no with the c-1 I used a surveyor's tripod and a majestic head.... very very stable.Originally Posted by Chris Strobel
no with the c-1 I used a surveyor's tripod and a majestic head.... very very stable.
That's the head I had trouble with...the B2 - especially with the mount at the rear of the camera. It was too hard to aim with. Plus I just didn't get sharp pics when I used it – not one.
With the 1200 (and 800), for stability, I tie a parachute cord from the front standard to the bottom of my tripod leg and snug it up. This helps a lot. I've been doing this ever since I started shooting 8x10. Also, lately, if it's windy at all, I set up a portable bow hunters blind/tent and shoot out of that. It totally blocks the wind/rain/snow and it only takes a few minutes to set up and take down.
When working in windy conditions with any sheet film camera I use local rocks to steady the camera.
I carry a mesh laundry bag, which weighs only an ounce or two, and when needed I tie it to the bottom of the tripod head and fill it with rocks. The added weight acts as an anchor. (If the wind is strong enough to blow a heavy bag of rocks, I probably can't stand up anyway.)
The cameras do not move. The bellows may blow, but I shield it as much as possible with the darkcloth, and don't end up with camera movement evident on the negative.
Some people here are a lot wiser than others!
Quite civilized. I like that. If one must be out in the wind, I like to be as low to the ground as practical, taking advantage of any terrain & flora thats around to block the wind.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
And your Wehman is more stable on a 3047 head with a 1200mm lens?How are you using a 1200mm lens on a Wehman since the max bellows extension is 30 inches.A 1200mm lens
is 47 inches?
The Wehman is not more stable. The C1 is a tank. But I get about the same amount of keepers - though I haven't actually counted. I use the Wehman because it's easier to carry. The 1200 is a tele - it only needs about 30 inches at infinity. With the front standard tilted forward and the lens board tilted parallel I have about 2" to spare at infinity.
Hmmm... I saw a post of yours some time ago where you thought stated that "I doubt that any field camera is more stable or more rugged (than the Wehman)". I'm really happy that you like your camera, but a statement like that suggests that you haven't worked with too many other modern 8x10 field cameras - every other modern long extension 8x10 I have owned leaves it in the dust on both counts (an Ebony - which was way heavier, a Lotus and a Phillips - which is the same weight but super stable). There's only one positive I see in a Wehman and that is the price point and I'd suggest that the new Shen Hao FL-810 at the same price is probably a much more precise and stable tool.
Right, I have never tried an Ebony, a Lotus, or a Phillips (plus many others). But I have tried a Calumet C-1 and I still feel that the Wehman is comparable to it with a 1200mm TELE. It's not as strong but it's very close. I seriously doubt that Ebony, Lotus, or Phillips are nearly as stable as the C-1...I doubt that any field camera is, maybe I'm wrong…as has been established - I haven’t tried them ALL. However, that's what I based the statement on that you were referring to - – actual experience with a C-1 & Wehman with a 1200mm lens. I didn’t realize I was on trial when I wrote it. The Wehman works very well for me... obviously not for you… it's good that you're not using it anymore.
just to add to the list, 8x10 double extension Tachihara is not stable with anything longer than 350mm in the wind, heck not even in still weather. But rock solid with the 210 and the 150mm!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks