What part of the world are you near? I'm sure somebody would be happy to show you theirs. 90 is pretty wide. If you have ever been to horseshoe bend, 90 gets it all in from the lazy tourist spot.
What part of the world are you near? I'm sure somebody would be happy to show you theirs. 90 is pretty wide. If you have ever been to horseshoe bend, 90 gets it all in from the lazy tourist spot.
I put forth that there are basically to styles of LF camera's.
1) Field/Press/Technical/Folding cameras
2) Monorail cameras
there have been no really new developments in either of those styles for many years.
They all do essentially the same thing:
1) provide a light tight chamber
2) hold a lens in an adjustable position at the front of the camera
3) hold a sheet film in an adjustable position at the rear of the camera.
They all have advantages, and shortcomings in the areas of usage, dependability, movements, etc.
The diversity has been well discussed on this thread.
However, my personal observation is that they are all copies of some other builders or companies previous endeavors.
For instance, there has been a lot of discussion on Toyo cameras, which I agree are a good camera, and I've had a few of them. My reasons for owning them is that in the used market, they are generally priced nicely for what they are. A 45A, AII, and even an AX can be found in the $500-600 price range for a very nice example. The CF is less highly regarded, but much lighter and while it's priced at an outrageous $850 new, it can be found in nice condition for $300 - 500. I bought my last near mint CF for $225.
I think of them as the best bang for the buck in a GG view folding, rock solid, metal field camera. Every other brand that is priced over that range is fluff for people who pander to the "What camera are you shooting" crowd. So it comes down to whether you really are after the image from a proper LF camera, which is a light tight box with a positionable lens on the front and a good holder for the film on the back.
But in talking about the Toyo field models, one should look at how they derived their current folding field models. When Graflex decided to discontinue their "Press" line, they packaged up the tooling for the Super and Super Speed Graphics, and sold the package and licensing to Toyo. For a while Toyo produced the identical camera with only the name Toyo Super Graphic at the top of the front standard. Same Camera.
From there Toyo advanced over the years to the current folding field cameras and even dropped the rangefinders. So the Toyo camera's we are discussing in this thread have their roots in the Graflex Super/Super Speed camera. That camera has it's roots in the Crown and other previous press camera's.
That's my case for purporting that everybody's LF camera designs for the most part are not very different from much earlier camera's from other manufacturers. I also contend that any Crown or Super Graphic fully restored operates as nicely (smoothy) as an Ebony, KB Canham, Linhof and other far more expensive cameras (ego fodder).
And as such, they all have one similar limitation, lenses shorter than 90mm. The lens is too close to the film plane for movements on a conventional bellows, and on drop bed bodies, shorter lenses often include the front bed in the image.
It's been an interesting thread, but in response to the original question, aside from our biases, the real answer is "the lowest priced, but completely functional camera that will get the job done". Quite a few responses have been one of the Graflex graphic cameras. They will do the job until your ego can't take it any more and you have to have a fancy name brand, or you find the limitations of the press model and need more capacity in the camera. And a real plus is that if you use a Graflex for a year or so, you may get most or even ALL of your money back.
In any event, I feel safe in saying that your first LF camera will not be your last, so why spend more money than you need to "LEARN" what you really need and perhaps lose money in the process.
Right now the market is strong and actually rising in large format, but I truly don't think that's going to be the case for many more years. What you need is a camera Right Now!!! and get started on the educational process.
Nothing new is on the horizon. It's all old technology.
This thread is now two days old, and time's a wastin boy!!! What's taking so long
He already got a Sinar F it appears, with 90 and 210 lenses, and is now shopping for a good tripod.
Finally....
Ah yes, so I see.
Frank, just re reading part of this thread, I got a 90 6.8 Caltar Ex cond. $415.
You recommended the Rodenstock 90.4.5 Grandagon .($600)
For only $200 more or so -- this could be my primary lens. What is the stop difference/ quality different between 4.5 and 6.8? is that a full stop? Two stops?
Yeah ~ a stop I guess.
The advantage is it will allow greater movements and more even illumination (less vignetting) and bright ground glass viewing. Downside is it is larger.
You paid on the high end for the 90/6.8 Caltar and my $600 price is on the low end for the 90/4.5, so the price difference is probably greater. I like the 6.8 fine, both lenses are just as sharp. Shoot it and you can always swap later.
And now back to Rick... lol
Thanks Frank, that's cool. So KEH, is not quite as competitive as ebay? that said, I'm still I did the full package over there, fine...got it all over in one shot.
What is the stop difference, not conversant on these-- are 1/2 stops? (maybe there is a chart out there...)So full stop probably. I thought it was about brightness for viewing. Did not know about movements.
One see's vignetting on four corners of image?
Standard stops: 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, 45...Originally Posted by kevs-2323668
Each is 1.4 times the one to its left. 1.4 is the square root of 2, and therefore the ratio of diameters (expressed as a fraction of focal length) when the area is reduced by half. Thus, each admits half the light of the one to its left and twice the light of the one to its right.
Thus, an f/5.6 lens is a stop brighter than an f/8 lens, and an f/4.5 lens is a stop brighter than an f/6.8 lens. f/4.5 is about a half a stop brighter than f/5.6, and f/6.8 is about a half a stop brighter than f/8, and about a half a stop less bright than f/5.6. "About" is close enough for this evaluation.
An f/8 lens is noticeably less bright than an f/5.6 lens, but not profoundly so. An f/6.8 lens will only seem slightly less bright than an f/5.6 lens. With a 90, you'll still have to move around the focus screen and aim a loupe into the lens a bit to see it all--that will be a bigger issue than the wide-open stop.
The faster lenses have slightly greater coverage, but I don't think it's important for your intended use. The f/5.6 Super Angulon has a coverage angle of 105 degrees, and the f/8 is 100 degrees, for example. They are all abundant compared to the option you were considering just two days ago. At 65mm, it makes a more important difference.
Rick "who owns five Super Angulons in both f/5.6 and f/8 versions" Denney
Rick, thanks, if there is a list with those funky f stops. let me know.
And thanks for you great help yesterday, very cool!
Just ordered Gitzo legs on ebay-320 legs.
Did not know an f stop has effect on coverage, that does not happen with 35mm...
It does happen on 35mm, but generally there is enough coverage that you don't notice it except for light falloff in the corners when wide open. Lenses are lenses no matter what the format.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks