Zone VI Ultralight

**Tim Klein** · 8-Jun-2001, 23:55

Ross - Don't jump to conclusions about the cost of an Ebony! At current exchange rates, Robert White lists the RW45 for only about $150 more than the Zone VI. It doesn't have quite the movements of the Zone VI, but they are ample enough for most landscape work. The RW45 will focus a 500mm lens (of telephoto design), and it actually weighs slightly less than the Zone VI.

I was also a user of the older Zone VI camera. It wasn't the most rigid camera to begin with, and while it was fine for the first year or so, everything just kind of loosened up over time until the thing was essentially worthless. Until very recently, a friend of mine had the ultralight. It was more rigid than I remember my Zone VI being, but it was starting to loosen up a bit as well. He was concerned enough about it that he sold it. This may be a problem with wood fields in general, as I had the same thing happen with the first wood field I purchased (a Wista, many, many years ago).

I came very close to purchasing an Ebony when I was last in the market. I looked at two models; the RW45 and the 45S, which is non- folding. They were by far the most rigid wood field cameras I've ever handled (though I've certainly not handled them all), and were very nicely designed. I ended up going with the Canham DLC (which I have been extremely pleased with), but there is no doubt that I'd have chosen the Ebony if I had ultimately decided to go with wood.

By the way, I took a look at your website. You've got some fantastic images there! No matter which camera you ultimately purchase, I suspect that you'll continue to prove your "artistry of a photographer" statement for a long time to come.

**Ross Martin** · 9-Jun-2001, 00:40

Tim, thank you for the kind words about my images! And thanks to everyone for giving me food for thought, I really do appreciate it. I am going to try and get ahold of a local fine art shooter I met recently and see if I can get some field time on his Ebony, and find out what all the fuss is about. I'm ordering up literature on the Philips and figure I'll give the Canham another look as well.

Regards,

**Kevin Crisp** · 9-Jun-2001, 15:59

Sometimes I see comments about cameras that are extremely puzzling. Having used the Zone VI camera for 12 years now, and having used it a lot, and having taken it many places, I can't imagine how anyone could say it becomes so loose that it is worthless. I've had two of the Zone VI 8X10's (first one was pre-production and was eventually stolen) and nothing about those was flimsy or became loose either. There is nothing "loose" on my 4X5 which doesn't get tight if you tighten a knob. The comment along these lines which referred to the "older Zone VI" might have referred to the original lightweight which wasn't the one Zone VI made, but still I can't fathom some of the criticism here. There's a review of the camera on or linked to this website which is harshly critical of how incredibly complex and difficult if not impossible it is to open and close the Zone VI. Again, unless you're trying it one handed or blindfolded, I don't get it. Every camera has its peculiarities of design and when you learn how to fold it up and open it (and do it until you really have it down) the camera is a piece of cake to use. If a particular piece of equipment doesn't appeal to you for some subjective reason, fine. Certainly a valid point of view to be shared. But anybody who is looking for information here and runs across some of the ludicrous over the top criticisms of equipment which get posted isn't being done a service.

**Ross Martin** · 9-Jun-2001, 16:27

Well said, Kevin.

I am as guilty as anyone for being overly critical of various cameras and for occasionally obsessing over the equipment to the point that I lose my perpective on why I'm photographing. Now after starting this thread I realize once again that I am worrying far too much about the gear, when for me it's all about experiencing and capturing on film the awesome majesty of creation. So for now, I will choose a simple yet functional camera that I can afford, and let that tool be the means to a greater end.

**Tim Klein** · 11-Jun-2001, 22:25

Kevin - Since my post was mainly intended to let Ross know that an Ebony (a camera that his original message implied was an extravagance) might actually be in his price range, I didn't want to waste a lot of time detailing the poor performance and workmanship of my older Zone VI camera.

Since you've asked though, let me go into a little more detail.

I thought it was pretty clear what I meant by loose, but for those who were unsure, to me, looseness is the opposite of rigidty. At longer extension, the bed was less tight and stable than it was originally. The standards (while never exactly bombproof), got to the point that they moved at the slightest touch. It didn't matter that the knobs were tightened, things still wiggled and moved more than I was willing to accept. Inserting film holders, pulling darkslides, adjusting f-stops, and cocking shutters were all enough to occasionally change focus. I tried different sized washers of differing materials, and that didn't help. I cleaned metal to wood and metal to metal contact surfaces, it still didn't help. I was unsatisfied with the experience.

My results with the camera were sometimes disappointing, so yes, I considered it "essentially worthless". When I went to sell it, I found out that Zone VI had a fairly poor quality reputation (again, older model) and I ended up taking far less for it than I would have expected (entirely my fault, I now check resale value before purchasing new equipment). The low resale coupled with the cost of getting a new camera, made the Zone VI "essentially worthless" to me financially as well.

Does that help or is that still "ludicrous over the top criticism"?

I know others have mentioned it here, but we should keep in mind that all we are sharing here are our personal experiences. Mine was negative and I know of others whose experiences were similar. Yours was positive and you probably know others who have had positive experiences. The fact that my experience was negative doesn't make it "ludicrous", or "over the top". Two of the three reviewers you mentioned on the linked review page mention the difficulty of folding the camera. Why is their combined opinion "ludicrous" or "over the top", while your single opinion about how it's a piece of cake for anyone who isn't blindfolded, not?

**Kevin Crisp** · 12-Jun-2001, 11:44

Tim: Are we talking apples and oranges here? Again, what is an "older Zone VI camera"? Zone VI originally put its mark on what I understand was a lightweight Japanese camera and sold that as the Zone VI Camera. (Actually a Wista, some say.) Is that the one you had problems with? Then came the one they made which is extremely similar to the Wisner. It was much more solid (and heavy) but it has been around long enough (pre-Calumet) that one could consider that an "older Zone VI camera." So point one is I'm still not sure we're even discussing the same camera or manufacturer. If the Zone VI camera became unstable and useless and you returned it for a warranty claim under the lifetime warranty (Zone VI) or your friend made a warranty claim for his loose lightweight camera (Calumet, 5 years) what happened then? Was the warranty claim to Zone VI or Calumet? My hunch is that we aren't talking about the same piece of equipment. Your comments about resale value don't seem to square with what people are bidding them up to on Ebay, nor the used store prices I've seen, which again makes me wonder which product you sold. (Is something worth $600 to $850 used [assuming it's the US version] "worthless"?) As to my point about some criticism here being over the top, I've received some private support from people who know exactly what I was talking about. I didn't characterize your comments as ludicrous; I made a general point which some people seem to understand and the Zone VI reviews illustrate the point pretty well. If you know a particular product well, then it can happen that a subjective comment about it can be so far off the mark that it falls into the "over the top" category. If I told you a Cobra was a quiet and spacious but dog-slow automobile which seats 4 comfortably, would you care if 2 out of 3 "reviewers" voiced similar comments? Does that make me right? Are my comments valid because they are my opinions? I think the only part of our discussion which has any potential interest to anyone thinking about the Zone VI lightweight camera, which is how we started on this, is whether your experiences with your camera are with the Zone VI-manufactured camera. If they were, and if your friend's problems were with the lightweight one (more to the point, since the wood and metal of the camera are different), I'd be interested to know about how the warranty claim was handled. As others have noted, Calumet's website has this as one of their best selling products and yet there don't seem to be any first-hand users with comments on the camera. This does seem rather odd and if somebody bought one and is using it, I'd like to know what they think. I'm still considering getting one. If I offended you I certainly didn't mean to and I apologize for doing so.

**Kevin Kemner** · 12-Jun-2001, 17:09

Ross,

I checked out your website. Nice work! Anyway, maybe one of the easiest ways to address the issue of the Zone VI ultralight would be to find an excuse to go to LA and check one out. Depending on where you live in Washington airfare could be pretty affordable expecially when you compare it to the investment you are proposing to make on the camera. As for the other camers mentioned above I'm not sure that the Ebony referred to has an adequate bellows extension for the lens you propose using. It would at least be worth investigating at the Ebony website.

Good Luck.