View Full Version : Prototype RF-coupled 4x5 camera
I don't believe it's been mentioned here but apologies if so:
http://www.aubreykingston.com/lfc-home
Very beautiful design by a Bay Area designer. I do hope it makes it to production someday, even without the RF and multi-shot film magazine (which seem very ambitious).
Very good!
I see no reason a rangefinder cannot work
However 4x5 Grafmatics abound and work well
I look forward to whatever you produce and sell
I've been following this on Instagram and am very interested to see what they produce!
Bob Salomon
3-Jan-2021, 16:29
I don't believe it's been mentioned here but apologies if so:
http://www.aubreykingston.com/lfc-home
Very beautiful design by a Bay Area designer. I do hope it makes it to production someday, even without the RF and multi-shot film magazine (which seem very ambitious).
“... refocus through a ground glass. This allows for incredible speed and versatility never before available to 4x5 photographers.“
This has been a feature of LInhof Super Technika for well more then half a century. Also a feature of Wista RF cameras as well as several others, like MPP.
Also the rangefinder base appears to be somewhat narrow for 45 photography. The accuracy of a RF is dependent on the length of the base.
They also mention that it will accept interchangeable lenses but how do they calibrate the RF for each lens?
Surely I don't mean the technologies are ambitious. I mean it seems ambitious for an independent designer to bring them into production (and economical production at that), but I wish him all the good luck in the world. It's more or less what I've been wanting for years.
Bob is right make the windows wide.
Study all the failed cameras, like this one, by the company that sold millions of RF finders
http://www.novacon.com.br/odditycameras/kalart.htm
and no wires, electronics or computer anything
some of us expose film by Sunny 16 and a good guess
some use a hat for shutter
I love the idea of the film magazine. I was thinking along similar lines for making such a thing myself. But I'm a bit sceptical about him bending the sheet that hard and not getting it scratched somewhere when moving from one part to the other.
Yes, I have a Grafmatic but it is just not very practical.
Bob Salomon
4-Jan-2021, 04:00
I love the idea of the film magazine. I was thinking along similar lines for making such a thing myself. But I'm a bit sceptical about him bending the sheet that hard and not getting it scratched somewhere when moving from one part to the other.
Yes, I have a Grafmatic but it is just not very practical.
A regular sheet film holder holds 2 sheets of film. This back holds 3. How much more practical is that? Especially if you bracket!
I had not read it only holds 3 sheets. If that is the case, then indeed it isn't better than normal holders. It should hold at least 12 in a volume not much larger than a grafmatic and certainly not heavier. Otherwise it isn't worth it.
The holder design confuses me too. It doesn't seem to use septums or a dark slide.
EdSawyer
4-Jan-2021, 16:37
meh. it's the over-designed answer to the question no one is asking. Terrible ergonomics, overly heavy (machined billet? WTF), too big, expensive, etc. There's plenty of better/cheaper choices already out there.
People with talent in CAD/CAM and and access to the right tools should make something useful. A graflok back that can shoot instax as an idea. Or maybe a way of remaking pack film. Those are things that are worth solving.
An overpriced/overdesigned handheld 4x5? Why bother. it's already been done better, cheaper and more elegantly.
John Layton
4-Jan-2021, 17:29
Yes...the (functional) horse needs to lead the (design) cart, in all aspects...otherwise, why bother?
What are the existing options? The various Polaroid conversions? I had a Chamonix Saber equivalent and another Chinese cottage craft product that I enjoyed but didn't work out so well in the end. RF not reliable enough. The 110B type conversion is for me too bulky and not quite the same idea.
BTW The designer does have a mail box and might appreciate constructive criticism.
Bob Salomon
4-Jan-2021, 19:03
What are the existing options? The various Polaroid conversions? I had a Chamonix Saber equivalent and another Chinese cottage craft product that I enjoyed but didn't work out so well in the end. RF not reliable enough. The 110B type conversion is for me too bulky and not quite the same idea.
BTW The designer does have a mail box and might appreciate constructive criticism.
Wista RF, Linhof Master Technika Classic, Graphic press cameras. All ave lots or some movements and accept a large range of lenses and all can do macro.
Exploring Large Format
4-Jan-2021, 20:02
meh. it's the over-designed answer to the question no one is asking. Terrible ergonomics, overly heavy (machined billet? WTF), too big, expensive, etc. There's plenty of better/cheaper choices already out there.
People with talent in CAD/CAM and and access to the right tools should make something useful. A graflok back that can shoot instax as an idea. Or maybe a way of remaking pack film. Those are things that are worth solving.
An overpriced/overdesigned handheld 4x5? Why bother. it's already been done better, cheaper and more elegantly."A graflok back that can shoot instax as an idea."
Mine on order:
https://shop.lomography.com/en/lomo-graflok-instant-back
Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
All of which are designs 50 years old, if not much more. But of course we have the usual bashing of products you'll never use or even see. Let's see what they come up with using modern manufacturing techniques.
Certainly send them some feedback if you like. I am always happy to see what products come on the market, NEW, in the 21st century. I was not really a fan of the Mercury camera concept either, until I actually talked with him and subsequently bought several different cameras and parts.
The holder design confuses me too. It doesn't seem to use septums or a dark slide.
It has 3 compartments that can hold a sheet of film. They form a kind of serpentine. Film is transported between them. No idea how he wants to do that, but from what I see is that the film has to bend around some pretty sharp corners.
I like the idea of getting away from the classic film holders. They are large and heavy for just 2 sheets. My experience with Grafmatics has been not good so far. So yes, rethinking the way film is handled isn't a bad idea. But I'm not sure about the way he's taking.
Wista RF, Linhof Master Technika Classic, Graphic press cameras. All ave lots or some movements and accept a large range of lenses and all can do macro.
All old stuff where you might happen upon a working one if lucky. Most of them (expensive) antiques. Finding spare parts like a bellow you need to trust someone in his shed making one that can serve you an keep working long enough to make it worthwhile.
meh. it's the over-designed answer to the question no one is asking. Terrible ergonomics, overly heavy (machined billet? WTF), too big, expensive, etc. There's plenty of better/cheaper choices already out there.
People with talent in CAD/CAM and and access to the right tools should make something useful. A graflok back that can shoot instax as an idea. Or maybe a way of remaking pack film. Those are things that are worth solving.
An overpriced/overdesigned handheld 4x5? Why bother. it's already been done better, cheaper and more elegantly.
I don't see the problem with a machined billet. Program once, push button to make another one. Compared to the tooling needed to make the cast aluminium frame of a wista this is progress and much cheaper for the volumes of production needed these days. I never saw a 4x5 camera as the pinnacle of ergonomics. Most are terrible to use.
I do agree that there is a market for some "new" versions of older pieces of gear. A new and better Grafmatic (also not really a very ergonomic thing). An Instax back although with the resolution Instax has this might not be really that interesting. Remaking pack film... don't know. I fear that is an industrialisation issue that will need a lot of tooling and machines. Another thing might be a new shutter.
As for overpriced... anything with particular names on it is overpriced for what it is. They are not better, certainly not cheaper. And I never have had anyone call a 4x5 "elegant". I did hear "boat anchor", "anvil" and others.
I think he missed a great opportunity by not including a shutter. As far as I'm concerned, I feel the weakest part of 4x5 are the shutters. It just is too hard to get them serviced here in europe.
esearing
5-Jan-2021, 05:34
I guess the inventor never heard of https://mercurycamera.com/ which is a universal body+lens design for up to 5x7 film sizes. Uses a viewer instead of range finder and is completely modular. his design is certainly not "The first portable 4x5 camera system".
If realized, this would be an RF-*coupled*, interchangeable lens handheld camera. The examples listed are much bulkier or not coupled. The Razzy and Chamonix Polaroid conversions are kind of close in terms of how you can shoot them.
"Overpriced" is a strange accusation to lob at a prototype that doesn't have a price.
Not like I have skin in the game, but like Corran I find the kneejerk dismissal pretty bizarre. If anything we should all applaud this young designer's efforts. But I agree he shouldn't be going around claiming firsts.
Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2021, 02:17
If realized, this would be an RF-*coupled*, interchangeable lens handheld camera. The examples listed are much bulkier or not coupled. The Razzy and Chamonix Polaroid conversions are kind of close in terms of how you can shoot them.
"Overpriced" is a strange accusation to lob at a prototype that doesn't have a price.
Not like I have skin in the game, but like Corran I find the kneejerk dismissal pretty bizarre. If anything we should all applaud this young designer's efforts. But I agree he shouldn't be going around claiming firsts.
Your first line describes the Wista RF.
Oren Grad
7-Jan-2021, 10:08
Your first line describes the Wista RF.
Bob, once you've added a lens and inserted a film holder, the Wista 45RF weighs more than 7 pounds. A Master Technika with grip and multifocus finder is even heavier, and even bare-bones without the grip and with a wire-frame finder it's about the same as the Wista. I've used my Master Technika hand-held, so I know exactly what that feels like. A late-model top-RF Graphic is just a bit lighter - I've used one of those hand-held too - but good luck equipping one with a set of modern lenses with matching cams.
If this guy can somehow deliver a camera that supports RF-coupled interchangeable lenses but shaves a few pounds off the weight of a 45RF or MT, it will offer a unique value proposition and be an option well worth having. I think that's a big challenge and I'm a bit skeptical, but I wish him well and will be delighted if he succeeds.
Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2021, 10:45
Bob, once you've added a lens and inserted a film holder, the Wista 45RF weighs more than 7 pounds. A Master Technika with grip and multifocus finder is even heavier, and even bare-bones without the grip and with a wire-frame finder it's about the same as the Wista. I've used my Master Technika hand-held, so I know exactly what that feels like. A late-model top-RF Graphic is just a bit lighter - I've used one of those hand-held too - but good luck equipping one with a set of modern lenses with matching cams.
If this guy can somehow deliver a camera that supports RF-coupled interchangeable lenses but shaves a few pounds off the weight of a 45RF or MT, it will offer a unique value proposition and be an option well worth having. I think that's a big challenge and I'm a bit skeptical, but I wish him well and will be delighted if he succeeds.
This guy is under the delusion that a single window RF/viewfinder is unique.
He might be a designer but he doesn’t know what has been available for decades in main stream 45 rangefinder 45 cameras like the RF.
Oren Grad
7-Jan-2021, 10:56
This guy is under the delusion that a single window RF/viewfinder is unique.
That basic specification is not unique, but there's still room to deliver a variation on the theme that offers distinctive value. For example, as I just mentioned, weight is one area where a product could be differentiated in a way that has real benefit for the user. Or perhaps he could deliver the interchangeable lens functionality at a lower price - it's now very costly to have a set of lenses cammed for a Technika.
If he gets to the point of being able to show a working prototype we can judge it on its own merits.
Hear hear, Oren!
Let it go Bob!
This guy is under the delusion that a single window RF/viewfinder is unique.
He might be a designer but he doesn’t know what has been available for decades in main stream 45 rangefinder 45 cameras like the RF.
It might not be unique considering the history.
But it is unique NOW. AFAIK there hasn't been an interchangeable lens 4x5 camera with RF made this century. Certainly not one where you have NOT to unfold the camera, put the lens into place, set it at the right position, faff about with the cams (if you have or can have them made) and load directly 3 sheets with transport between them by a simple means. One that you can pull out of the bag, take the lenscap off, focus and shoot with.
I have a Wista and it is a pain to use. I'm not convinced by his film magazine but the rest is nice to me. 3D printed lens cone is fine for prototyping but I'd like a milled/turned/carbon fibre one for production. Ideally, I'd like vertical movements, a build in light meter and an electronic shutter. Can't win them all.
Icing on the cake would be data printing on the negative. ;)
Some perspective: the two RF-coupled 4x5 cameras available right now cost about $9.900 (Wista RF) to $13,000 (Linhof Master Technika Classic). This is just the camera, no cams (or viewfinder on the Linhof, another $2,300 to even see what you are shooting!).
These designs have largely not been iterated on for decades and decades. And really, the Linhof has been basically unchanged for almost a century, in terms of the RF mechanism.
There was also the Polaroid 110B, released in 1960 for $172.50, with a combined VF/RF that many use today in conversions. That is just over $1,500 adjusted for inflation. Yes, it only worked with the built-in Ysarex lens, but others have adapted it for a variety of lenses around that focal length.
With modern manufacturing techniques and innovations, perhaps this project has potential to put another option in the marketplace. With other options costing as much as they do, there's certainly a lot of room in terms of price-point...
Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2021, 12:39
Some perspective: the two RF-coupled 4x5 cameras available right now cost about $9.900 (Wista RF) to $13,000 (Linhof Master Technika Classic). This is just the camera, no cams (or viewfinder on the Linhof, another $2,300 to even see what you are shooting!).
These designs have largely not been iterated on for decades and decades. And really, the Linhof has been basically unchanged for almost a century, in terms of the RF mechanism.
There was also the Polaroid 110B, released in 1960 for $172.50, with a combined VF/RF that many use today in conversions. That is just over $1,500 adjusted for inflation. Yes, it only worked with the built-in Ysarex lens, but others have adapted it for a variety of lenses around that focal length.
With modern manufacturing techniques and innovations, perhaps this project has potential to put another option in the marketplace. With other options costing as much as they do, there's certainly a lot of room in terms of price-point...
For just 3 lenses, no movements, no macro, etc.. and the back takes just 3 sheets of film! Progress?
Please let me know how many folks are using movements or trying to shoot macro with handheld 4x5. Interchangeable magazine is a debatable point but plenty of folks are using standard film holders with only 2 sheets. Oh and with a Grafmatic my 4x5 Linhof back makes it very difficult to see through the RF, btw, due to the thickness...
Also please let me know any other 4x5 RF that can use multiple lenses without changing a cam? Oh wait there is none.
You don't work for the distributor anymore, you really don't have to slavishly defend these products.
Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2021, 13:00
Please let me know how many folks are using movements or trying to shoot macro with handheld 4x5. Interchangeable magazine is a debatable point but plenty of folks are using standard film holders with only 2 sheets. Oh and with a Grafmatic my 4x5 Linhof back makes it very difficult to see through the RF, btw, due to the thickness...
Also please let me know any other 4x5 RF that can use multiple lenses without changing a cam? Oh wait there is none.
You don't work for the distributor anymore, you really don't have to slavishly defend these products.
The Wista RF comes with a Tri lobed cam installed. No cam to buy for the lenses. It’s crammed for.
Hand held macro might not be common on 45 but movements and the use of macro is common for most 45 users. Hand held, not so much today. The vast majority of 45 users usually have 1 camera. Not a closet full. So most users would probably select versatility that grows with them rather then a very limited snap sot modern 45.
Okay, good to know about the Wista lobes, my bad. I disagree about the rest of your points. Just look around here - many talk about how there's no perfect camera and therefore multiple cameras is the norm. Obviously this kind of product is not made for macro or movements. One can buy any of the many, many excellent cameras for those types of images, many available brand new today, from cheap to expensive. It should be clear that "handheld" 4x5 w/ RF is where there is less options, especially new. The VAST majority of people aren't buying new Wista RF or Linhof MT cameras, if any.
3 sheets instead of 2 sheets is a 50% inmprovement. That's progress to me. As I have not had any successful use of a Grafmatic I disqualify it. Now I do admit that having to lug around a lenscone for each lens is in my opinion not a good idea. they might be light but the certainly will become bulky once you go to 180-300mm.
I admit that I prefer to take my selfmade 4x5 with a fixed focus 125mm instead of the Wista. Just because it is so much easier.
Took me years to calm down enough to finally get my 6 Grafmatics to work well
I would do everything wrong, I thought the septums went the other way
I still do!
but now they work!
I should marry a Grafmatic to my good working Travelwide and.....travel
but noooo I am staying home alone until the cows come home
no cows near me
just deer and feral cats, them cats are scary
Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2021, 14:52
Took me years to calm down enough to finally get my 6 Grafmatics to work well
I would do everything wrong, I thought the septums went the other way
I still do!
but now they work!
I should marry a Grafmatic to my good working Travelwide and.....travel
but noooo I am staying home alone until the cows come home
no cows near me
just deer and feral cats, them cats are scary
When we got married back in ‘63 I was in the USAF and we found a feral cat living underneath our apartment. Beautiful black cat, pregnant and mean as hell.
We brought her inside and tried to tame her, not very successfully. Until she was about to have her kittens. Then she became very dependent and friendly.
She had 5 kittens and then became very unfriendly again.
We had a squirrel monkey and the monkey couldn’t stand the cat. Whenever the cat got close to the monkeys cage he would reach out, grab her tail and yank on it till the cat cried out.
However, when the kittens were near he would open his cage and play and nap with them.
Rod Klukas
7-Jan-2021, 19:04
Well, guys you forgot this one: Thor Loader. https://www.dropbox.com/s/guma97twk1l3z3s/Thor%20Load%2050%204x5%20sheet%20film%20holder%3Aloader.png?dl=0
It accepts a 50 sheet box and changes the sheet with the touch of a button. A bit heavy though, so only works with a Graflok back. I had them in the store a couple times. Worked ok, but I remember they were over a $1000, in the 1990s, I think.
Do you remember seeing them Bob?
Bob Salomon
7-Jan-2021, 19:13
Well, guys you forgot this one: Thor Loader. https://www.dropbox.com/s/guma97twk1l3z3s/Thor%20Load%2050%204x5%20sheet%20film%20holder%3Aloader.png?dl=0
It accepts a 50 sheet box and changes the sheet with the touch of a button. A bit heavy though, so only works with a Graflok back. I had them in the store a couple times. Worked ok, but I remember they were over a $1000, in the 1990s, I think.
Do you remember seeing them Bob?
I remember a motorized sheet film back that I think was called Wolf. Don’t know if it’s the same one. It wasn’t around very long.
Well, guys you forgot this one: Thor Loader. https://www.dropbox.com/s/guma97twk1l3z3s/Thor%20Load%2050%204x5%20sheet%20film%20holder%3Aloader.png?dl=0
It accepts a 50 sheet box and changes the sheet with the touch of a button. A bit heavy though, so only works with a Graflok back. I had them in the store a couple times. Worked ok, but I remember they were over a $1000, in the 1990s, I think
I really like that! But I says "still in prototype". Anyone knows if they went into production.
B.S.Kumar
8-Jan-2021, 06:17
The idea of a compact RF-coupled 4x5 camera is to be welcomed. Cameras like the Wista RF and Linhof do need substantial improvement in design and usability.
However, I'm not sure how the film magazine in this prototype camera works. A changing tent would be needed to one load film in the field. Or does the photographer need to carry 3 magazines? What happens to the one or two sheets of film remaining in the box? Can the magazine be loaded with only one sheet? Cost of 3 magazines vs. cost of film holders?
A few clarifications about the Wista RF:
All old stuff where you might happen upon a working one if lucky. Most of them (expensive) antiques. Finding spare parts like a bellow you need to trust someone in his shed making one that can serve you an keep working long enough to make it worthwhile.
I've sold dozens of Wista RF cameras in excellent working condition. Wista still makes the RF, and I can get any Wista RF camera serviced, supply spare parts and most accessories.
Some perspective: the two RF-coupled 4x5 cameras available right now cost about $9.900 (Wista RF)
I can supply a brand new Wista RF for 405,000 JPY if anyone wants.
Kumar
I wish the designer well with his plans. The name LFC-1 brings Liverpool Football Club to mind more than anything camera related. He says in his about me page that he likes "soccer", he should know better - or is he a Liverpool fan?
Thanks for the info Kumar. I was referencing B&H's current listed price...interesting you could get one for 60% less.
esearing
9-Jan-2021, 06:36
I noticed that Ilford still makes 5" roll film during the ULF special order. except for the fact that you would lose individual sheet processing , would it be useful to have a 5x4/5x7 roll film back like the Horseman 6x9 backs do for 120 film? Probably not but let your mind wander a bit at the possibility. I'm sure arial cameras likely had something but you wouldn't want to hike with it.
Bob Salomon
9-Jan-2021, 07:21
I noticed that Ilford still makes 5" roll film during the ULF special order. except for the fact that you would lose individual sheet processing , would it be useful to have a 5x4/5x7 roll film back like the Horseman 6x9 backs do for 120 film? Probably not but let your mind wander a bit at the possibility. I'm sure arial cameras likely had something but you wouldn't want to hike with it.
Look up Linhof Aero Technika 5” roll backs. These things take 50’ of 5” (120mm) NATO spooled roll film or 60’ if it is ester base film. They would mount to any Technika 4 or later body but will not mount to a Graphlok back. I believe there was one that could mount to a Graflok but took less film and may not have given the 5x5” negative.
Embdude
18-Jun-2021, 10:47
Anyone have info about the lens he uses a 90mm f8 Biogon? I was not aware of a 90mm 4x5 lens from zeiss... Is it new? I thought they quit LF...
Dan Fromm
18-Jun-2021, 14:08
Anyone have info about the lens he uses a 90mm f8 Biogon? I was not aware of a 90mm 4x5 lens from zeiss... Is it new? I thought they quit LF...
Dude, I may be mistaken but until proven otherwise I think you've been trolled. The version 2 images look like renderings, not photographs of an actual object. The lens cross-section shown in http://www.aubreykingston.com/lfc-home#/lens-bellows/ isn't a Biogon formula, it is an early Russar. The version 1 images give the strong impression that it doesn't have a working RF.
Rod Klukas
3-Jul-2021, 10:01
In 1991 Pop Photo showed this and I sold a couple of them. They had trouble217261 outside the studio with field cameras as the back was heavy and actually did best Graflocked to a Studio type camera.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.