|
McMadCow posted:Just a heads up to Brit/UK large format shooters, I'm selling my MPP plus a dozen holders and a Polaroid back in the gear thread. Sorry to see you have to let it go. Where are you moving to now?
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Sorry to see you have to let it go. Where are you moving to now? Back to the States. East Coast for a month and then back to San Fran. I don't want to sell it and I'm just going to buy another one when I get back across the pond, but my move is quickly becoming a nightmare and putting it and all my plates in my luggage is going to put me over the weight limit before I even start. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:Back to the States. East Coast for a month and then back to San Fran. I don't want to sell it and I'm just going to buy another one when I get back across the pond, but my move is quickly becoming a nightmare and putting it and all my plates in my luggage is going to put me over the weight limit before I even start. I'll pay for shipping to me and then shipping to you in San Fran if I can rent it until May/June.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Tesla Was Robbed posted:I'll pay for shipping to me and then shipping to you in San Fran if I can rent it until May/June. Where are you located? We may be talking hundreds of Dollars or Pounds for international shipping.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:Where are you located? We may be talking hundreds of Dollars or Pounds for international shipping. In the US. It was probably me more dreaming of a cheap way to convince the wife that we need to put a medium format camera in the budget. Guess it won't be that cheap
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
If you're thinking that's medium format you're gonna be in for a wild ride.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:It's pointless to buy a 67ii unless you're heavily invested in the P67 already. The improvements are minor in the grand scheme of things (autoexposure, matrix metering, and better mirror damping) and the camera is far, far, far more expensive. The 67 is essentially the same camera as the 6x7MLU (only a few metal parts changed to plastic), so there's no reason at all to prefer one or the other. MLU-less bodies are typically a bit cheaper. So if you were going to buy a P67 would you have a preference over a MLU 6x7 or a P67 body?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
ZippySLC posted:So if you were going to buy a P67 would you have a preference over a MLU 6x7 or a P67 body? I'd prefer the 6x7 MLU slightly, because supposedly they have a few metal parts that became plastic in the later version, and are a bit cheaper. Condition is more important than the specific model, really. People pay a bit of a premium for newer stuff. The differences between the 6x7 MLU and 67 are trivial, they're basically the same camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
From my experience the MLU isn't as important as some make it out to be - the biggest issue in terms of shake on the P67 is the absolutely massive focal plane shutter, not the mirror.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
dukeku posted:From my experience the MLU isn't as important as some make it out to be - the biggest issue in terms of shake on the P67 is the absolutely massive focal plane shutter, not the mirror. Yeah, it's important to remember that the P67 was a professional camera system that was produced unchanged for almost three decades, if it wasn't capable of delivering professional results it wouldn't have lived that long. That said, I would still buy a MLU version if I could afford it, unless I found a screaming deal on a non-MLU unit. This is because I advocate getting the focusing screen replaced, and if you're going to send it in for work you might as well have the work done on the non-gimpy version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
I've seen people online saying that the viewfinders got progressively brighter and that the ergonomics on the 67II are far superior. The built in grip (not the wood one) looks helpful. Is it worth an extra $500? Eh, probably not. But having a bright viewfinder is important. I find my Yashica TLR almost unusable in all but the brightest situations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
ZippySLC posted:I've seen people online saying that the viewfinders got progressively brighter and that the ergonomics on the 67II are far superior. The built in grip (not the wood one) looks helpful. Is it worth an extra $500? Eh, probably not. But having a bright viewfinder is important. I find my Yashica TLR almost unusable in all but the brightest situations. That's why I suggest the focus screen, brightness is a lot less important when you just need to line up the split prism. Some of the slower lenses (75mm) are definitely a bit on the dark side. I'm not sure it's really body-related though. All the viewfinders are interchangeable, so the only thing in the body that would affect it is the screen. People recommend cleaning or replacing Rollei/Yashica screens to brighten them up, I'd imagine the Pentax screens collect dust just the same and would benefit from either cleaning or swapping the screen out entirely. If you clean the screen on a 6x7 it should be just as bright as one that rolled off the line. The 67ii might have a screen with a brightness enhancing coating (Hi-Lux, OptiBrite, etc) but I'd bet against it personally. I think it's just age. I'd believe the ergonomics got better, the 67 isn't unusable but it's definitely not the most comfy camera in the world to hold. I've seen people make 67ii style handgrips for the 67 out of wood, if you really need to you could just do that. I'm fine with the OEM wood handgrip. The AE pentaprism did get a digital display, which is very nice, but that feature set isn't worth the extra $800 to me (~$1100 vs ~$300). Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
The 67ii is just late-era excess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
MF macro with a generous serving of bokeh! RVP50 R56-2 by alkanphel, on Flickr  RVP50 R56-6 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Anyone know the differences between the Chamonix 45N-1 and the 45N-2? Google isn't helping much. Someone in town is selling an N-1 in like new conidition with reflex viewfinder for $900CDN which seems like a pretty decent deal. edit: vvv looks like I'm an idiot then burzum karaoke fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Feb 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
dude ranch posted:Anyone know the differences between the Chamonix 45N-1 and the 45N-2? Google isn't helping much. Chamonix' site has the differences: http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/45.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
 The Bookseller, Rue la Fayette by JaundiceDave, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
Genderfluid posted:
I wish his left hand wasn't cut at the wrist, other than that I really like this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
 Melbourne is in there somewhere, Fuji Acros, Rodinal with an orange filter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 11:15
|
|
|
I needed to finish off a roll with a couple of shots left on it so I resorted to taking photos around my flat. Getting a tripod set up in a bathtub is harder than you might imagine: mamiya_HP5+009 by Tim Breeze, on Flickr edit: One of something not my filthy bathroom:  mamiya_HP5+007 by Tim Breeze, on Flickr Holistic Detective fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Feb 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
cross posting I did some long exposures a while ago with the DSLR, I wanted to try the same thing with the Blad. Next time I'm at sea I'll aim for some longer exposures. This last trip the weather was really good so we didn't get too much mad dramatic water so the results aren't as crazy... but still happy with how they turned out. all scanned, no adjustments except some dust spotting. Red filter owns. When I shoot b&w it pretty much lives on my camera. most of the ship is orange so it pops the superstructure out and darkens the water.  Out on the trawl deck by Alex Gard, on Flickr  Out on the trawl deck by Alex Gard, on Flickr  Out on deck by Alex Gard, on Flickr  Out on the trawl deck by Alex Gard, on Flickr  Out on deck by Alex Gard, on Flickr  Out on deck by Alex Gard, on Flickr Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Feb 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Those are beautiful, especially the third one. How did you stabilize the camera? I can't imagine a tripod could stay still too well on a ship's deck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Surprisingly it's not so bad. In really rough weather I just hold the tripod as firm as I can and push it downward into the deck. I'm probably making this up but maybe my hands absorb some of the vibration coming up the tripod, who knows. I found that exposures 1/2-1 second work well, anything over that doesn't look as dramatic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
You post good stuff Mr. Sludge Tank.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
 Tiong Bahru, 2013 by alkanphel, on Flickr  Tiong Bahru, 2013 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
For roughly the same price, should I get a Pentax 67, Bronica ETRSi, or Fujica GSW690II? Here's what I see as the main pros of each, let me know if I'm wrong. Bronica: Can change film backs More shots per roll Pentax: Sick gripz Pentax makes good lenses Fujica: Won't be tempted to buy a gamut of lenses? Which one should I get?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
more shots per roll is actually a con, each neg with the bronica is half the size or less when you compare it to the negs you'd get out of the pentax or the fujica.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:
That's some National Geographic poo poo right there. How long of an exposure was that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Fujica: It's a fixed lens rangefinder, so no swapping of lenses, unless you go and get the wide angle version too, the GSW690.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Spedman posted:It's a fixed lens rangefinder, so no swapping of lenses, unless you go and get the wide angle version too, the GSW690. Right, hence I won't be tempted to buy lenses for it! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:That's some National Geographic poo poo right there. How long of an exposure was that? about 1/2 sec IIRC
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Geektox posted:For roughly the same price, should I get a Pentax 67, Bronica ETRSi, or Fujica GSW690II? Here's what I see as the main pros of each, let me know if I'm wrong. Pentax: bitchin awesome Rest:
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
I wouldn't get a 645 camera, but you can probably find a Bronica SQ kit for around that price range too and it's 6x6. So really, if you want interchangeable lenses get the Pentax, otherwise I love my GW690ii. Mr Despair is right though, if you want more shots per roll just stick with 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Bronica SQ systems seem like a good choice until you spend all your money on lenses 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 11:09
|
|
|
I got an incredible deal on my GW690II, but as much as I love it, if I was looking at paying market value, I'd get a P67 over it. It really comes down to preference and what you intend on doing with it. A rangefinder system will lighten your load, the 6x9 format is nice for landscapes and you'll get huge negatives by medium format standards, but it's a pretty crappy system to use for portraiture or anything that you'd want close focusing or depth of field preview for. burzum karaoke fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 12:54
|
|
|
I spent 2 hours today replacing the bellows on a toyo 45AII. Bellows came from ebay seller tokyophoto. Highly recommend him, seems like good quality kit and comes with all tools needed. Has a few different bellows for different cameras. Paid $100 for the kit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
I paid about $350-400 for my GW690, and I love it. I guess the GSW is probably more than that? I think the fuji is a great MF camera to start out with (if you are OK with rangefinders). At least for me, as it's lighter and more compact, I'm more likely to carry and use it. I would say it's slightly less conspicuous than other MF cameras but I think we all know that's a lie. At least it doesn't get confused for a video camera like my Hasselblad does...
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
dukeku posted:Pentax:  Hell yeah
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Geektox posted:For roughly the same price, should I get a Pentax 67, Bronica ETRSi, or Fujica GSW690II? Here's what I see as the main pros of each, let me know if I'm wrong. You might consider the Mamiya RB67 as well. They're not expensive, and they're easy to find, have lots of lenses available, interchangeable (and rotatable) backs, bellows focusing, and you can shoot 6x4.5 up to 6x8 with the right backs. You can also make it compatible with Hassleblad V-system digital backs if you win the goddamned lottery. I have an RB67 and I like it a lot. It's very heavy and 100% manual, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Geektox posted:Fujica: Buy a G690 series and a gamut of lenses  Serious answer, I'd say either the P67 or the Fujica. If you haven't tried rangefinder focusing before, try to find something cheap first so you know if you like it. If you can live with one focal length, the Fujicas are good cameras, otherwise as a SLR the P67 will be more flexible overall. The Fujica 6x7 models are kind of dumb though. There's also a similar series in 6x4.5, but I'd go with the bigger negatives. The P67 lenses actually aren't all that spendy, they'll drop back down after the tax return rush. And yes, the lenses are great. The RB67 is heavy as hell, get a tripod with a good ballhead if you go that route. There's nothing wrong with the ETRSi, but the P67 or the Fujica have a lot larger negative areas. 6x4.5 slides are OK, 6x7 or 6x9 slides are amazing. Also be aware that some 6x4.5 cameras put the frame in portrait rather than landscape orientation. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Feb 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2014 01:50
|
|