PDA

View Full Version : Fuji Film in Polaroid 545 holder



paul owen
27-Aug-2005, 05:07
I was hoping to pick a few brains here! I understand that the Polaroid 545 PRO holder is compatible with Fuji Quickload film. Is there anyone using the older, all metal, 545 holder with Quickload film? Any issues/problems/quirks? Any info greatly appreciated! TIA Paul

Kirk Gittings
27-Aug-2005, 05:14
Yes it works fine, though the Fuji holder holds the film flatter than the old Polaroid does. I don't know about the newer Polaroid Holders.

paul owen
27-Aug-2005, 05:27
Thanks! I understand that the Fuji holder has a "pressure" plate of sorts - but when using the lens at (say) f22 I'm hoping that any "discrepancy" will be dealt with by using the small aperture!

Armin Seeholzer
27-Aug-2005, 08:35
Hi Paul

I used it in the past but was not happy with the results. I used it 3-4 times and got 2 sheets with lightleaks and sometimes unsharpness can't recomand it!
With the original Fuji holder its really a improvement, sharp results and no lightleaks!
Good luck!

David Karp
27-Aug-2005, 10:13
I have used the older 545 holder with Fuji Quickloads with no leak problems.

My buddy who is a professional photographer has run an awful lot of Quickloads through his 545 with the same results.

Jay
27-Aug-2005, 10:38
I have been an architectural photographer for some 35 years. My experience has been to the contrary. I have found thatFuji Qucikloads and Kodak readyloads are sharper in the 545 holder than either the Fuji or Kodak holders.

Just my experience.

Scott Rosenberg
27-Aug-2005, 15:33
jeff... glad to see i'm not the only one... i used to use both fuji and kodak packet film in my 545i holder. i also used fuji film in a fuji holder. the only problems i ever had with film flatness were with the fuji holder. NEVER with the 545i. i've since switched to cut film holders - film is flat, i'm sending less waste to the landfills, and it's less expensive.

Will Strain
27-Aug-2005, 16:47
My old metal 545 works quite nicely with quickloads or readyloads. No flatness problems at all I've been able to discern... and fewer bent clips than I was getting with my readyload holder.

Paul Butzi
27-Aug-2005, 17:22
At one point, I measured the film positioning of a bunch of holders, including measuring the position of readyloads and quickloads in the Kodak holder readyload holder, in fuji quickload holder, and in my two Polaroid 545i holders.

The kodak and fuji holders were right on the money compared to my grafmatics and standard Fidelity/Lisco/Riteway holders.

Readyloads and quickloads were off by amout 1mm. I have had long arguments with Steve Simmons, who insists that this is not sigificant.

Both the Fuji and Kodak holders use a spring loaded pressure plate to index the film forward against a stop (ensuring good film position and flatness), the Polaroid holder uses springs to push the packet back (the source of the positioning error and the source of the film flatness problems as well).

When I use Readyloads or Quickloads, I use a Kodak single sheet Readyload holder. I will not use either of my Polaroid holders for readyloads or quickloads.

If I care a lot about film flatness for some reason, I load up grafmatics, which appear to me to give the best film flatness and positioning of all the options I have available.

Be aware that the size of the exposed area varies with different holders. The polaroid holder gives a slightly larger image area than either the Kodak or Fuji holders, but because the film is not pressed tightly against the edge of the aperture, the edges of the exposure are not quite as sharply defined.

The Polaroid holders are significantly bulkier and heavier than the Kodak and Fuji holders. Last time I checked prices, they were significantly more expensive, too.

Paul Butzi
27-Aug-2005, 17:29
You might find www.butzi.net/reviews/readyquick.htm (http://www.butzi.net/reviews/readyquick.htm) helpful as well.

Will Strain
27-Aug-2005, 18:22
"The Polaroid holders are significantly bulkier and heavier than the Kodak and Fuji holders. Last time I checked prices, they were significantly more expensive, too."

Yes, but if you've been shooting for a while, the odds of your already owning a 545 are pretty good. And if it works for all 3 formats, so much the better.

As it is, my black and white work is all type 55 at this stage. So, when shooting I'm already bringing my back. I didn't see enough of a difference to warrant bringing an additional back (fuji's or kodak's) even though I own one (the older kodak model).

But that is just for me. Obviously everybody has their own method, kit and carry requirements.

Paul Butzi
28-Aug-2005, 09:44
Yes, but if you've been shooting for a while, the odds of your already owning a 545 are pretty good.

Sure, that's a good point. Of course, if you've been shooting for a while, the odds of you owning a readyload or quickload holder are good, too, but I agree with your point.

And if it works for all 3 formats, so much the better.

Right. My point is that a readyload or quickload in the Polaroid holder (at least both of my Polaroid holders) results in a film positioning error of about 1mm.

So I'd urge anyone considering using the Polaroid holder to measure the film position first and compare that measurement to their measurement of a regular holder.

Fragomeni
4-Aug-2010, 13:10
Hello everyone. I hope no one minds me hijacking this 5 year old thread.

As a continuation of the above discussion after the fall of Polaroid, can anyone tell me if they are using any current production instant film for 4x5 photography? I am interested in using instant black & white but I can't figure out if there is any product available on the market that I can use with the cameras I currently have on hand.

I have been asking about the old Polaroid 545i holders and compatibility with current production Fuji films but it doesn't look like Fuji makes a single sheet instant film that works with it. I've also looked at the Kodak instant back that originally allowed 4x5 cameras to use PR10 instant film but again there doesn't seem to be any current production instant film that can be used with that holder.

The current Fujifilm pack film holder that takes FP-100B instant film packs appear to be too thick to use in a spring back press camera like the older 545i holders could.

My intention is to use instant B&W film with Speed Graphic (spring back) press camera and possibly in my Graphic View field camera (also a spring back). Is anyone doing this today? If so how so? Are there any conversions or hacks that will allow for it?

Thanks!

ivm
9-Jun-2011, 09:41
[QUOTE=Fragomeni;614987]Hello everyone. I hope no one minds me hijacking this 5 year old thread.

I'm in the same boat so to speak. Now that Fuji is making instant film packs, we should be able to use either the FP100 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 or new colour film 4x5 with the 545 or 545ii backs.

But I think you require a Graflok back for this?

Brian C. Miller
9-Jun-2011, 10:24
The Fuji FP100 products cannot be used in the 545 holders. The packs are pack film, not sheet film. The 545 holder can be used with Kodak Readyload or Fuji Quickload sheet film.

You will need to use a Polaroid 550 with the FP100-45.

Bogdan Karasek
18-Jan-2012, 14:34
Hello, I have still the older 545 holder which I used with Pola 72 to make proofs. It was great because I could see exactly what I was getting before shooting with 4x5 film.

Which Fujifilm are you talking about that fits the 545 holder?


Regards,
Bogdan K

Brian C. Miller
18-Jan-2012, 14:42
There is [b]no[/i] Fuji film for the 545 holder.

The only Polaroid holders that work with the Fuji film are the 550 and 450 pack holders.