Chamonix, is it the new Ebony in quality?

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Guys,'

I've been looking at pictures of the Chamonix in Chinese websites and am impressed by how well these cameras seem to be engineered. The rail mechanism and metal supports are substantial. The backs do not have extensive tilts and there are no assymetric movements, but for field work these look very competitive with the RW versions at least of Ebony cameras. What do you think?

Who has actually tested one or received their camera yet?

Can anyone say whether these cameras could be used for work were Schleimflug tilts and swings are needed? I can't see much info on the tilts and swings!

What lensboards do they take for 4x5 and 8x10 and do they have graflok backs? Has anyone received an 8x10 yet and what is the solution for a reducing back?

Are the bellows leather or synthetic, IOW can they be used with IR?

Answer whatever you can!!! Thanks so much! :) :)

Asher

[davidb]

damn it dude....

you forgot the happy face when asking about the chamonix

:)

[Asher Kelman]

For sure, David!

Twins :) :)

Asher

[Ben R]

Asher, there has been quite a lot of talk here about these new cameras, Jack Flesher (who you know) has one. Try a search, get yourself a big coffee and a comfortable chair and prepare to spend some time!

Oh and before you get too excited (I know you're in the market for one now rather than later), the waiting list is pretty long...

[sanking]

Hi Guys,'

I've been looking at pictures of the Chamonix in Chinese websites and am impressed by how well these cameras seem to be engineered. The rail mechanism and metal supports are substantial. The backs do not have extensive tilts and there are no assymetric movements, but for field work these look very competitive with the RW versions at least of Ebony cameras. What do you think?

Who has actually tested one or received their camera yet?

Can anyone say whether these cameras could be used for work were Schleimflug tilts and swings are needed? I can't see much info on the tilts and swings!

What lensboards do they take for 4x5 and 8x10 and do they have graflok backs? Has anyone received an 8x10 yet and what is the solution for a reducing back?

Are the bellows leather or synthetic, IOW can they be used with IR?

Answer whatever you can!!! Thanks so much! :) :)

Asher

Michael Mutmansky did a very thorough comparison of the Chamonix 7X17 and Richard Ritter 7X17 in the March/April issue View Camera. He found that the build quality of the Chamonix "is equal to or exceeds that of any wooden camera to which I can compare." I have seen several Chamonix cameras and agree with that assessment of build quality.

There are, however, some caveats. Compared to both Canham and Ritter 7X17, bellows draw is limited, as are movements. Also, there is no handle on the top of the camera, and it really should have one IMO. And the camera comes with an acrylic focusing screen that will easily scratch with use unless protected. I also agree with Michael that the lens board locking mechanism is a weakness, and I suspect it is just a matter of time until someone drops a lens off the front unless something is done to address this problem. Movements are limited but more than adequate for field work, as there is swing and tilt on both the front and back, and shift on the front. But the major plus of the Chamonix is its rigidity when locked down and very compact design.

I have seen several other Chamonix cameras (4X5, 5X8, 20X24, etc.) and the build quality on all of them was superb. The small 4X5 is one of the most elegant cameras I have ever seen and I would almost start using this format just to work with this beauty.

However, as I mentioned before, I really like the Ritter design in being able to change the orientation of the bellows from portrait to landscape orientation. If that feature is important to you, as it is to me, the Ritter design is very attractive, especially with larger cameras like 12X20, 14X17, 16X20 and 20X24. I briefly considered a 20X24" Chamonix but determined that for my work the RR 20X24, even though not as compact, would be more satisfactory. On the other hand, the 7X17 Chamonix is so light that turning it on its side for portrait orientation would not be such a big deal.

Sandy King

[HeinrichVoelkel]

Sorry guys, but where can I have a look at these cameras? Google only brought up some dead ends...

Regards

[Bruce Barlow]

Sorry guys, but where can I have a look at these cameras? Google only brought up some dead ends...

Regards

Google "Richard Ritter" to get www.lg4mat.net, and follow the link to his site, where you can click on the ULF Camera section for photographs.

[HeinrichVoelkel]

Google "Richard Ritter" to get www.lg4mat.net, and follow the link to his site, where you can click on the ULF Camera section for photographs.

thanks Bruce, but do you have a link for the "Chamonix" as well

[Monty McCutchen]

Heinrich,

It is my understanding that the Chamonix site is Chinese only and the English version is currently in the works. However I am including several threads (sorry if you are aware of these and I am being redudant) where there are numerous pictures of the Chamonix camera that forum members here have posted. Hope this is helpful.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=28336&highlight=Chamonix

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=28536&highlight=Chamonix

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=441511

I am not that great at the computer gig so if those don't work plug in Chamonix on the search menu on this site and look up

The Brown Truck passed by today thread
Do Blondes have more fun thread
Chamonix 12 x 20 on Everest thread which has numerous pictures of the camera in all sizes on it and will lead you to the Chinese website.

Once again I hope this is helpful,

Monty

[LH1H17]

Not a chance.

I realize that the cost of the Chamonix is only a small fraction, but I can say with confidence that my Ebony 45SU is made with nicer components (e.g. Titanium and Ebony wood versus something decidely more pedestrian...) The quality of the woodwork is also imcomparable. E.g. compare the corners of the front board to the Ebony where everything is quartersawn. Chinese people, when not hawking their own goods, will tell you that the best cameras (and lenses) come from Germany and Japan, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

OTOH, I do like how the base of that Chamonix looks....
(and btw I was born in Beijing... so I (hope) I know what I'm talking about)

[Michael Mutmansky]

Funny, actually.

I would never consider an Ebony to be the best available. Canham, Linhof and Alpa all have them beat for metal work, the Wisner luxury series easily has them beat for woodwork, and the Phillips has them beat for field functionality and rigidity.

The Ebony makes a great 'pedigree' camera, but I don't consider them to be terribly good in many other aspects of the field. Their folding field cameras are unspectacular and heavy.

The only cameras I would consider owning in the Ebony line are the non-folding ones (45S, 45SW, and 45SU). They can do things that many other cameras cannot, and for that reason, deserve attention.

Let me say, however, that may priorities may be a little strange and in the minority around here, but I have always considered my cameras to be a tool for making photographs, not something that I pull out and fondle while at home. So while All these others do not use (the completely unnecessary) ebony and titanium, they are in many cases the better for it, especially in terms of the performance and capabilities in the field.


---Michael

[Blacky Dalton]

Let me say, however, that may priorities may be a little strange and in the minority around here, but I have always considered my cameras to be a tool for making photographs, not something that I pull out and fondle while at home. . .


---Michael

Well said Michael!!! Can you tell what kind of wood the camera is made from by looking at the finished photo??? I really believe there is way too much attention focused on the equipment.

B. Dalton

[Jack Flesher]

Not a chance.

I can say with confidence that my Ebony 45SU is made with nicer components (e.g. Titanium and Ebony wood versus something decidely more pedestrian...) The quality of the woodwork is also imcomparable. E.g. compare the corners of the front board to the Ebony where everything is quartersawn. (and btw I was born in Beijing... so I (hope) I know what I'm talking about)


So you have actually compared the two side-by-side and drawn this conclusion?

[Jack Flesher]

The only cameras I would consider owning in the Ebony line are the non-folding ones (45S, 45SW, and 45SU). They can do things that many other cameras cannot, and for that reason, deserve attention.



Took the words right out of my mouth :)

[Steve Hamley]

I agree with Michael up to a point. Certainly cameras are tools, but if you want to do the "Tool Time" thing and fondle your tools, that's up to you.

The camera should be "transparent" during picture taking; that is, the photographer should be able to concentrate on taking the image and not on manipulating the camera, at least to the greatest extent possible. But that will be achieved by different cameras for different people. I found the 8x10 Canham very fiddly with its three identical T-knobs on the front standard. I could not tell the difference between them under the dark cloth, but I can work the controls just fine on the Ebony, 2D, or Deardorff. I also found that it frequently took three hands to focus the Canham because the lever locks were either "on" or "off" and if the camera was pointed up or down, it takes one hand to tension the lever or control the rail, one hand to hold the loupe, and one hand to turn the knob. No such problems with an Ebony, 2D, or 'dorff.

So I ended up selling the Canham. Do others like it and use it successfully? Sure. Was the quality and support good? First rate. Did it take pictures as well? Yep. But I spent more time working the camera than the image.

I also have a rickety but nice looking Korona 8x20 that no one would ever guess could make a sharp image, but it does. So use what is comfortable for you and lets you concentrate on taking pictures, Ebony, Arca, Linhof, Korona, 2D, whatever.

Cheers,

Steve

[Rick Russell]

As for whether the Chamonix is the new Ebony in quality I cannot say, as I have not used a Chamonix.

Is Ebony the best? No. Is it the best in quality? I don't know, as I have not used every other camera. But then, there is not, nor can their be, a best. Or best in quality. How can something be deemed the best when there is no objective standard for what best means? Especially when dealing with a subjective consideration. A best car? A best wine? A best place to live? A best anything? No.

I own and love my Ebony camera. It is the best tool for me. Beyond that, nothing else really matters.

Rick Russell

[Bruce Barlow]

I know from long experience that there are many LF cameras that rarely, if ever, leave the mantle in the living room. How can a Zone VI that's 15 years old and in "pristine" condition on eBay have been anything but mostly a decoration? The alternative is that a well-used camera acquires "honorable scars."

That said, camera-as-decoration is completely legitimate. They can be quite, quite lovely. Honorable scars from hard use are also legitimate. It's nobody's business which mine is, except me.

So "best" is going to be a tough thing to agree on. We tell our Fine Focus Workshop students who are new to large format to get the simplest, cheapest 4x5 they can find, and use it until it can't do something they absolutely need to do. At that point, they can find the "best" camera for them because they'll actually know what they want, rather than just thinking they know, or buying something which is overkill at first and being intimidated by it (which we see remarkably often). Our assumption about use is farther towards scarring than mantling.

My first camera was a new Wista. 25 years later my current camera is a pretty beat up Wista that serves me well and carries lots of memories. For me, it's the best. But that's me.

[evan clarke]

There is one really critical issue on view cameras which pales all others. The GG/filmhoder plane must be accurate. You can learn to use any of the cameras to make good photographs, they are just tools...Evan Clarke

[RichardRitter]

There is one really critical issue on view cameras which pales all others. The GG/filmhoder plane must be accurate. You can learn to use any of the cameras to make good photographs, they are just tools...Evan Clarke

Right. A lot of people have this feeling. It to the most part is true if you are using your lenses wide open and photographing test charts. Most know that a lens is best use at the sweet spot or the best closed down "F" stop for that lens. I have seem cameras come in with the glass in backwards and would ask if there is any problems and I would hear back there is no noticeable problem. yes there would be a problem if the image was to be made into a 30 x 40 print and taken wide open.

Even the best cameras have come into the shop with the ground glass out of wack This includes Linhof, Wisner, Zone VI, Ebony, the list goes on and most times the owner did not know it.

Remember that the film is allowed to float around in the holder.

[Michael Alpert]

Let me say, however, that my priorities may be a little strange and in the minority around here, but I have always considered my cameras to be a tool for making photographs, not something that I pull out and fondle while at home. So while All these others do not use (the completely unnecessary) ebony and titanium, they are in many cases the better for it, especially in terms of the performance and capabilities in the field.

Michael, most of the time what you write makes good sense to me. This post, however, is a little over the top. I think many, if not most, of the people who frequent this forum are interested in photography; they see cameras as tools. There is no reason for you to set yourself apart from other contributors here. Also, how does not using titanium or ebony help enhance "performance and capabilities in the field"? Your logic, in this instance, is tipsy. As far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter which camera any one person considers "the best." Some people can only work with metal cameras, others work best with wooden field cameras. The Ebony cameras are carefully designed and beautifully made. I and others see them as tools that function as they should in the field.

[jetcode]

I realize that the cost of the Chamonix is only a small fraction, but I can say with confidence that my Ebony 45SU is made with nicer components (e.g. Titanium and Ebony wood versus something decidely more pedestrian...) The quality of the woodwork is also imcomparable. E.g. compare the corners of the front board to the Ebony where everything is quartersawn.


Pedestrian cameras are perfect for me. The money I saved in purchasing a Shen-Hao in pedestrian Burma Teak ($3k saved) went to the purchase of a pedestrian Cezanne Elite. As a pedestrian based photographer I found the Shen-Hao perfectly workable even though it is fitted with pedestrian aluminum hardware.

Pedestrian works for me. :)

[Michael Mutmansky]

...This post, however, is a little over the top....


As it was intended to be. It is a direct response to post #10 and was intended to parallel the statements in there.

I don't care what other people use for camera gear, because it is a personal choice that in my opinion. nobody should have to justify. However, personally, I'd rather have an inexpensive camera that does what I need, rather than an expensive piece for the mantle. I store my gear in cases, I don't put it on display in the living room. It keeps the dust off the gear better.

I own and use an Ebony 45SU (when I shoot architectural subjects with the 4x5). Every time I use the thing, I think to myself that I wished they didn't play that titanium/ebony game, as no piece of wood or metal on that camera needed to be either to make an equally solid and functional camera.

These materials serve no function but to make the camera more exclusive, more difficult to fabricate, heavier, and more expensive. I'd rather have a cheaper, lighter, and yes, more pedestrian tool that does the same job well, and if one of them came along, I'd probably sell the Ebony to get it.


---Michael

[Michael Alpert]

As it was intended to be. It is a direct response to post #10 and was intended to parallel the statements in there.

Michael,

Okay. I now understand what you were responding to. For the last year or so, I've been using a mahogany 5x7 Ebony folding camera, which functions very well and is quite light. (I previously struggled with a 5x7 English camera that others rave about, so I realize there's a difference of opinion about everything.) This year, I've taken many many hundreds of photographs in all sorts of weather conditions (I live in Maine), and the camera has consistently worked well. I don't care about snob appeal, fancy metal and wood, or trophy objects. I just want a camera that works well. This Ebony camera has been fine. If it had all the best qualities that you have found in various other cameras, it would be better still, though we both know it would not become less expensive.

[evan clarke]

Not a chance.

I realize that the cost of the Chamonix is only a small fraction, but I can say with confidence that my Ebony 45SU is made with nicer components (e.g. Titanium and Ebony wood versus something decidely more pedestrian...) The quality of the woodwork is also imcomparable. E.g. compare the corners of the front board to the Ebony where everything is quartersawn. Chinese people, when not hawking their own goods, will tell you that the best cameras (and lenses) come from Germany and Japan, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

OTOH, I do like how the base of that Chamonix looks....
(and btw I was born in Beijing... so I (hope) I know what I'm talking about)

Everything is a matter of perspective. I have enclosed a photo of what I make and in my frame of reference, all the wooden cameras are finished somewhat crudely. I may not have stated my previous post properly and agree with Richard. I should amend it to say that IF there is a critical aspect of camera design it may be the film plane. A great craftsman with an average tool will make better products than a poor craftsman with the best tools, same with cameras...Evan Clarke

[CP Goerz]

Nice sticks! I love playing pool, snooker etc etc!


CP Goerz