PDA

View Full Version : Polaroid 110 Conversion or FOTOMAN 45PS



Danny Liao
15-May-2007, 17:10
I'm thinking of picking up either a Polaroid 110B 4x5 Conversion or a Fotoman 45PS. The polaroid conversion is about 400 bucks cheaper at just about 800. Fotoman is about 1200 but brand spanking new body with a used Nikon 135mm lens. The 4x5 conversion comes with a 127mm Enna Munchen Ennit.

Can anyone sway me towards one direction or another?? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Oren Grad
15-May-2007, 17:43
IMO the key functional difference is the coupled rangefinder. Assuming the Polaroid conversion is done well so that the RF remains accurate - not to be taken for granted - the question becomes whether your intended use needs the kind of accurate focusing-on-the-fly that a rangefinder can give you but scale focusing can't. If the answer is no, the Fotoman is likely to be a more versatile and robust tool.

Ted Harris
15-May-2007, 17:54
I'd also add that you really can't compare the two lenses. They are diferent generations. The lens on the Fotoman is a modern multicoated lens I presume?

Oren Grad
15-May-2007, 18:06
Depends how much one cares about lenses, but Ted's point is well taken. For me the ability to put whatever lens you want on the Fotoman would be a huge advantage. If the intended use doesn't require the coupled rangefinder, that alone would be enough to sway it for me.

I should add, I owned a 110 conversion for a while - one of Dean Jones'. The conversion was very nicely done, but in the end I couldn't tolerate the 127 Ysarex on it.

cyrus
15-May-2007, 22:11
If your goal is a handheld 4x5, why not also consider a press camera? Much cheaper, and swappable lenses (need to find cams to match - doable)

I own a 110B conversion and considered the Fotoman. The rangefinder made the difference. The Fotoman does use modern lenses in comparison to the Ysarex but the Ysarex really isn't all that bad. There's no reason why a skillful conversion job can't also include a change of lenses and readjustment of the rangefinder, but the camera may not close up.

Dean Jones
16-May-2007, 01:10
I should add, I owned a 110 conversion for a while - one of Dean Jones'. The conversion was very nicely done, but in the end I couldn't tolerate the 127 Ysarex on it.


No problem Oren....I seldom use the Ysarex nowadays, opting for later model Fujinon 135mm and 150mm lenses. I also favour the 150mm Nikkors and Caltars.
Modification to the cam is required to suit the later lenses so swapping is not possible.

Where the crunch comes is when you're trying to focus a camera not equipped with a range finder with parallax compensation.
This is of the utmost importance when shooting portraits with the longer focal length lenses. I cannot see how one can achieve accurate focus by guesstimate, especially at wide apertures in low light.

I still feel the 127mm f4.7 Ysarex is a nice lens considering its age.:)

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/

archivue
16-May-2007, 02:01
mamiya 7II

J Peterson
16-May-2007, 04:56
Depends on what work you are doing.

For me - Polaroid. The coupled rangefinder is the selling point for me. And Parralax correction. iI'm guessing it's a lot quicker to work with and you use less film through accurate focus.

You can get a rangefinder for the fotoman, but it's one of the older type designs based on distance scales. Which i'm of the understanding that you use the range finder, find the distance, make the adjustment on the lens. hope it's right.

And please correct if wrong - but i don't think it's as simple as just putting any lens you like on the camera. You need different adapters for different lenses. I think there are still compatability issues there as well...

For what I do (people) it's a no brainer - polaroid conversion. Oh yeah, and I prefer the look of the older lenses.

Oren Grad
16-May-2007, 06:50
You can get a rangefinder for the fotoman, but it's one of the older type designs based on distance scales. Which i'm of the understanding that you use the range finder, find the distance, make the adjustment on the lens. hope it's right.

This is correct. The RF is a separate gadget - you find the distance with it, then set it manually on the lens.


And please correct if wrong - but i don't think it's as simple as just putting any lens you like on the camera. You need different adapters for different lenses. I think there are still compatability issues there as well...

Each focal length needs its own cone size; minor variations in focal length and back-focus are accommodated with shims. You need to do a careful initial setup of each lens on its cone, but after that swapping cones is easy. There are some limitations in what lenses can be accommodated, but these generally have to do with long lenses or lenses in Copal 3. The camera should be able to accommodate any modern 135.

Aggie
16-May-2007, 06:56
Well as an owner of all three cameras ( Littman, razzledog, fotoman and also a hobo) at one time or another I would say go with the fotoman. I have had the same lens on all three. The Fotoman is solid reliable, and the company is wonderful to work with customer service wise. Sure you have to do distance calculation, or use their little distance finder gizmo, but once you have that calculation it is fast, and accurate. The fotoman is so easy to use that I have taught a local blind girl how to use LF with it. It also has the advantage that with different cones, you can change lenses.

George Kara
16-May-2007, 07:05
I have just acquired a Razzle polaroid 900 conversion and also own a fotoman 6x12. The fotoman is a wonderful kit, built to last forever and to very high quality standards. There is a magnetic ground glass adapter which is great. The viewfinder an approximation of what the film plane is. This camera is very slow to work and is almost impossible to take quick shots.

This is why I purchased the Razzle. If you are going to shoot people or moving subject s I suggest the polaroid.

Ted Harris
16-May-2007, 08:26
Not sure I fully agree .... I use a Fotoman 45PS with a 75mm or 135 mm lens and zone focus and shoot Polaroid T55 .... it is a great street camera ..

oakwood
29-May-2007, 20:27
Hi this is william Littman; oakwood is the only user ID i have in this forum

I was surprised as was everyone else after learning these matters has spilled into this forum when photo.net suspended Jones for his misuse of his membership to cause admitted instigation and solicitation.

Danny you contacted me almost 4 years ago and I'm not here to solicit your business first because I now you cant afford my product second because I don't agree that the forums should be used for solicitation and regret that I'm forced to clarify the endless string of lies which the moderators allow to be posted by people offering products and services even though the site represents in the terms of use that they are to exclude themselves from using the forums threads

In reference to the ensuing and endless trail of flip -flops posted in the forums by Dean Jones in regards to technical issues changing his story to fit what anyone may want to hear next

Michael schmid confronted Jones with the issues in 2006 and his responses are posted below.
Quote ;"
Michael schmid , feb 06, 2006; 03:53 p.m. hello, recently i built myself a 4x5" camera on the basis of the polaroid 110b(like dean johnes's or l*mtan's). now i want to change the 127mm lens for a 135mm lens, for example a schneider symmar."

Dean Jones response was
Quote;"Despite the later lens being more advanced, I doubt you`ll see any improvement in quality over the original Rodenstock 127mm!"feb 09, 2006; 03:56 p.m.


So no problem Oren whatever you want to hear Jones will provide.

When one of my clients posted a review saying that he had accidentally dropped his camera after holding it by the Polaroid back Jones responded by saying the most trusted camera back; the graflock embraced by the industry was like a bear trap and went on to utilize a design intended for a tennis racquet to imprison the film holders so they won run away.....
That was 1 incident only which prompted this insanity.

Last fall I introduced the parallelism perfection and Jones publicly dismissed it as fabrication and soon after went on to modify his product in response to my introduction; of course with his own twiiist.... ed.

Back then when he admitted neither lens would make a difference he was admitting to a parallelism problem with his cameras even though he had no idea what parallelism may be as proven by his later posts.

Oren when you say you couldn't live with the 127 ysarex you would not be the only one but perhaps you should have had a chance to know what it can do in the presence of parallelism as shown by this link as such quality exceeds what most people get with apo sironar S lenses.

http://www.littman45single.com/10gallery/figaro1.html

Jones lies here in the forums and it mushrooms to people insisting they cant live with certain lenses. well in this case most people would agree after seeing what a properly set Ysarex can do would agree that what Oren couldn't live with is the camera and contrary to what he has been made to believe the rangefinder is only an interpretative device and unable to overcome lack of parallelism by means of calibration. lies lies and more lies

Oren ;according to Jones he no longer uses the ysarex but earlier stated he doubts you'll see any difference anyway so you're all set!!

oakwood
29-May-2007, 20:31
In reference to recent assurances made By Dean Jones regarding legalities
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=22852&page=2&highlight=littman

PUBLIC NOTICE OF APRIL 30TH 2007

The LF community needs to be made aware of the ensuing falsehoods and lies written by Dean Jones in our detriment in an ongoing attempt to resort to defamation for the purposes of solicitation:
29-Jan-2007, 23:15
"Thanks John. I had a Patent Attorney check this all out about four years back......he laughed so much, he never even charged me for the couple of hours consultation.
He figured I had nothing to worry about as my camera conversions in no way replicated Littman`s. "

1) First of all on Jan 29th 2003 when Dean Jones emailed to inform me that the alleged consultation had already taken place Dean Jones did not even have a patent application pending number as to have consulted an attorney as to whether a camera would infringe on a patent which was not yet issued and he had no knowledge as to what was claimed and was not producing the configuration he offers now.
Such said configuration was admitted attempted After such said person publicly admitted obtaining one of our products, posting the incident in the public domain and admitting to having no idea "AS HOW TO REPLICATE IT" by stating "

Aug 21, 2005; 06:27 a.m.
"a certain camera I received from NYC for repair. "
"Fortunately, I have many images of the 'Pas Par Hasard' conversion, but unfortunately no directions on how to build it."

That occurred on Aug 21st 2005 almost a year and a half after the alleged meeting therefore you are now aware of the following:

a) the alleged counsel consultation could not have made determinations of violation 4 patents which were not yet issued and this individual was unaware of the claims not to mention that a year and a half later when he claimed to be holding one of our products in his hands admitted"unfortunately no directions on how to build it".

Therefore you have proof that the configuration in question could not have been discussed a year and a half before and without the ability to cross reference to actual patent claims and did not admittedly replicate mine as per his own public assurances by inference until 1.5 years later saying he had no idea while holding it he could not have presented this attorney with a truthful representation a year and a half before as a result No patent claims could have been verified and no structure in question was available nor understood by this individuals own admission so you have absolute certainty that you are being lied to by Dean Jones .
B) In closing this individual states"
He figured I had nothing to worry about as my camera conversions in no way replicated Littman`s. "

Our patents are utility patents. replication or originality can be a factor in copyright cases where one can claim to have come up with an idea on their own.
Patents.especially Utility patents with claims sufficiently broad may not allow for de minims structural differentiation to play a factor if the utility is present then infringement would occur despite structural difference.

This has been constantly misrepresented to the public by people showing a home brewed camera back using a spring loaded patio door closer as being visibly different therefore replication is not present.

If you go to the doctor and lie to him he cannot help you the same happens with an attorney and as you can see this individual lied to his attorney and 4 years later further disrespected him by using his words to represent such determination was made as a result of"
I had a Patent Attorney check this all out about four years back.
Such said statement made on January 29th 2007 is a fraudulent false and defamatory assertion publicly made in our detriment to instigate the public to disregard our patent rights and as proven is based purely on falsehood and fabrication.
c) if this individual lied to his attorney and as a result he dares represent that "He figured I had nothing to worry about as my camera conversions in no way replicated Littman`s. "
Be it known for the record that Dean Jones public announcement to proceed to replicate our product after claiming to have obtained it , posted pictures of the occurrencein August of 2005 saying it was in his opinion the best way to go about the job then saying"Fortunately, I have many images of the 'Pas Par Hasard' conversion, but unfortunately no directions on how to build it." then saying it was his own idea.

Gentlemen; if someone is holding a completed structure he grudgingly attributes origin to a third party on Aug 21, 2005; 06:27 a.m.
"a certain camera I received from NYC for repair. "
"Fortunately, I have many images of the 'Pas Par Hasard' conversion, but unfortunately no directions on how to build it."
and then when he realized he had stuck his head in the toilet he went back for more and yanked the chain on ", Aug 24, 2005; 06:37 p.m.when he assured
Just a quick follow up............ these suggestions are all my own IP and reflect my own thoughts on the best way to go about converting a 110B "

Three days earlier he states the best way is not his idea and three days later he says it is his IP. and as explained earlier use of visibly different components does not change a thing in this case. especially when the perpetrator boasts that his product offered in the auction meets patented claims; posts pictures to demonstrate it and while he tried to convince the whole world that there was nothing new about our product which was in the market since mid summer 2000 he went on to introduce the knock off he announced as being something new " The new order".

last but not least we have obtained many structures from people who resort to these public interferences and in the remote event one instance would not qualify that could only mean " not today"/ not this time .. and to summarize the alleged counsel could not have had the ability to check anything applicable and the misuse of his word in this manner goes to show in great length what this individual is doing to the reputation of those who trust him but mostly to the reputation of those he instigates into causing harm and making public assurances to aid him based on lies.

the whole statement written on Jan 29th 2007 represented:

I had a Patent Attorney check this all out about four years back......he laughed so much, he never even charged me for the couple of hours consultation"



thru these false assurances Dean Jones has managed to arouse the misplaced outrage of many even of those belonging to respectable professions
The next day a lawyer who had read such assurance responded by saying

"All it takes is one dangerous humanitarian like this and next thing you know we'll all be working for peanuts.
In a more serious vein, if your generous lawyer was willing to write a legal opinion to the effect you mention you might send it to eBay or VERO".

Not only did this lawyer who was humanitarian do the work for free but he was stabbed in the back when his word was knowingly misused as to justify the ensuing lies.

Let this and the dozens of such instances where people have stepped out on a limb only to find themselves embarrassed and publicly ridiculed in every instance serve as a clear indicator of what to expect by those rallying such misguided idealisms based on assurances which are proven false.

.
I have endured 4 years of abuse and unfair competition fueled by defamation based on alleged attorney assurances which are false and proven to be fabricated by this liar who tells me to learn how to spell and questions my punctuation while he is poking my pulse with these ensuing lies and defamation. and dares assure"Dear Mr Littman....one thing I do NOT do, is tell lies...Dean Jones .27-Apr-2007, 20:08"

Surely a sad clown can make someone knowledgeable in the legal profession laugh by lying and laugh hard for 2 hours. Everyone in the photographic community would believe that when they can now verify that those who supported this individual's fabrications now realize they have been made to laugh at themselves and embarrass themselves in front of everyone else for 4 years as if under a spell.

I love dogs and spent my entire your raising them and share a love of these joyous creatures with anyone else but we have not become so specialized and blinded by favoritisms as to enable criminal activities; sabotage and theft and defamation based solely on a favoritism based on fraudulent lies. This cannot continue.

This exposes the publishers of these lies and those who induced infringement and or interfered with our rights based on those lies to liability .

As a result of this evidence we have the right to expect something " New" and that is that the LF community will no further tolerate this individual disrupting their time with his proven lies

oakwood
29-May-2007, 20:33
PUBLIC NOTICE OF MAY 24TH 2007

After a careful review of the evidence and the date of the alleged attorney consultation the following determinations have been made.
1) the alleged consultation took place in February 29th 2003 or slightly earlier. The admission of "I had a Patent Attorney check this all out about four years back" means that the entire diatribe started in PN as admitted instigation based on a consultation where no determinations could have been made without patent application numbers which this individual admitted he did not have in writing in April 29th 2003 by email to us.

Therefore the instigation / defamation published as fulfillment of direct threats to us has been determined to be based solely on bravado when it is clear that the consultation is emphasized as a one time occurrence and all the interferences based solely for the purpose of personal gain and an admitted disdain for the law .

The publishers of these false statements and interferences against our business are invited to remove them ipso facto or face Defamation and RICO act charges for knowingly publishing defamation as a means enabling admitted extortion stemming from a direct threat by email on April 25th 2003 implying that should I consider continuing the enforcement of my patent rights he would resort to publishing the entire scenario on threads and let the public decide".

Because the only relevant facts are patent claims and prior art you have proof that the scenario that Jones presented is false; he asked the public to decide against us using lies which he again ratified to be still valid on January 29th of 2007 that is clearly defamatory .and because this is so public and the threatened defamation was used to coherse us into waiving our rights it constitutes public extortion and Jones and others who have admittedly Joined in these connivances for personal gain at my expense the other culprit wrote to us that they would to be using the threads to discredit us as a means of self promotion because" they could use the publicity" as threatened in writing or as they wrote on the threads"to stop us or at least keep us busy", The publishers of these false statements are enabling unfair competition by publishing defamation as admitted means of solicitation by identified individuals in violation of the policies posted in the public domain.Such threat was also fulfilled. and in reference to the other veiled threat here is something which concerns everyone:

The most important piece of information that applies to these matters and which I was not allowed to reveal until now is as follows;

In 1980 there was this photographer commuting regularly from South Beach to Soho; a regular client of Marty Forsher who acquired most of his modifications throughout the years directly or later on thru NPC when Marty sold. This photographer was also a regular client to all of the major photography shops in NYC at such time and which enabled him to establish relationships which have flourished over 27 years.
This photographer a regular client of professional camera repair directly and indirectly when third party stores submit the work.
because of his interest and knowledge of photographic equipment and classic cameras this photographer was asked by a Eastman Kodak sales rep in 1981 to do a research of any and all market and after market cameras including experimental modifications that enabled the use of 4x5 and 5x7 films.

This photographer did a 2 year research of all the NYC shops and all of the foreign sources and has absolute certainty that none of the modifications covered by the Littman patents were available then or known to the industry experts many of which are still in business doing the very same thing and at the same addresses they were 27 years ago .

This photographer was also a regular subscriber to all the major photographic journals atsuch time

This photographer whom some tried to present as "Johnny come lately" was already shooting for Harpers Bazaar in NYC at his Broadway and Houston Studio loft In Soho in 1984 and one of his full time assistants job was the research of any and all new technology in charge of renting ; testing and evaluating whatever camera system was out there in any film format.

Extensive proof and testimony exists to substantiate this evidence.
The business name of this photographer has always been and still is William Littman .
I invite the moderator to remove all such threads that induce infringement; allow solicitation by people offering products and services and do so utilizing false statements which constitute defamation.

If these threads remain published It is our position that the management of this and other forums ; its owners and the moderators in particular are happy to invite this illegal/ illicit behavior and that they should be held personally liable for damages for knowingly publishing falsehood which is admitted purposes posted by the perpetrators is to impede our business.
And a note to those who enjoy the usual out of context one liner legal dismissals we have become accustomed to enduring
Ladies and gentlemen ;two wrongs don't make a right. what Dean Jones is doing is unethical, illegal and immoral and anyone endorsing it tolerating it or helping to further such behavior falls into the same category.

Jones insits that I should learn how to spell. I respond that everyone has permission to wake up and free themselves from his spell!

Mike Davis
29-May-2007, 21:02
Mr. Littman,

Please inform me as to how a question for advice regarding either a Polaroid 110 conversion or a Fotoman camera justifies your hijacking this thread. It's not the first time that I've seen you come onto public forums and begin to issue threats.


This exposes the publishers of these lies and those who induced infringement and or interfered with our rights based on those lies to liability .

I believe that you produce a quality product. But, in all honesty, I don't care about your arguements with Dean Jones. If you had posted this series in a properly labeled post rather than hijacking one, I would never have spent the time reading them.

Mike

Sheldon N
29-May-2007, 22:41
Yes, I agree.

Can the moderator please clean out this unrelated mess?

Gordon Moat
30-May-2007, 00:39
Clean-up in aisle two!
:eek:

Dean Jones
30-May-2007, 01:53
Mr Littman......

What right have you to come on here and vandalise this forum? It has absolutely NOTHING to do with you. It appears you cannot even rent out your cameras, let alone sell them. Please refrain from these painfully long and rather boring bully tactics, pick up your bat and ball and kindly leave.

Someone who wants advice on which camera to go with, shouldn't have to endure such rubbish. I agree with the unanimous opinion that you should be thrown off. :mad:

You might also take notice that I do not convert Polaroids so equipped with Ennit Munchen lenses...so the camera mentioned here is certainly not one of mine.

oakwood
30-May-2007, 02:25
Yes, I agree.

Can the moderator please clean out this unrelated mess?
The only unrelated mess here is the allowance of solicitation by Jones by the moderator.

Everyone knows that insensitive people could care less and prefer to appropriate what isn't theirs to take insisting that any objection to that amounts to something messy. They brake into your house hijack the remote control; change the channel and if you object they tell you to take a course in public relations.

On an earlier thread someone Joked" the last time they were in a chat room full of photographers discussing the Littman and someone yelled Hitler" to which I respond that my dad was involved in the capture of Adolph Eichmann Hitler's lieutenant in charge of exterminating al Jews .

On a recent issue of a New York newspaper I read that a day after eichmann was captured and placed in an airplane for extradition a million people took to the streets in Buenos Aires to protest his capture as a civil liberties violation.

a few years after this my dads fortune was confiscated and our house where the ambassadors of the countries where the plane was to refuel met with Golda Meir to ensure the plane would not be intecepted until it reached destination ; that house was leveled by the buldozers

Do yourself a huge favor and please do not humor me with your misplaced/ misguided mob meets picket fence style idealism.

I do not much care about my arguments with Dean Jones myself and I wouldn't have to do any postings myself if the moderator observed the policy of the forum and prevented people offering services from posting and misrepresenting the facts.

If the moderator allows Jones to misrepresent the facts he has to allow me to set the record straight that is the bottom line.

The scenario could be quite different if none of this was allowed.

My post is absolutely related because it responds to the question asked with absolute exactitude by showing there are two options Littman and stolen from Littman.

I can see that fails to meet your preference. some got accustomed to getting comfy based on fabrications and lies and say don't much care how you get it as long they get it, say any discrepancy is an issue between businesses.True until forum allows business to use forum for solicitation and rally the public against another business based on lies. rest assured. It is time for people to snap out of it. Right now from where I stand this entire website and its safe harbor of these interferences against us looks like the unrelated mess.

I am sorry but the publication of defamation posted by Jones and which this website allows to remain published from past and present posts has a direct effect on the outcome of the discussions and the setup where he will not squeal if he is allowed to have the last word on these threads on every related thread by starting it or having his friends invite him to advertise products is a status quo which is in iteslf the unrealated mess..

It is absolute hypocrisy to sit there and witness Jones starting dozens of defamatory threads; self promoting posts and assurances that impede us from selling our product and say that the evidence which proves what is what should be treated as an unrelated mess.

While I have posted evidence proving that Jones has lied as a means of appropiating the podium on these subjects I have never seen anyone object. those insiting that what i have posted is an unrelated mess have asked it be removed because it highlights previous posts by these members and others who may act similarly Justifying Jones behaviour and what I have posted is something they would have preffered had never surfaced. .

here is a little grammar trivia for punctuation enthusiasts;

Noun: razzle razul
Usage: Brit

Any exciting and complex play intended to confuse (dazzle) the opponent
- razzle-dazzle, razzmatazz, razmataz
Derived forms: razzles
Type of: play
Encyclopedia: Razzle

Main Entry: raz·zle-daz·zle
Pronunciation: "ra-z&l-'da-z&l
Function: noun
Etymology: reduplication of dazzle
1 : a state of confusion or hilarity
2 : a complex maneuver (as in sports) designed to confuse an opponent
3 : a confusing or colorful often gaudy action or display
- razzle-dazzle adjective .

That is precisely what I'm saying is at the center of it all, not an unrelated mess but an ongoing and escalating misrepresentation and confusion of anything and everything

Everyone knows the problem is not that some sell drugs . the problem is people sell drugs because it is enabled by those who wish to buy them.

Everyone knows the problem is not that people sell countefeit movies but that people are willing to buy them

But everyone has a a hard problem confronting that the problem is not that Jones has the willingness to act as he does. The problem is that any questioning of that raises questions about the lack of integrity of those who have supported it or failed to prevent it. and that Im affraid is something youll alll have to live with .

Dean Jones
30-May-2007, 02:38
Danny, my best advice: just buy a Fotoman....at least Paul Droluk is sane. :p

Helen Bach
30-May-2007, 04:46
...

You might also take notice that I do not convert Polaroids so equipped with Ennit Munchen lenses...

Hi Dean,

Out of curiosity, why is that? I've decided on a converted Polaroid, and the one I have available for conversion has an Ennit lens.

Thanks,
Helen

Dean Jones
30-May-2007, 04:55
Hi Helen....I certainly have nothing against the Ennit, although only being a three element lens, it can be stunningly sharp. It's just that I haven't used one for a few years as most Polaroid conversions favour the Rodenstock. I did utilise them on the 6x12 rollfilm conversions a while back.
I was just trying to say to Mr Littman that the particular camera Danny was interested in probably wasn't one of mine, but it seems to be much like trying to discuss Christianity with the Taliban. :D

P.S. I like the shot of 'Boy George'!

Helen Bach
30-May-2007, 05:21
Hi Dean,

Thanks for the reply. I was just curious. I realised why you mentioned it, but continued regardless.

Best,
Helen

Paul Droluk
30-May-2007, 05:29
The camera business is aways a little slow this time of year... the IRS refunds have been spent and the wildflowers are no longer in bloom. No need to worry or fret... autumn foliage will glow again long before the Christmas bills come in, and more cameras will be bought. In between, there's lots of good wine to sip and warm summer sunshine to bask in.

As for the camera, I would get the Fotoman. But I'm terribly biased (duh), so please disregard my advise... other than to enjoy the wine and sunshine.

oakwood
30-May-2007, 06:44
Danny, my best advice: just buy a Footman....at least Paul Droluk is sane. :p
the right to preserve ones sanity. that is certainly something anyone is entitled to
but becomes a little bit difficult when there is a Guy called Dean Jones that is permitted to steer the forums for his own self interest now says



Where the crunch comes is when you're trying to focus a camera not equipped with a range finder with parallax compensation.
This is of the utmost importance when shooting portraits with the longer focal length lenses. I cannot see how one can achieve accurate focus by guesstimate, especially at wide apertures in low light.

I still feel the 127mm f4.7 Ysarex is a nice lens considering its age.:)

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/

The Fotoman does not have a rangefinder and what Jones is now saying about the requirements lacking in the Fotoman and an asset to his product was the epicenter of all arguments between me and him starting in November of 2003 to date except that when I was the one saying that was the case he was denying it categorically dismissing everything as a fabrication by me to raise camera prices.

He assured everyone in photo.net that parallax compensation was not required negligible and also lied by saying that his camera offered proper parallax compensation on a 127mm lens and that is downright thievery knowingly enabled by the forum moderators the bottom line is we have Oren here proving with his comments that the problem is not a rangefinder but the simultaneous presence of parallelism first. which Jones assured was yet another excuse by me to raise camera prices. proper cam stemming from proper parallelism and the only true thing is that rangefinder adjustment is a simple two step calibration but in the absence of parallelism all else is just guestimate.

earlier discussions on the subject between me and Jones proved that in the absence of a proper sequence of technical compliances which he dismissed as not required any results achieved would have to be done by gusetimate.

I hope Paul Droluck is sane and I hope everyone else can be as sane as possible and it is my right to expect that when everyone sees that Jones tells that Drolucks camera could not suffice because it lacks what I insisted was required but Jones denied referring as still does as smoke and mirrors when he fears my competition and was repeatedly found lacking in his product that you don't sit back and ignore that the problem isn't between me and Jones but between Jones and reality itself. The problem isn't between me and Jones but between Jones and everyone else. The problem remains unresolved because a bunch of people who don't care anyway either way would rather not have to hear any arguing while Sunday driving or surfing the net for recreational purposes and Jones manages to take refuge and appear accommodating by telling each person what they expect to hear.

I don't think that anyone comes here expecting to be lied to unexcrupulosly and I can see why there may be a reluctance to believe that may be the case if it has remained for this long but the fact is that there is clear pattern of behavior where Jones first denies everything I claim as negligible fabricated or not required but then everyone sees him adjust his position as if my shadow and then claim it was his idea.

The point is if it was not required then he would not have to change position . if it was negligible he wouldn't have to then insist it was of the utmost importance and so forth.

Rest assured that I am sane but I have endured a lot of interference and it has taken a toll on every aspect of my life and rest assured I intend to be compensated accordingly by those who have enabled the publication of these falsehoods and the misuse of the forums by Jones.

I am glad my clients do not participate in these discussions I say they are smart to spend all the time they can with family and friends.

One dear friend of mine a renowned photographer and an avid user of my product spent a lot of time trying to explain to members of Photo.netwhat the qualities and benefits of my product may have been but nobody seemed to care because Jones was attacking the guy disputing everything as Jones and his palsy kept attacking him denying what Jones now says is required so he decided that he was sufficiently pissed and decided to evaluate the actual products made by Jones as it remains posted in photo.net. his evaluation proved that Jones assurances were false that after examining the products .

That changed nothing and I decided to ask my clients to make sure to spend their time taking pictures instead of wasting their time and being subjected to abuse.

The name of this photographer Alban Crist and we kept making plans to get together for the last two years but he kept getting busy with work and Jones kept me busy by posting more and more lies and in November I had my first L45s VI and wanted to let him test it and all of a sudden I receive an email from his wife informing me that Alban had passed away after a shot but tough battle with lung cancer.

I freaked out as I had just lost a best friend and a chance to share my efforts with someone who really cared and appreciated because I am constantly hammered by pretentious expectations of those who don't give a hoot and Albans death made me have to confront all the years that I have dedicated to this project having to quietly abandon my photography because Jones feels entitled to use my name or confuse the issues in his favor ;raise doubt with the endless flip flops depending who he is addressing. and every instance ends up with something that amounts to saying" buy whatever you may just make sure you don't buy a Littman". let me reiterate that Im glad to hear Jones says Paul Droluck is sane but unhappy that is only assured as a last-ditch effort to present me as unreasonable while a few minutes earlier when I had not yet arrived he was saying the Fotoman option was unreasonable for reasons which he dismisses while confronting me and that is just insane! and that he then proceeds to discuss sales questions right in the middle of the threads is downright insulting.

Colin Graham
30-May-2007, 06:55
Stunning word count, oakwood.

Danny Liao
30-May-2007, 09:40
"As for the camera, I would get the Fotoman. But I'm terribly biased (duh)..." Hahah, no worries. I've decided to go with the Fotoman. It should be arriving soon. I hope it shoots as good as it looks! Anyway, thank you everyone for all the help.

Ben Syverson
30-May-2007, 09:50
Wow. Quite a show, Littman.

Gordon Moat
30-May-2007, 09:57
I nearly hate to state this, but both Jones and Littman need to either take their differences to court, or get the hell out of here with these verbal battles. Neither of you will solve anything posting this crap, other than biasing people against both of you. I like to think that all people have at least a few good qualities. Now if both of you can act in a civil manner here, and refrain from bashing each other, I would imagine both of you might have something positive to contribute here. If not, I think I am not the only one who is getting tired of this sh*t. So either do something and take it to court, fight the legal battle, or quit bitching about it.

Adieu!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

Ash
30-May-2007, 10:34
I'm getting so bored of Littman.

I don't care if he's right or wrong. He's a total prick and should get a life, at least Dean has a sense of humour............and better prices. :D

Michael Graves
30-May-2007, 10:39
I came up with a pretty decent idea. What if you were to take an old Polaroid camera with a rangefinder. Attach a Graflock back and cam the rangefinder to a 150 lens. If you use a hemispherical cam, you could call it a Hemiroid.

Or maybe not. Why try to turn a piece of shit into a pile of gold? Alchemists tried that for years.

Frank Petronio
30-May-2007, 13:41
Dean is merely defending his right to build cameras, whenever he posts something of interest to the discussion, his "stalker" will pop up with the usual 10,000 word rant. Or three.

tim atherton
30-May-2007, 13:53
littman - why don't you just bugger off from this forum and zip it - no one is in the least bit interested

Dean Jones
30-May-2007, 14:58
Now if both of you can act in a civil manner here, and refrain from bashing each other, I would imagine both of you might have something positive to contribute here.
Gordon Moat
A G Studio

Hello Gordon, I have only ever tried to contribute something positive to these threads and personally don't care for comments I make being hijacked by this fellow, then twisted, distorted and falsified. I merely try to offer advice, because everyone has different styles, has a different approach and the very idea of networking ideas is what photography is all about. I believe in sharing ideas, not hiding them away, otherwise we would be going nowhere fast.

It is my opinion that if one is not required to shoot portraiture close in with a long lens, but prefers a wider angled camera to shoot landscapes, then a range finder is unnecessary. If you want to be able to swap lenses easily, then the Fotoman is the obvious choice.

Paul is correct, life is to be enjoyed, captured on film often, so as to preserve a little history, before it all goes pear shaped. Pre empting the pear shape can only hastened by negative ramblings and continual attacks. I much prefer to avoid this Ogre, but sometimes it's impossible. I have NEVER witnessed this fellow contributing anything worthwhile to LF without someone having to part with wads of cash.

Please don't lump me in the same category as this buffoon. :)

I'm sure Danny has made the right choice.............

Dean Jones
30-May-2007, 15:29
buy whatever you may just make sure you don't buy a Littman". let me reiterate that Im glad to hear Jones says Paul Droluck is sane but unhappy

This shows exactly the workings of a deluded mind.....at no time have I stated 'buy whatever you may just make sure you don't buy a Littman' and neither did I state that Paul Droluk was 'unhappy'. I would say Paul is very delighted, I mean Danny has bought one of his cameras, as have many others! :D

Mr Littman, at least have the courtesy to spell Paul's surname correctly, your attention to detail is appalling. :eek:

Gordon Moat
30-May-2007, 16:35
Hello Gordon, . . . . . .

Please don't lump me in the same category as this buffoon. :)
. . . . . .

Hello Dean,

It is fairly simple, if you don't respond to him, then he will effectively be ignored. When both of you go at it, all it does is make both of you look bad. If you want to be the better man, then don't stoop to his level.
:cool:

Gordon Flodders
30-May-2007, 16:40
It's so nice to see one has his priorities in order by writing jibberish whilst a friend is dying.
Reminds me of Nero, who fiddled while Rome burned.
I also read that George W was playing his guitar while New Orleans sank. Perhaps there is a similarity?

oakwood
30-May-2007, 18:08
[QUOTE=Dean Jones;245534]This shows exactly the workings of a deluded mind.....at no time have I stated 'buy whatever you may just make sure you don't buy a Littman' I represented you stated something that amounts to implying" 'buy whatever you may just make sure you don't buy a Littman' when you said "at least Paul Droluck is sane "
the reference to " at least" is because earlier on you had made comments that reffer to The Fotoman as the lesser camera therefore " at least" implies " buy it despite its shortcomings" or whatever" as in it I warned it would not suffice but at least the maker is sane" which also implies he should not buy a Littman as you are implying Im not sane.
I don't know what your concern may be. Danny is a student and I had no expectation of him buying my product. and i said so you are not adressing Dnnny with your comment but everyone else ;It is clear you did not come here to answer dannys question but to plug your product.

The real question is what is Jones doing in a Forum reserved for users of products plugging his products ; having his buddies invite him and buldozer anyone who gets in the way while he is telling people what to buy or not based on character? and when confronted with facts he feels entitled to tell others to leave because their contribution is of no value?


Finally I said I was glad to learn you say Paul is sane but that I was unhappy that when you find the Footman can cost you a sale you say'Originally Posted by Dean Jones

Where the crunch comes is when you're trying to focus a camera not equipped with a range finder with parallax compensation.
This is of the utmost importance when shooting portraits with the longer focal length lenses. I cannot see how one can achieve accurate focus by guesstimate, especially at wide apertures in low light.

And when you find that The Littman could cost you a sale as has happened for 4 years you say none of that would be the case.

I think you confuse contributing something valuable to a forum as a participant with putting money in your own pocket. this forum has many members and for what I have verified most are more knowledgeable than you and don't dare drop their business card and offer their services by posting links or self plugs.

As if asking the public to not associate with a person business or product based on proven defamation and lies were not enough taking it further to admitting to offering bribes in the form of DIY advice in exchange for votes is not a contribution but a connivance. your usual supporters ratify it when the say in one form or another"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Dean is merely defending his right to build cameras"
The right to build cameras cannot be defended by telling lies about the cameras and the competition.'

" I believe in sharing ideas, not hiding them away, otherwise we would be going nowhere fast.Dean Jones.

If Dean Jones ever comes up with his own Idea and wishes to share it than that of course is his right to do so. and he has proven to be fast in denying all of my ideas at first and then appropriating them to represent they were his own that may be fast but not fast enough as it is after the fact and posted all over the forums as proof. If he said to be holding a structure in his hands saying it was made by me and no idea how to build it in 2005 then if he wants to share what he admits isn't his forcefully and you support that you have a problem.

I knew nothing would be decided here but what Can and will be decided elsewhere depended strictly on 3 aspects one was the presentation of the evidence which I have posted. the second was Mr. Jones response to that and the third requirement was
the responses of the same who have supported Jones and admit they don't care if he is right or wrong .

If I have had to use many words it is because Jones told everyone the following"

Dean Jones, Oct 13, 2003; 06:05 a.m.

As it was I who instigated this discussion,( using lies ) I feel that I should have a word in closure.He may have felt like it as he always does but he wasn't justified to feel entitled to the last word and dare set policy in a forum when he is the first one to disrespect the forum terms of use". and he started that thread and others on an alleged Attorney consultation where he had no access to patent applications to determine if he even had a right to start that thread and post the defamation and lies that he did and then he dared state( " It is my opinion that a legal Patent should be respected.") Great then by all means do as you say for once and then someone may believe you besides those who admit they don't care if you are right or wrong. ".( The input provided by William Littman in this matter is much appreciated, but at the same time, such input must be considered as words only") Words only???? well it takes a lot of words the frazzle created by someone trying to convince everyone that what I say amounts to words only. I am sorry but who on earth does this guy thinks he is?.



Every attempt to clarify technical aspects has been diverted into a character comparison and let me just add that I attended the a catholic law School and have nothing but praise and admiration for Catholicism starting with Christ himself and it is Jones who has admitted to having started this seditious instigation in the forums.he did so by stating it would be done solely for the purposes of asking the public to decide. the evidence that was presented was false. some have decided based on those lies and Jones admits to be determined to retain the status quo at all costs and by all means..



As far as I'm concerned I have done all that was required of me to prove my case and I have obtained responses from all sides which fully completes my evidence in excess of any possible requirement for any patent case; defamation case etc. and the final piece of evidence shall be the position taken by the website itself.

I have been aware of what to expect from Jones for a very long time I did not come here to ask something of him which he told everyone his opinion was they should do as he says but not as he does


I only came here to present the evidence because I was required to do so. not aimed at those who dont care who is right or wrong ; I came here to see what the response will be by the website management and the moderator will be because the person doing the damage can't afford to pay for what he is admittedly trying to brake and all that is left is to determine the position of those who knowingly enable the activity after which I can make my choices thank you.

Gordon Flodders
30-May-2007, 18:38
Sir, I do not recall Mr Jones trying to sell his product here, in actual fact he recommended Danny should buy a Fotoman.

You appear to be hopelessly out of control. :o

Frank R
30-May-2007, 20:12
The place for this dispute is in the courts.

Mr Littman has refused to take anyone to court. Instead, he bullies people with these postings.

Littman, take your grievances to the courts and leave us alone.

Steve Icanberry
31-May-2007, 15:49
I thought I had seen it all! The moderator of this forum is asleep at the switch or does not give a rat's ass! Littman's written garbage has nothing to do with the original subject of this thread. The moderator also allows foul language that was written to Littman to be published word for word by Littman on this forum in a feeble attempt to make me look foolish. I say to all of you! What the Hell Good is a forum such as this?? Why the hell should any of us pay any attention to this forum?? I say to the Moderator in very very blatant terms: CLEAN THIS F#CKING SH!T UP!! This forum is worthless!!! I am not going to lower myself to this "Sea Hunt" in the toilet bowl or do "Chin-ups on the curb", this is not some place for some sick ass greedy bastard from New York to spew garbage and sewage about some worthless patent no one cares about in the first place. I have personally challenged Littman to sue me on a number of occaisions and he does not so much as even respond, What does that tell you???

Ash
31-May-2007, 15:58
Uhhhmmm Steve, seeya?

I've found the kind people here more than helpful with every request of mine. They are wonderful folk. :)

Gordon Flodders
31-May-2007, 20:37
Why has so much anger in the LF community has been generated by Mr William Littman? It is truly astounding. No other manufacturer in photographic history ever caused such resounding mayhem by using so few words.

Frank Petronio
31-May-2007, 20:46
Littmann using few words!? LOL I almost choked

Gordon Moat
31-May-2007, 21:01
There is no anger on my part. Quite simply, I feel that unless one is willing to do something about an issue they have (in this case a court of law), then those individuals have no basis for whining. So rather than wasting time and bandwidth, Littman needs to take the next proper step for recourse, and let his arguements be decided in a court.
:cool:

Gordon Flodders
31-May-2007, 21:36
I suggest there would not be a court building large enough to fit everyone in, not to mention the mass media contingent. Television rights may be of special interest to Mr Murdoch. Perhaps even a mini series.

Ash
1-Jun-2007, 00:48
I'd like to see it in court, but only if Batman is the judge.... hmmm or maybe The Joker? :D

Steve Icanberry
1-Jun-2007, 02:26
Hi Ash, I agree with you, There are helpful caring people on this forum, But this Krank Littman has got to go! His rantings disgrace not only this forum but Photo.net as well. I think Littman is well aware that he has no basis for a suit and may as well have Batman or the joker for the judge as a sane judge is not going to want to hear his case and perhaps sentence Littman to a special facility for the mentally ill. I still think the moderator should clean this up as this is disgraceful and shameful! NOW, ALL OF YOU, GET OUT THERE AND TAKE SOME PICTURES!! Then enjoy Wine, Bourbon, Scotch, Gin and Ale in the Sunshine with your converted 110BEE or Fotoman!

Thomas Greutmann
1-Jun-2007, 13:12
Trying to stick to the original subject:

I own a Polaroid conversion (by Dean Jones) with the Rodenstock Ysarex lens. I can say that much about the lens quality:

(1) The pictures are sometimes really sharp, especially if you focus on subjects not too far away. Details like spiderwebs or fibres are really popping out.
(2) Sharpness seems to fall off somewhat at the edges
(3) Things in the distance (at infinity range) are never really sharp, but I notice this with practically all lenses in landscape photography
(4) I shoot only black and white, so I don't know how the lens performs with color films

Based on my experience so far the discussion about sharpness of the lens for large format handheld is somewhat academic. It is very difficult to hold a 4x5 camera stable during exposure, so I have ruined more pictures by a little shaking of my hand when pressing the shutter release button than lack of sharpness of an old lens possibly could. The somewhat awkward shutter release mechanism is so far the only real drawback on the Polaroid 110 design. The effect of shaking during shutter release is much more noteable on 4x5 than on smaller formats.

So, for both Fotoman and Polaroid: find a way to keep the camera from shaking when releasing the shutter. If you manage this then there is not much to worry about sharpness of the lens. Even a good old Ysarex will please the eye.

Nevertheless I have been contemplating to mount a more modern lens on a Polaroid 110. I have a wonderfully sharp and yet compact Apo Ronar 150mm that might be a good fit.

Another option that I am exploring currently: I am toying with an old Super Graphic. It is, matter of fact, about the same overall size and weight as a Polaroid 110. And with a working rangefinder and a matching cam it is a real option for 4x5 handheld work. And there is an option for limited movements and for switching lenses.

Of all this, the Polaroid is probably still the best option for fast work, with a combined rangefinder / viewfinder.

And, most of all, anyway you choose, handheld 4x5 is fun.

Drew Bedo
1-Jun-2007, 13:39
Hello Danny Liao: I got lost in reading all of this...Did you get what you came here for? Do you have the information that you need to make an informed choice?

George Kara
1-Jun-2007, 15:01
More than anything, this is a case about the importance of public relations. Mr. Littman suffers the consequences of his internet identity.

Anyone doing the smallest amount of due dilligence re polamod cameras will come across his postings. More importantly, the concensus of the comments reflect an utter contempt for the man and what he stands for.

This is a public relations disaster. Who would purchase a camera from a person with this reputation?

It would be easier to sell or re-sell a polaroid modified by Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda Inc.! His name is bad news among the photographic community.

The Littman patent is unchallenged because there is very little money to be made from it. This business is the domain of the engineer/enthusiast - such as Mr. Jones.

Dean Jones
1-Jun-2007, 18:44
If anyone is in doubt as to the capability of a Rodenstock Ysarex 127mm f4.7 fitted to the old Polaroid.... put your mind at rest. I have a 6x24 image comprising of two 6x12 shots stitched, taken with this lens.
Just an Australian farming scene shot in 2004. The image is a 2.7mb jpg file, so if you would like a look, just let me know and I'll send it to you........
I also have the same image saved as a 90mb TIFF that's just over a meter wide......the print looks awesome in B/W too, I have both hanging on my wall.

Cheers.

Frank Petronio
1-Jun-2007, 19:00
I shot with a Dean conversion with the Ysarex and really can't distinguish between images I made with it compared to a modern 135 Rodenstock Sironar... at least at f/11-16 the differences are probably next to nil in practical experience.

My hunch is that at that point the sample variation between individual lenses will matter more than the lens design itself.

Dean Jones
1-Jun-2007, 19:09
Can you spot the Merc in the carport up on the hill? There's also a tractor parked next to it. I can't quite see the make and model?
Here's a little peek............:)

Oren Grad
1-Jun-2007, 19:23
Since I was the one who dumped on the 127 Ysarex, let me just add a couple of points of clarification so that people can interpret what I said in light of their own purposes.

I had two gripes with the Ysarex. First, it (or at least my sample) didn't adequately cover 4x5. It was especially weak at wider apertures and middling to distant focus, where the corners got pretty nasty. Since I needed the wider apertures to achieve hand-holdable shutter speeds, this was a significant problem.

Second, I really, really disliked the bokeh. Frank mentioned not being able to tell the difference compared to a "modern 135 Rodenstock Sironar", but to my eye the character of the Ysarex is very different from that of the Apo-Sironar-N or -S, lenses I know well and which are my standard. That is, of course, entirely a subjective matter and as always YMMV.

Overall, the image character of the Ysarex struck me as pretty typical of common standard lenses of its vintage. I had a 135 Graflex Optar that was similar in some respects, and the look of the Ysarex has some resemblance to that of first-generation (convertible) Symmars and Sironars as well. I don't care for those lenses either, but lots of people here are perfectly happy with them.

I hope this helps - sorry to have posted an opaque comment to start with.

Dean Jones
1-Jun-2007, 20:46
Oren, I guess everyone has a favourite lens with a certain look....I guess if we all had the same lens, with the same bokeh, we might just as well have all the same ideas and shoot the same subjects.

I think in this case the Ysarex wasn't pushed to the extremities of 4x5, so it pulled up well. I think there could also be slight differences in performance between them all anyway.

I've used many other lenses of various makes and types, some of which vary considerably in performance. Some that were reported to be wonderful were quite disappointing, some old crappers with scuffs and marks showed unbelievable results.

Beauty in the eyes of the beholder certainly applies in all aspects of photography whether it be the camera or the subject......I had my sweaty palms all over a 4x5 Tachihara yesterday, I struggled like crazy to hand it over. :p

oakwood
2-Jun-2007, 04:56
[QUOTE=Oren Grad;246222]Since I was the one who dumped on the 127 Ysarex, let me just add a couple of points of clarification so that people can interpret what I said in light of their own purposes.

I had two gripes with the Ysarex. First, it (or at least my sample) didn't adequately cover 4x5. It was especially weak at wider apertures and middling to distant focus, where the corners got pretty nasty. Since I needed the wider apertures to achieve hand-holdable shutter speeds, this was a significant problem.

Second, I really, really disliked the bokeh. Frank mentioned not being able to tell the difference compared to a "modern 135 Rodenstock Sironar", but to my eye the character of the Ysarex is very different from that of the Apo-Sironar-N or -S, lenses I know well and which are my standard. That is, of course, entirely a subjective matter and as always YMMV.

Overall, the image character of the Ysarex struck me as pretty typical of common standard lenses of its vintage. I had a 135 Graflex Optar that was similar in some respects, and the look of the Ysarex has some resemblance to that of first-generation (convertible) Symmars and Sironars as well. I don't care for those lenses either, but lots of people here are perfectly happy with them.

I hope this helps - sorry to have posted an opaque comment to start with.[/QUOTOren your spontaneous and first response is what is desireable in a public forum where people expect to know an opinion. you shouldnt feel pressured to saing you dumped on a lens. nobody here makes lenses and people should not be here trying to sell cameras in the first place, but the fact is you were right the first time and more so this time.

there is a huge difference between the lenses which could be readily seen if parallelism were present and both would perform better.

As to your prefrence it is entirely justified and i just dont understand how someone tells you it is not a problem because they seldom use speaking of modern lenses as a choice and then the lens has to be defended.

The issue is a camera different lenses provide different options and trying to take that away using partisan rally instead of fact does not help anyone.

You shouldnt have to change your position if it helps sales or hurts them; people come here to learn the truth;some come to sell cameras but that is about to change in a Jiffy! and when you say your opinion may have resulted in a comment that was opaque .the truth may be Opaque sometimes; some people need to learn how to live with that

Gordon Flodders
2-Jun-2007, 20:24
Reading the postings by Oakwood has made me realise what an obnoxious fellow he really is and I could only hope that he be removed from this forum in due course. I have an old Littman 45 single for sale if anyone is interested.

Michael Graves
2-Jun-2007, 20:28
Reading the postings by Oakwood has made me realise what an obnoxious fellow he really is and I could only hope that he be removed from this forum in due course. I have an old Littman 45 single for sale if anyone is interested.

Give you sixty-seven cents for it.

Ben Syverson
2-Jun-2007, 21:13
I'll give you a whole buck for it.

PM sent.

Darryl Baird
8-Jun-2007, 07:55
I'm considering selling my Razzle-conversion Polaroid, which Dean outfitted with a Fuji 125mm - W lens and a graflok back. When I get some good shots of the system, I'll post into the classifieds.

Before you ask why, I love this camera, but am paring down my current assortment of LF cameras (from 5 to 2) for a better traveling bag.

Ash
8-Jun-2007, 13:41
Darryl, please send me a PM before selling it on the forum, as I am very interested in purchasing a Razzle, but Dean is unavailable on the forum for the month, and has a back catalog of orders.

Husker
20-Jan-2014, 15:29
The camera business is aways a little slow this time of year... the IRS refunds have been spent and the wildflowers are no longer in bloom. No need to worry or fret... autumn foliage will glow again long before the Christmas bills come in, and more cameras will be bought. In between, there's lots of good wine to sip and warm summer sunshine to bask in.

As for the camera, I would get the Fotoman. But I'm terribly biased (duh), so please disregard my advise... other than to enjoy the wine and sunshine.


OT--> Paul, Do you remember this photo?

108853