|
King of Bees posted:Just got a "Schneider 135mm f5.6 235mm f11 Symmar in Synchro-Compur shutter" and a 6.8 90mm from an auction and I'm ready to take the plunge. What's the best next steps? Not looking to go all out or on the cheap. Almost all of my shooting is MF these days so I'm excited to bump up for epicly lame but cool to me landscapes with 80 pounds of gear. Do you have a camera yet? What kind of photography do you do?
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Do you have a camera yet? What kind of photography do you do? No camera yet, looking for recs, and mostly landscapes and some studio still life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
your main choice is monorail vs press camera. Monorail has more movements but is heavier and needs to be done from a tripod, whereas press cameras can be shot handheld and often have a rangefinder built in. You can still shoot a press camera using the ground glass but movements will be more limited. it sounds like you are looking for a monorail based on landscapes+still life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
Well, there's field cameras as well, which has movements and are a fair bit more practical than mono-rails.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
Just get a Chamonix and skip all the growing pains. It's worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:51
|
|
|
C H A M O N I X Don’t waste your time with poo poo like the intrepid. You’ll end up buying the chamonix later anyways
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:Just get a Chamonix and skip all the growing pains. It's worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
I'm sensing a theme here... Any recs for finding a used one?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 02:28
|
|
|
i'd just look around, they're sturdy cameras, if you can find a used one without obvious visual issues (physically broken parts) it should be fine. looking at completed ebay listings they don't seem to come around very often, but when they do, they go for nearly full retail, so if you buy new and hate it you can always resell!
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 02:40
|
|
|
Any thoughts on the two lenses? They were part of a huge lot of camera gear at auction and the estate they came from was mostly high end with blads and leicas and accessories from the 60s and 70s. So it seemed like the person bought good stuff. Ken Rockwell uses the same 90 for travel quite a bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 02:50
|
|
|
Echoing the chamonix sentiment
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 03:24
|
|
|
Just repeating that I still think my Intrepid was worth the money and weight saving, but they're a lovely company and any buyer should be aware of that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 03:26
|
|
|
What're the recommended Chamonixes (chamoni?) nowadays? There's a lot of very similar models without much explanation on the differences between them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 03:33
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:What're the recommended Chamonixes (chamoni?) nowadays? There's a lot of very similar models without much explanation on the differences between them. This!
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 03:34
|
|
|
King of Bees posted:Any thoughts on the two lenses? They were part of a huge lot of camera gear at auction and the estate they came from was mostly high end with blads and leicas and accessories from the 60s and 70s. So it seemed like the person bought good stuff. Ken Rockwell uses the same 90 for travel quite a bit. the Angulon 90/6.8 is an Angulon type (shocking, I know, this floor is made out of floor, but it was good/distinctive enough that it named its own category/formula) and basically covers 4x5 straight on with no movements when stopped down. The design dates to the 30s, it's not a superfluous lens by modern standards but it's fine stopped down to f/16 or f/22. The selling point for modern usage is that it's super light and small, so it's good for hiking and travel, and can often be tucked inside a body. there is nothing with equal coverage, equal quality, and equally small, and certainly not a whole lot that's better for the price (normally sub-$100). The "better lenses" are things like a Super Angulon type (and others with the same formula like Grandagon, Nikkor-SW, Fujinon-SW, etc) that are 3x or more as thick. They are not, however, hugely more expensive, basic Super Angulon 90/8 in rimset Compur starts around $170 or so and apart from the size it's a better lens. The Symmar is a classic 50s/60s example of what's known as a "plasmat" type. This is essentially the bog-standard "modern" postwar (WWII) lens and with good reason, it's a solid performer with good coverage (a 135mm will give you modest movements on 4x5 when stopped down, or can be shot straight on when wide open, perhaps a little soft wide open). What's more, this is what's known as a "convertible" where you can take off the front lens group ("front cell") and shoot using just the back cell, which results in a much slower, much longer focal length, much less corrected image. This is not hugely useful vs a dedicated lens but it's there. There generally exist equally good to better plasmats (Nikkor-W, Fujinon-W, etc) at fairly low prices (think around $150) and there are better lenses at higher prices (apo plasmats, generally $700+, or planar types at $1300-$2000), but this is one of those situations where for the most part they're all relatively the same within some range, it's like buying a 50/1.4 or a 85mm portrait lens, they are all pretty much the same formula and all perform pretty much the same and it's not worth circlejerking too hard about how "the Pentax 50/1.4 is totes better than the Nikkor 50/1.4 !!1!11!". (lens history can basically be divided into a few eras, the biggest division is pre-WWII vs post-WWII. WWII was when optical coating got figured out and that had a massive impact on lens design, previously to that every element with an air-glass interface resulted in diffraction as the different frequencies of light scattered, this manifested as a loss of contrast in more complex lens formulas. The important lens formulas were all figured out quite quickly, the Planar and Plasmat types actually date to the 1890s, but these were impractical for normal use because the contrast was too low, so prewar lenses focused on minimizing air-glass interfaces and maximizing the quality you got from the smallest number of elements - basically triplet, Tessar, and Heliar types, along with some occasional 'symmetric' wide-angle types like Biogon, Angulon, Hypergon, Topogon, etc. If you want, you can also divide things into a pre-1900 era ("pre-panchromatic and pre-modern glass types") and a post-1990 era ("modern CAD lens designs on multi-coatings and multiple aspheric/exotic glass elements") but the pre-vs-post war distinction is the most significant.) In short, assuming the lenses are in decent shape (no fungus, no separation/Schneideritis, shutters working, etc) what you have is a basic, competent lens kit, very shootable but not the LF equivalent of Leica/Hasselblad tier gear. Fair market value of those two lenses together in average-ish condition is $200-250. It’ll be fine for getting started and once you figure out your needs a little more precisely you can go from there. As far as whether the lenses will work for you... That is not the lens kit for massive movements, if you want more movements on 4x5 then you probably want either a 90mm Super Angulon type or a 120mm Angulon/Super Angulon type, and probably a 135mm/150mm Super Angulon or 150mm Plasmat type. But it will be enough to get started and do basic landscape/studio stuff. After all that would have been a professional lens kit in the 50s. Just don't expect to take a monorail and turn it into a pretzel doing tilts and shifts on them like some of the later superwide coverage lenses can do. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 08:40 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:What're the recommended Chamonixes (chamoni?) nowadays? There's a lot of very similar models without much explanation on the differences between them. The main one to get is the Chamonix 45n2: http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/cameras/45n2 The 45H-1 and 45Hs-1 are for people who need to use ultra-wide lenses. The 45F-2 is for those who need asymmetric rear tilt, usually for shots that require heavy use of the Scheimpflug principle. And yes, get a Chamonix, not the terrible Intrepid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 09:14
|
|
|
Intrepid is the lightest 4x5 since you’ll realize how poorly made it is and just not carry it around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 09:52
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Amazingly helpful post Thank you! Wild EEPROM posted:Intrepid is the lightest 4x5 since you’ll realize how poorly made it is and just not carry it around. Lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 11:14
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Just repeating that I still think my Intrepid was worth the money and weight saving, but they're a lovely company and any buyer should be aware of that. Just curious: have you ever used a large format field camera that isn't an Intrepid?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 18:59
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:The main one to get is the Chamonix 45n2: http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/cameras/45n2 gently caress, the n2 is sold out  Website says they'll be back in "4-6 months" but who knows when that was initially posted. I'll just have to keep my eyes on there I suppose. I'm not a huge fan of super wide-angle, and while I would like to take advantage of movements and such I dunno if I'd really need the flexibility provided by the 45F-2, I doubt I'd be able to take full advantage of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 19:09
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Just curious: have you ever used a large format field camera that isn't an Intrepid? No, I have not and while I have no doubt that the Chamonix is much nicer to use, I don't think it would make my pictures any better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 19:37
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:gently caress, the n2 is sold out For what it's worth, you don't have to use the extra movements on the 45F-2, so it's really a matter of whether you want to spend $200 extra to have the camera sooner. ImplicitAssembler posted:No, I have not and while I have no doubt that the Chamonix is much nicer to use, I don't think it would make my pictures any better. Sure it would - I remember the shot you posted of the alleyway that had some real wacky tilt. Don't underestimate how much of a difference something really simple and basic like having zeroing marks/detents makes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 23:15
|
|
|
Looks like I need to save up some cash for when the chamonix comes back on line. So getting an old wista n or something for a couple hundred is not a good idea? There's tons of them from japan on ebay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 01:07
|
|
|
King of Bees posted:Looks like I need to save up some cash for when the chamonix comes back on line. So getting an old wista n or something for a couple hundred is not a good idea? There's tons of them from japan on ebay. A Wista 45N is a perfectly decent choice, with some relatively minor limitations: - Base tilt rather than axis tilt on the front standard means more tilt/focus/tilt/focus iterations - axis tilt like on the Chamonix means if you zero out rise/fall, changing tilt won't change the focus distance at the center of the frame - No front swing or fall movements - 5 pounds is heavier than most other field cameras - 300mm maximum bellows draw means a 240mm lens is probably about the longest you can use and still focus at distances you'd use to photograph people
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 01:42
|
|
|
Toyo 45AII is a brilliant alternative and comes up regularly. Considerably heavier but virtually unbreakble.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 01:50
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:gently caress, the n2 is sold out I bought an F1 because the N2 was out of stock at the time. I'm pretty sure I've never used rear tilt, but I don't regret my decision. Also, the separate knobs for tilt and rise/fall on the F2 is a feature I wouldn't mind having. Been shooting my Bronica SQ a lot lately, here are some shots.    
eggsovereasy fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 04:53
|
|
|
^ Those are extremely sick. First and 3rd especially.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 11:35
|
|
|
Truly the one true Horseman configuration
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 10:30
|
|
|
And the only way to use a Mamiya 645
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 10:36
|
|
|
*Only if you are a white male.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 17:21
|
|
|
Sorry ladies this one's for the fellas
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 02:35
|
|
|
So excited to be going down to the closest reasonable mountains near me this weekend (Tongariro national park in New Zealand) for a two day hike. Just lol at multi-day hikes with the Chamonix though, way more than half my packs weight is the camera and other poo poo required to operate it. Weather better play ball, it’s a pretty spectacular volcanic area and should have a reasonable amount of snow on the peaks right now. Too bad it’s only for one night, I can already picture myself now not knowing what to shoot first in the few hours of reasonable light in the morning and afternoon...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 09:25
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:So excited to be going down to the closest reasonable mountains near me this weekend (Tongariro national park in New Zealand) for a two day hike. Just lol at multi-day hikes with the Chamonix though, way more than half my packs weight is the camera and other poo poo required to operate it. Weather better play ball, it’s a pretty spectacular volcanic area and should have a reasonable amount of snow on the peaks right now. Too bad it’s only for one night, I can already picture myself now not knowing what to shoot first in the few hours of reasonable light in the morning and afternoon... Yeah, been accruing multi-day hike gear over the winter and the core items (tent, sleeping bags (for me and the dog), cooking gear, extra clothing) weighs less than the camera gear. Still waiting for the snow to clear at higher altitudes before heading out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:14
|
|
|
Anyone use a 75mm with their Chamonix? I'm assuming I'd have to move the rear standard forward to focus at infinity? Any issues with movements and the 'universal bellows'? Will vignetting be a problem? Would I need a center filter? It seems like the Nikon 75mm f/4.5 has the most coverage of the modern ones I could find specs for. I'm not backpacking or anything with it so weight isn't a huge concern.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:For what it's worth, you don't have to use the extra movements on the 45F-2, so it's really a matter of whether you want to spend $200 extra to have the camera sooner. Missed this one!. Yeah, fair enough. I'm still kinda baffled by that one, but it has then also proved to be a good lesson in double checking that the back is set up correctly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Anyone use a 75mm with their Chamonix? I'm assuming I'd have to move the rear standard forward to focus at infinity? Any issues with movements and the 'universal bellows'? Yeah the bellows minimum is 52mm so you're probably going to have to move the rear standard forward so the base doesn't appear in your shots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 04:20
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Anyone use a 75mm with their Chamonix? I'm assuming I'd have to move the rear standard forward to focus at infinity? Any issues with movements and the 'universal bellows'? I had a 75mm lens on an f1 chamonix, it was finr but squishy you can get a bag bellows iirc. I didnt use a centre filter but there was negligible fall-off. Alternatively, tilt the rear standard back and drop the bed down, rise the front standard so its in line with the rear again, should get rid of seeing it in ur shots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 08:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
I've used a 65mm on my Chamonix a number of times. Using the rearmost position for the front standard and with zeroed rise/fall, the bed appears in the frame in portrait orientation but not in landscape. The problem disappears if you use the second rearmost position for the front standard. Yes, you have to move the rear standard forward. You won't have much image circle for movements but the standard "universal" bellows won't be a problem in this regard.
MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jun 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 19:27
|
|