I'm using a couple of Toyo roll film holders and I love 'em!!! They are larger than most but lighter in weight. And best of all, they hold the film absolutely flat. And yes, they are expensive. I bought mine used in mint condition.
I'm using a couple of Toyo roll film holders and I love 'em!!! They are larger than most but lighter in weight. And best of all, they hold the film absolutely flat. And yes, they are expensive. I bought mine used in mint condition.
And lack of dust and film type availability and ease of loading and number of frames you can carry easily and... well I guess those are about it.Originally Posted by CXC
Ok, they're not easier to load than a single holder, but it's much easier to load a RF back in the field than fooling with a changing bag and associated dust.
Since I'm grounded this wkend as my foot heals, I spent the day printing 6X9 negs
from a Horseman roll film back vs Pentax 6x7, all onto 16X20 B&W. This is my first
time printing from a roll film back, placed on my Ebony 4X5, using typical but modern view lenses. My first impression is that the presence of movements using
the view camera leads to much better odds of acute focus throughout the image.
This was expected and the results are certainly impressive. What I am also learning
is that the film seems to need less spotting when I use the Horseman back, simply
because there no nearby shutter curtain and mirror flipping stuff around. I typcially
load everything in the cleanroom; but if lenses or film are changed in the field, it's
very difficult to keep minor contamination out, especially in the mtns or desert.
So I looks like I have a good alternative to sheet film on long backpack trips, provided I don't plan shoot color too. I tend to print color larger, and it would
necessitate a separate back, so the weight saving over a changing tent and half
a dozen holders would be negligible, that is, once all my remaining Quickloads
are finally used up.
I have a Horseman 6x9 back for my MPP MKVII, it's light and sturdy with no problems with film flatness at all, I can understand why they are highly rated backs.
I have been considering buying a roll film holder to use with my 4X5 camera. I have a CC400 which has the spring back. This limits me to something like the slider type holder. Another option would be to upgrade my camera. I was looking at the Cambo SC II with the International back. Then I could use the Shen Hao 6X12 back. Anyway this thread has given me much to consider.
hey ED
if you wont a newer camera then get one! BUT you can buy a Calumet Roll Holder Model C2 from $50 to $250. & what would the newer camera cost?? I have had
one of the Cambo SC BUT I STILL HAVE a CC400 , CC401, & a CC402 any one of I like better then I did my Cambo SC the ONLY thing I miss is the Graflok back
The camera would have cost about $200. I have decided to ask my wife for a C2 6X7 holder for Christmas. If I really enjoy the roll film experience I may upgrade the camera and get a 6X12 holder. I have a suspicion that this may lead to the purchase of an Epson v500 scanner to replace my 2450.
With roll film backs one has to consider film flatness as well as fit. The slide in RF Backs like the Sinars are fairly thick and not all cameras will fit. The sinar zoom backs have excellent film flatness though and if one is serious about shoot roll film in a view camera one needs to give them serious consideration.
I placed the order for a Cambo 6X7 C2N film holder. I will be using it with the following two lenses: 150mm f/9 G-Claron and 210mm f/5.6 Sinaron-S. Merry Christmas to me!!
May be bad form...hope not...but I have a couple for sale in the classifieds. Four or five pages back by now.
JD
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks