Opinions of this holder seem to be very few. Search on internet only turned out negative ones. Is it really that bad so hardly anybody using it? Their C2N model doesn't improve a bit? I ask because I much prefer insert type roll film holder and I can't afford the sinar zoom.
I didn't have particularly good luck with my Calumet 6x7, but I'm not sure if it was the earlier model or the current one. The problems I had were irregularly-spaced images (overlaps), and, of course, negative flatness if the film was left in the holder for any lengthy period of time. I've heard that the Toyo rollfilm holder is better, but I haven't tried one. The Toyo was about $100 more when I bought the Calumet holder a few years ago.
They may have changed things since I used them (6x7 and 6x9) a few decades ago. But at that time the potential disadvantage was than the film path included a reverse hairpin turn. If the film was left for a prolonged period halfway through, a permanent bend might occur. Not a problem for professionals who blow through a lot of film.
Toyo makes something which (in photographs) looks somewhat more substantial. Never actually handled one. About $500, I think.
You are correct that the Sinar version is priced (long with much of their products) way out in La-La-Land.
Aaron,
I've had the same experience with these rollfilm holders as Ralph. It doesn't matter how carefully you load the **&%^*^* thing... the spacing is irregular. It's terribly frustrating!
Consequently, I've gotten rid of mine and bought a couple of older, tan-colored, Linhof Super Rollex Rollfilm holders (~$325 - $350) from a well-known auction site. They're reasonably priced and the film advance mechanism operates smoothly and efficiently. I also have a Horseman 6x12 that works very well too (but I still prefer the Super Rollex).
Of course, unlike the Calumet model where you insert it into the space where the filmholder normally goes, the Super Rollex requires that the groundglass be removed (atleast, in the case of my Sinar) and is held in place by means of two sliding clips. It may be a bit more inconvenient but the images come out consistently spaced "EVERY" time.
As I said...look on "that" auction site and you'll find they can be had for a very reasonable price. And, I agree with John in that the Sinar version requires that you leave the keys to your Landrover in exchange!
Cheers
Life in the fast lane!
In fact I'm a frequent trader at that place too. I know horseman linhof holders are better but cheap wood field doesn't have graflok back and cost a lot to add that feature.
At the price they want for it? For that money, I can afford to crop the top and bottom off a whole lotta 4x5 images; the actual image area is 12cm in the long dimension. Plus there's no need to carry a heavy and cumbersome rollfilm holder.
Another route is to cut a darkslide so it masks half the film. I did that and the image area I get is 4.75cm x 12cm, close enough IMO or maybe better. Plus, I can then rotate the back 180 degrees and take another shot with a slightly different exposure if I want. And no rollfilm holder blues...
Aaron,
Didn't realize you were talking about using this in a cheap wood camera without a graflok back... otherwise, I wouldn't have mentioned the Super Rollex!
Alan... your method works too!
>
Cheers
Life in the fast lane!
>You are correct that the Sinar version is priced (long with much of their >products) way out in La-La-Land.
>--John Cook, 2003-10-10 17:30:13
You get what you pay for. My Sinar works beautifully, perfect spacing, and flat film. A great, high-quality piece of gear out here in 'La-La-Land'.
>At the price they want for it? For that money, I can afford to crop the top and >bottom off a whole lotta 4x5 images; the actual image area is 12cm in the long >dimension. Plus there's no need to carry a heavy and cumbersome rollfilm holder.
>--Alan Davenport, 2003-10-10 20:07:10
That is unless there is film available in 120 that isn't offered in 4x5... which is why I have the Sinar.
It isn't that much bigger or "heavy and cumbersome" than my Polaroid holder--fits snug in the bag right next to it.
No "rollfilm holder blues" here.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks