LITTMAN 45 SINGLE VI On EbaY 8,000

[Gordon Flodders]

Upon returning to NYC I used it the next day in studio and it looked/worked perfectly there too. There is something about the littman 4x5 and the images you produce with, its not just a great camera, its the camera you will reach for first.

As far as I can ascertain, the Littman produces an image no better or worse than any other 4x5. The image quality out of any camera is dependent upon two things, that being the ability of the operator and the quality of the lens. Full credit should be given to Polaroid for their manufacture of a camera body that renders itself far more useful nowadays as a 4x5, (when correctly converted) than it ever did using the outdated and messy old Type 47 rollfilm.

There are many things to consider when selecting any rangefinder equipped LF camera, those of weight, portabilty, usability and even more importantly, price and personality of its manufacturer. IMHO the Littman easily passes the first three, but fails miserably with regard to the last two.

Success of the Razzle, the Byron (and many others) is due primarily to price and performance. More importantly it's due to the attitude adopted toward LFer's, the general public and customers past and present.

After wading through the tiresome claims stated within the all too numerous *bay listings (the original topic of this thread), I get the feeling I've been really brainwashed, resulting in the fact that reaching for a Littman 'first' maybe not such a great idea.

GF.

[Ash]

GF said it really well.

Think of brand loyalty.

Think back to the last time someone in a shop was rude or snotty to you, did you feel like buying there again?

Think of the customer service you received from a company, would you buy their product again?

Then take the classic "I don't buy Japanese" or similar. Due to historical and cultural stigma, my grandfather for example wouldn't buy Japanese products (because of the war), just as my father never let me wear black suit shirts (because of the Fascists).

[Thebes]

Given Littman's previous actions in message forums I think his support in this thread is largely of the shill kind. Too bad that effort can't be put into making a truly new camera, something his prices would surely justify. As it is I find him vile and would never purchase one of his cameras, not even used.

Neat concept, but they've been around for a lot longer than he has been making them. If I ever got one I would probably make it myself, it seems to me that a RF folder should be a camera inexpensive enough to take into the street without fear of enormous financial loss. The Razzle 900 looks nice and isn't sold via a "patent troll" business model, though I still think I'd prefer the pride of having built my own... out of idle curiosity mostly, but the RF looks really nice and it could be handy. A used Polaroid 900, a used graflok back, a lens and some metal bits it might only cost 400 bucks, plus a few dozen hours of work... it could be worth it. But at 8 grand, one would have to be mad.

[Drew Bedo]

Thebes: Check this thread for a DVD video on doing a Razzle type conversion yourself.

[fuegocito]

I still think I'd prefer the pride of having built my own... out of idle curiosity mostly, but the RF looks really nice and it could be handy. A used Polaroid 900, a used graflok back, a lens and some metal bits it might only cost 400 bucks, plus a few dozen hours of work....

Hi Thebes,

I have the 900 body already torn apart, the useless bits, the graflock back...all you need is a lens and time to piece them together. I have a Razzle already and was planning on making one with a 90mm lens...and now I have changed my mind. If you are interested, drop me a line.

Rob

[seanriva]

Sean, that would mean allot more if you gave us your website so we could check out your portfolio of "Fashion, Beauty, Portraits, Wild Life, Nature/Landscapes, and Nudes". All I could find was this portfolio of snapshots on Friendster: http://profiles.friendster.com/3376875

So I understand everyone else on this forum seems to hate on Littman. I feel differently and have said such. As far as my websites here they are. My last year and a half of artwork which is being shown @ the Morrison Gallery later this year and Berlin the year after, is not on my sites because I want to keep it unseen till then. I understand people have copied littman's camera and made it cheaper. But, not at this quality and this is my opinion and I will always feel this way even if you would rather peddle your own cheeper version.


www.seanriva.com

www.seanrivaart.com

[CarstenW]

My name is Sean Riva and I have been a photographer since the age of 14. I am now 30 and photograph Fashion, Beauty, Portraits, Wild Life, Nature/Landscapes, and Nudes. I have an extensive camera collection consisting of 2 Nikon F4 with 5 lenses, a Contax 645 with 3 lenses (135 macro being my go to for beauty)

That is an interesting claim, as there is no 135 Macro for the Contax 645. The only MF 135 macro I am aware of is the Hasselblad and it has no focusing helicoid and is meant to be used with bellows, hardly a lens to use for beauty.

Could you elaborate a little?

I would also love to see photos of your two Littmans.

[Gordon Flodders]

So I understand everyone else on this forum seems to hate on Littman. I understand people have copied littman's camera and made it cheaper.

This 'hate on' seems to be the general feeling amongst most LFer's as far as I can see. The animosity stems from the many years of insults, threats and general stupid behaviour shown on various forums, most of them outside LFPF.

As for 'stealing his camera' let me say that it never was 'his' camera to begin with, it was Polaroid's. Others have converted the 110B in various ways, some long before Littman even thought of the word 'Patent'.
I believe this is where the problem first arose, as the insistance that only he could modify a Polaroid and all others must 'desist' was nonsensical and it only enraged those who dare have any similar ideas.

To my knowledge, no one has ever adopted the Littman method of conversion so nothing was ever stolen, but the stupid belief that it was, began the furore back in 2002.

I have several examples of converted Polaroid cameras and fail to see that any single camera produces a better image than any other, to make a claim to the contrary is preposterous.
No amount of use by a movie star/film director, rich and famous/perhaps artistic individual or photographer could possibly have any effect on image quality of a camera.

As for 'cheaper' conversions, I cannot see a single alternative that utilises a strip of 'Velcro' to maintain the front standard's position of integrity, nor do I see any other's conversion covered in rubber matting, so as to disguise the CB103 plastic holder, commonly found on all 'Four Designs' packfilm conversions.

As for perfect parallelism being 'better than expected' what does this mean exactly?
It seems we will never know without first spending $8000 on a mystical Allen key arrangement.

Someone obviously thinks we all came down in the last shower.

GF.

[Terence McDonagh]

People spend more than what a Littman costs on a designer handbag.

It's called having more dollars than sense.

Putting a bigger engine in a Volkswagen doesn't make it a Porsche. It's a Polaroid 110 with a 4x5 back grafted on to it.

I've seen the Littman and the Razzle. There's not $7,000 worth of difference unless you count the story of having to deal with Mr Littman. From my perspective as an engineer, the difference is more in the $100-$200 range at best, not counting the cost of a different lens.

[seanriva]

That is an interesting claim, as there is no 135 Macro for the Contax 645. The only MF 135 macro I am aware of is the Hasselblad and it has no focusing helicoid and is meant to be used with bellows, hardly a lens to use for beauty.

Could you elaborate a little?

I would also love to see photos of your two Littmans.

The lens is a 120 macro (my fault) and I have used it many times on beauty. A small portion of which are on my website under beauty. Specifically dry lip and wet eye. . .

As for images I have done rescently and pics of my camera's it appears william has made an ebay listing with some of that info in it.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=290391667467

Hope this clears that 135 issue up and that you enjoy my stuff. Will check in again later. SeanR.