 |
 | 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 / March 2007Calumet?
Hi All, I'm a "casual" photographer... I invest more time than the average hobbyist photographer into learning photography but I'm not a professional photographer. Better yet, I'm a software engineer that once had dreams to be a professional photographer. I started photography in the late 80's with 35mm and my own B&W darkroom. Recently I've jumped into the digital bandwagon with a sonalta d-slr. All good until I came to an exhibition of a fellow photographer (Dana Neibert) and realized that film is still used a lot, especially for commercial stuff. He showed his crown graphic, and that got me thinking. Now I want to start shooting large format (4x5), but on a budget, since I'll still shoot digital. From what I've researched, the calumets are a very good starter camera (cheap), and then I've bought one on ebay (one of the old CC-403 I believe, it's the gray one) for about $100 bucks (body only). The price is ok, so if I need to re-sell it, I won't loose any money. My question is if this is a good camera to start (and start buying stuff for it) or should I spend a bit more (and I really mean a bit) and start with a calumet 45 model (the black one, with square rails). I will mostly do stuff in my studio, and I don't care for convenience if I need to take a few shots outdoors (that's why I don't care for the folding models such as the crown graphic)... Cheers! Padu > My question is if this is a good camera to start (and start buying stuff for > it) or should I spend a bit more (and I really mean a bit) and start with a > calumet 45 model (the black one, with square rails). Better yet buy a used Omega View D or E in good shape! Built like tanks and were actually made by Mamiya. Used price maybe 300 dollars, and you'll have money for film, paper and chemicals.  SignatureGeorge W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had. The Omega View was the finest camera that I ever owned. It had the smoothest action of any view camera out there. I use a Crown Graphic now. It takes a lot longer to set up and lacks the extreme movements but that is not a problem. > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and were actually made by Mamiya. Used price maybe 300 dollars, and > you'll have money for film, paper and chemicals. Nermal spake thus: > The Omega View was the finest camera that I ever owned. It had the > smoothest action of any view camera out there. I use a Crown Graphic > now. It takes a lot longer to set up and lacks the extreme movements > but that is not a problem. Why do you say the Crown Graphic takes longer to set up? I have one, and I realize it lacks some of the features of monorail cameras, but I don't really see why it should take longer to set up. (Assuming you don't have to switch between portrait and landscape orientation, which would be faster on a camera w/a revolving back; but then, not all monorails have that feature.) SignatureDon't talk to me, those of you who must need to be slammed in the forehead with a maul before you'll GET IT that Wikipedia is a time-wasting, totality of CRAP...don't talk to me, don't keep bleating like naifs, that we should somehow waste MORE of our lives writing a variorum text that would be put up on that site. It is a WASTE OF TIME. - Harlan Ellison, writing on the "talk page" of his Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harlan_Ellison) My old Crown Graphic does take longer to set up...it is not a problem since I do not use it that often. It is much more portable than a view camera. The movements are more limited than a real view cameras can live and work around that though. Up till a few years ago I used it for macro work with short focal lenses on an old Compur shutter (35 mm, 55 mm, and 90 mm). I still love working with large negatives. I use 35 mm and 2 1/4 for macro now: no one processes color film in the large format. > Nermal spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > faster on a camera w/a revolving back; but then, not all monorails have > that feature.) > I use 35 mm and 2 1/4 for macro now: no one processes color film in the > large format. No one? Maybe no one near where you live.... Nermal spake thus: >> Why do you say the Crown Graphic takes longer to set up? I have one, >> and I realize it lacks some of the features of monorail cameras, but I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > My old Crown Graphic does take longer to set up...it is not a problem > since I do not use it that often. Sorry to bug you about this, but I still don't understand why a Crown Graphic would take longer than a view camera to set up. Assuming one already has the correct lens mounted in either case: Crown Graphic: 1. Attach to tripod 2. Open camera, pull out front standard & lock down 3. Open back, put up dark cloth 4. Open shutter & aperture 5. Compose & focus 6. Close shutter, reset aperture & shutter speed, cock shutter 7. Insert film holder, pull dark slide, make exposure. View camera: 1. Attach to tripod 2. Move front & rear standards to approx. position 3. Open back, put up dark cloth 4. Open shutter & aperture 5. Compose & focus 6. Close shutter, reset aperture & shutter speed, cock shutter 7. Insert film holder, pull dark slide, make exposure. Unless I'm missing something here ... SignatureDon't talk to me, those of you who must need to be slammed in the forehead with a maul before you'll GET IT that Wikipedia is a time-wasting, totality of CRAP...don't talk to me, don't keep bleating like naifs, that we should somehow waste MORE of our lives writing a variorum text that would be put up on that site. It is a WASTE OF TIME. - Harlan Ellison, writing on the "talk page" of his Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harlan_Ellison) It is step #2, adjust swings and tilts...etc. Very easy to do on a view camera...a little bit more complicated on a Crown Graphic especially since the movements are more limited. Y If I did more large format I would consider the purchase an Omega View camera. I would love to find a good reason to purchase an 8" x 10" view camera. Note: the lab that does my 2 1/4 film has to send the sheet film to an outside laboratory. The last time (12 years ago) the turn-around time for Ektachrome slides was 8 days. Ektacolor processing (with contact sheet only) takes 7 days. > Nermal spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Unless I'm missing something here ... Nermal spake thus: > It is step #2, adjust swings and tilts...etc. > Very easy to do on a view camera...a little bit more complicated on a > Crown Graphic especially since the movements are more limited. Well, since a Crown Graphic only has front tilt and a little bit of front shift & front rise, it's actually easier, since there isn't a whole lot you can do there. No locking the back standard in "neutral" position, etc. SignatureDon't talk to me, those of you who must need to be slammed in the forehead with a maul before you'll GET IT that Wikipedia is a time-wasting, totality of CRAP...don't talk to me, don't keep bleating like naifs, that we should somehow waste MORE of our lives writing a variorum text that would be put up on that site. It is a WASTE OF TIME. - Harlan Ellison, writing on the "talk page" of his Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harlan_Ellison) > I would love to find a good reason to purchase an 8" x 10" view camera. Desire. Desire is a good enough reason. I mean, why did you marry your wife? SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.nolindan.com/da/index.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com It's wonderful so many people appreciate and use the Crown Graphic. I have one as well and presently use a 130mm Dagor plus 150mm and 210mm G-Clarons with it. Given a Graflite gun and a box of bulbs i'd be as happy as a pig in you-know-what. The little creature is very portable, no excuse not to take it out to play. E-6 is fairly easy to do yourself or find a good lab, and get on a first name basis with the plant manager. They will be glad to handle the occasional rush job and you can mark up and bill the rush fees to your client. darkroommike > It is step #2, adjust swings and tilts...etc. > Very easy to do on a view camera...a little bit more complicated on a [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >> >> Unless I'm missing something here ... >E-6 is fairly easy to do yourself or find a good lab E-6 labs are getting hard to find and doing it yourself isn't as easy as you think if you want quality. You are right on both counts. I have done it before. Some out-of-state labs still do 4 x 5 E-6. This week I was at my local shop and asked about large format processing. I was given the name and phone number of an out-of-state laboratory. I contacted them: they wanted to know who recommended me and personal information, etc. They do hand processing (dip and dunk). I was told by one of the customers at the counter that he no longer shoots color sheet film due to poor quality control of most laboratories. We agreed laboratories that run quantities of roll film through a dedicated film machine still have good quality control. BTW - I submitted 5 rolls of Ektacolor/Kodacolor that were exposed using my roll film adapter on my Crown Graphic. The local lab cannot make enlargements but supplies proof sheets. >>E-6 is fairly easy to do yourself or find a good lab > > E-6 labs are getting hard to find and doing it yourself > isn't as easy as you think if you want quality. "Nermal" > You are right on both counts. > I have done it before. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > my roll film adapter on my Crown Graphic. The local lab cannot make > enlargements but supplies proof sheets. I'm very lucky then. Two blocks from my office there's a pro lab (http://www.chromedigital.com/) that develops E-6 4x5. Anyway, I think for starters I'll get a polaroid back until I get confortable with all the controls of my new calumet. Cheers Padu Padu spake thus: >>You are right on both counts. >>I have done it before. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I'm very lucky then. Two blocks from my office there's a pro lab > (http://www.chromedigital.com/) that develops E-6 4x5. A lot of us here are jealous of you. I have the feeling you're gonna have lots o'fun with your rig. SignatureDon't talk to me, those of you who must need to be slammed in the forehead with a maul before you'll GET IT that Wikipedia is a time-wasting, totality of CRAP...don't talk to me, don't keep bleating like naifs, that we should somehow waste MORE of our lives writing a variorum text that would be put up on that site. It is a WASTE OF TIME. - Harlan Ellison, writing on the "talk page" of his Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harlan_Ellison) You are lucky. Let us know how things turn out. The price is reasonable (they did not mention LF C41 processing). I may take up LF color photography again. Right now I am eye-balling an 8 x 10 view camera. Right now I am doing mostly B&W with my Crown Graphic. Yep, I also use a Polaroid back with the PN film. That is a great emulsion...the negatives don't look that great but they are very easy to print and the results are as about as good as with Kodak brand film. > "Nermal" > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Padu > You are lucky. > Let us know how things turn out. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >>> using my roll film adapter on my Crown Graphic. The local lab cannot >>> make enlargements but supplies proof sheets. Unfortunately Chrome do not process C-41 4x5 films, only smaller roll films or 35mm films. They are willing to send out to another place, though it would be easier to simply find a lab that does that. I only know of one local commercial 4x5 shooter that uses C-41 films, the rest all using E-6 films. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com> "Gordon Moat" > Unfortunately Chrome do not process C-41 4x5 films, only smaller roll > films or 35mm films. They are willing to send out to another place, though [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > A G Studio > <http://www.allgstudio.com> Yes, I called them to confirm that. But correct me if I'm wrong. My intention is to shoot E-6 and then scan it, so I can process and print digitally. In that account, wouldn't E-6 be better? I plan on using a flatbed epson scanner and scan it myself, and eventually (if I need a really high quality really large print) send the film out to be drum scanned. PS: I'm aware that E-6 is the process, I really meant to say transparency film. You got the idea. > "Gordon Moat" > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > PS: I'm aware that E-6 is the process, I really meant to say transparency > film. You got the idea. I definitely think it is better to have E-6 transparencies than C-41 negatives. Nearly all my 4x5 images are scan then print, and I think when you can see what you want on a light table, it is easier to work that way. Just to mention, the Creo Scitex EverSmart scans that Chrome do are quite good. Drum scanning would be better, if on a good machine run by a talented individual, though I have found that 90% of the time high end flatbed scans are quite good and meet my needs. Not sure what films you plan on shooting. I am only using Kodak Readyloads (mostly E100VS) and Fuji Quickloads (mostly Astia 100F). Just on a convenience level, it is easier to drop off these packets for processing than to drop off film holders or a box of film, though it depends upon how you want to work. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com> "Gordon Moat" >> Yes, I called them to confirm that. But correct me if I'm wrong. My >> intention is to shoot E-6 and then scan it, so I can process and print [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Ciao! Ciao, So that confirms my expectations. Right now I have only heard about what readyloads and quickloads are, but never touched or know anything other than they are easier to work with. For now I'll be shooting polaroids, and I'll keep learning until I can decide which type of holder I will feel more confortable with. Grazie, Padu Merlotti [SNIP] > For now I'll be shooting polaroids, and I'll keep learning until I can > decide which type of holder I will feel more confortable with. You can use Fuji Quickloads in a Kodak Readyload holder, but it doesn't work well the other way round. You can also sort of use either in a Polaroid holder, but this doesn't work reliably well for me, and it doesn't seem to hold the film as flat either. So I use a Polaroid holder for Polaroid, and a Kodak Readyload holder for both Fuji Quickload and Kodak Readyload packs. (As well as conventional DDSs to keep costs down in the studio, using Quickloads all the time is expensive.) This combination is simple, and works very well. Peter > [SNIP] > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Peter Yeah, I have tested both Readyloads in Quickload holders, and Quickloads in the Readyload holder. In both cases, the opposite system holder makes an okay back-up for the proper one. The fit is a bit snug, and if you ever insert the film packet wrong way around, the holder will jamb. It can work, but your best bet is the proper holder to match each film. What I don't like about the Polaroid 545 holders is the lack of a pressure plate. I think film flatness is much better with a Readyload or Quickload holder. Neither of those is as heavy as the Polaroid holder, so no problem to carry both. I don't mind the cost, since I pass that on to each client. The lack of worry and convenience make Quickloads and Readyloads a more streamlined solution than double darkslide conventional holders. When I want to use a film not available in Quickload or Readyload, often I simply use a Linhof Super Rollex back with 120 roll film. While that is a cropped 56mm by 76mm view (6x7), the results still enlarge or scan nicely. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com> > What I don't like about the Polaroid 545 holders is the lack of a > pressure plate. I think film flatness is much better with a Readyload or > Quickload holder. > Gordon Moat > A G Studio > <http://www.allgstudio.com> I don't know about the newer 545i backs but I shot a lot of 4x5 in August 2005 when I was in California. I had concerns because I typically load film. I also had not used the old 545 back for much 4x5 until the trip. I would like to do a comparison to see if any better by using holders....in my particular case of the trip I see no sharpness problems. SignatureGeorge W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had. >>What I don't like about the Polaroid 545 holders is the lack of a >>pressure plate. I think film flatness is much better with a Readyload or [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > holders....in my particular case of the trip I see no sharpness > problems. When I do fashion and lifestyle shots on 4x5, I tend to shoot wide open, or sometimes only stopped down as far as f8.0. These are different working conditions than many 4x5 users consider normal. I think when you stop down further that it might be less of an issue. It would be interesting to see a comparison, though subjectively it seems more logical that a pressure plate would serve some useful purpose in a holder. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com> > When I do fashion and lifestyle shots on 4x5, I tend to shoot wide open, > or sometimes only stopped down as far as f8.0. These are different [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > A G Studio > <http://www.allgstudio.com> Then again blurry out of focus Bokeh can be interesting for that sort of stuff :) SignatureGeorge W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had. > "Nermal" > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Padu Same place I have been using for just over ten years. In fact, I need to pick up some 4x5 E-6 from their today. On the Polaroid back, I am using the 405 holder on my 4x5. While it is slightly cropped from a full 4x5, you get an advantage of ten shots in a pack. The cost is much less going with type 669 or type 690 Polaroid films. You could also get a 550 Polaroid back, and then Fuji Instant FP100C in the slightly larger size; still ten shots in a pack, but not as cropped, and still fairly compact to carry with your other gear. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com> >I'm very lucky then. Two blocks from my office there's a pro lab >(http://www.chromedigital.com/) that develops E-6 4x5. I could drive there if I had to. Hope they stick around. >Anyway, I think for starters I'll get a polaroid back until I get >confortable with all the controls of my new calumet. Priced the polaroid film lately? >>I'm very lucky then. Two blocks from my office there's a pro lab >>(http://www.chromedigital.com/) that develops E-6 4x5. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Priced the polaroid film lately? Chrome actually have two different locations. The other one is in Sorrento Valley. After the closure of Chromacolor on India Street, Chrome found themselves quite busy. However, you can still get a turn-around time on 4x5 E-6 of three hours . . . not bad at all. <http://www.chromedigital.com> Check the website for location directions and times. They don't only process film, and I feel are quite good at printing. My suggestion to Padu of the type 405 holder was to cut the per shot Polaroid cost a bit. While not the least expensive way to shoot, it is better than wasting a 4x5 when you want to check exposure or lighting. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com> <ellis@no.spam> >>Anyway, I think for starters I'll get a polaroid back until I get >>confortable with all the controls of my new calumet. > > Priced the polaroid film lately? Yes, not cheap I know, but I think I'll learn the mechanics of the camera faster that way (and probably saving on the long run). Cheers Padu Nope Omega made by Toyo imported in the US by MAC (Mamiya America Corporation), they are nice and can be had cheaper than an older Graphic View or Calumet CC (go figure). And it's a "system camera--some models have interchangable bellows, sliding roll film backs and other goodies. darkroommike > >> My question is if this is a good camera to start (and start buying stuff for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and were actually made by Mamiya. Used price maybe 300 dollars, and > you'll have money for film, paper and chemicals. > Nope Omega made by Toyo imported in the US by MAC (Mamiya > America Corporation), they are nice and can be had cheaper [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > and were actually made by Mamiya. Used price maybe 300 dollars, and > > you'll have money for film, paper and chemicals. Ok a minor detail :) Most of the older goodies should be usable on the Newer Toyos and vice versus. SignatureGeorge W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had. Yes and the good news is that MAC stocks parts, I had to replace a strut on my 45 F that had been damaged by the original owner and repaired with a crummy two part epoxy. MAC not only stocks parts but will sell to the general public (if you're knowledgeable enough to describe the part they reason you can install the part, in the past I bought a "stop-pin" for a bayonet mount M645 lens and many of the little leaf springs that hold the roller in RB-67 backs--my boss shot seniors with RB's and we wore the damn things out). There are basically two types of monorail Toyo/Omega. A lot of the 4x5 cameras use a 6x6 standard (C,D,E,F,G). Backs, bellows and lens boards, all 6x6, all interchange. Some 6x6 models have fixed bellows (the D I think), 4x5 G's are pro level and heavier, less plastic, more metal; more geared movements, monorail extensions. G's also have a 6x6 front end and use tapered bellows and larger rear standards for the 5x7 and 8x10's. The 45A, 45AII, and 45CF are folding "field" cameras, have tapered bellows rather than 6x6 square and share a smaller 110mm lens board (I THINK they share the same size lens board haven't bought a Toyo field yet--its on my list) the 45CX monorail also uses a tapered bellows and the smaller lens board (mostly for compatibility for the guy using a 45CF in the field?). There's 5x7 and 8x10 versions of the G, kits to convert the G' to other formats, reducing backs for the larger G's, sliding roll film holders (both Graflok and Mamiya Press) an older 5x7 field and Toyo made Super Graphics (bought the tooling from Graflex and shipped it to Japan) for several years. Also a a couple more "odd ducks", there's a VX which cleverly folds up very small and uses an extend able rail and the Robos which is an extra fancy VX. The VX uses the tapered bellows and smaller lensboard so that it can collapse into a smaller package. darkroommike >> Nope Omega made by Toyo imported in the US by MAC (Mamiya >> America Corporation), they are nice and can be had cheaper [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Ok a minor detail :) Most of the older goodies should be usable on the > Newer Toyos and vice versus. Sure, hundreds of photographers learned how to use a view Camera with these old Calumets. Very durable equipment. If it's bellows are light tight and it locks down solidly, save your money for the lens board, lens (get something with some coverage so you can use the movements), dark cloth, holders, tripod, hand held meter, filters, and ... the darkroom that you're going to want to build to process it all yourself. Lots of better places to spend some money. You can always upgrade the camera itself if you wish, and as you said, you'll get your $100 back out of it when/if you choose to sell it. No one will be able to tell if your pictures were taken with the Calumet, Sinar, Bender or an old graphic ... ... ... I've never found a reason to upgrade from my old Calumet and it's still going strong after 20 years. > Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Padu >[SNIP] > > Lots of better places to spend some money. You can > always upgrade the camera itself if you wish, and as you > said, you'll get your $100 back out of it when/if you choose > to sell it. Good advice. Remember that in large format you are much less 'locked in' to a 'system' than with smaller formats. If you want to change cameras in future, a change of lens boards is all you need. Many accessories are interchangeable too, with only a few things like binocular viewers tending to be restricted to a single make. This means it's much easier to change your camera/brand choice when and if you ever want to 'upgrade', and carries a much lesser financial penalty, compared to doing so in smaller formats. The Calumet should be a good place to start: save the rest of your budget for tripod, film holders, a Polaroid back, film, and, of course, a lens or two. Peter Thank you all for the comments. This was the firt post I write here, and I could already get a sense of the type of help I can get here. Cheers Padu Got it in the mail yesterday. It's in pristine condition! Now I'm waiting for my lens and polaroid holder in the mail to start shooting. Cheers Padu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nermal" > Note: the lab that does my 2 1/4 film has to send the sheet film to an > outside laboratory. The last time (12 years ago) the turn-around time for > Ektachrome slides was 8 days. Ektacolor processing (with contact sheet > only) takes 7 days. If anyone else has such problems, I've run a lab here in NJ for thirty years and we're still offering dip and dunk rush processing of both E6 and C41 films. We can process up to 11x14 sheets of either. We process and return film that's sent to us the same day we get it. We also do drum scans from originals up to 8x10. john c. tech photo & imaging www.technicalphoto.com |
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.