age, wear and tear, quality of workmanship ... lens & shutter (if included). |
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.