PDA

View Full Version : shen hao 4x10 vs chamonix 4x10



prado333
16-Nov-2007, 05:49
I would like to know opinions betwen the two cameras shen hao and chamonix
because i donīt know which to buy
all opinions are welcome

Walter Calahan
16-Nov-2007, 06:59
Both cameras are very well made. Don't worry about it. Get the one that makes you happy.

If one is available, but you'll have to wait on the other, get the one available. If one has the style wood you like, get that one.

The best solution is find someone or a store that has both, and check them out. Just because I like a manufacturer's design solution doesn't mean you'll like it.

Save you energy so you can worry about the images you make. Cheers.

jetcode
16-Nov-2007, 07:20
I can't speak for the Chamonix but the Shen-Hao 4x10 is awesome. I have the 5x7 back too. All in Burma Teak. The last view camera I will ever need. There is a Ebay seller who has 4x10 holders from Hong Kong for $80 each. They work well and are light tight. I just purchased some Shen-Hao 5x7 holders and they are good too. The slides move freely and there's no chance for light leak at the seams like the plastic holders which cost more used then the Shen-Hao's do new.

A Charles
16-Nov-2007, 09:15
There are a number of issues I would consider. The first is weight. The Chamonix in maple weighs only 4.8 pounds. The Shen Hao in walnut weighs twice as much at 8.8 pounds. The next issue is price. The Chamonix cost $2,240.00 The Shen Hao only cost $1,695.00. Another issue is the style of construction. The Chamonix is the popular Phillips style construction. The Shen Hao is the more traditional style. If your budget will allow I would say go with the Chamonix because of the weight issue. I have the Shen Hao FCL-810a and its a fine camera. If the Chamonix 8x10 would have been available when I decided to buy I would have gone with the Chamonix over the Shen Hao just because I'm guessing the quality of construction is probably better with the Chamonix but thats just a guess.

Marko
16-Nov-2007, 09:28
Which brins another question: Which of the two cameras allow changing orientation (horizontal to vertical) without having to tilt the entire camera?

Also, what would be the advantage of buying a dedicated 4x10 camera over an 8x10 with a 4x10 reducing back?

Jiri Vasina
16-Nov-2007, 09:36
Also, what would be the advantage of buying a dedicated 4x10 camera over an 8x10 with a 4x10 reducing back?

Size and weight?

But there are also advantages on the 8x10 side of the equation...

jetcode
16-Nov-2007, 09:37
There are a number of issues I would consider. The first is weight. The Chamonix in maple weighs only 4.8 pounds. The Shen Hao in walnut weighs twice as much at 8.8 pounds. The next issue is price. The Chamonix cost $2,240.00 The Shen Hao only cost $1,695.00. Another issue is the style of construction. The Chamonix is the popular Phillips style construction. The Shen Hao is the more traditional style. If your budget will allow I would say go with the Chamonix because of the weight issue. I have the Shen Hao FCL-810a and its a fine camera. If the Chamonix 8x10 would have been available when I decided to buy I would have gone with the Chamonix over the Shen Hao just because I'm guessing the quality of construction is probably better with the Chamonix but thats just a guess.

It is a guess. The quality of my camera easily compares with that of the Canham I owned. At some point quality (high end cameras appear quite useable) becomes less of an issue and weight and cost as you state become more of an issue. My camera feels light in my hand for it's size. It doesn't feel like 8.8 lbs but then again it's made in Teak. The $500 I saved bought me film holders. I have no allegiance to Shen-Hao I just think it's a great camera. After viewing the Phillips design I am not all that sure that this design matters to me. Give me a traditional flatbed, my preference purely.

Songyun
16-Nov-2007, 09:43
Which brins another question: Which of the two cameras allow changing orientation (horizontal to vertical) without having to tilt the entire camera?

Also, what would be the advantage of buying a dedicated 4x10 camera over an 8x10 with a 4x10 reducing back?

1) None

2) You can shoot 8X10. Only advantage you have in 4X10 is the weight. Again Chamonix 810 only weights less than 4 kgs.

jetcode
16-Nov-2007, 10:21
Marko,

I like to shoot 4x10 verticals and it turns out that it wasn't all that difficult to do. The camera was just as stable vertically as horizintally though we know that the perspective controls are obviously different.

Joe

C Henry
16-Nov-2007, 10:42
I'm another owner of the shan hao 4x10. My camera weighs 3.6kg without a lensboard.
It's a great camera as long as one understands the limitations. With a decent tripod and head, I'm able to photograph in the portrait orientation. However, using movements becomes slightly problematic, since the front swing and shift are controlled by the same lever. As such I will chose a composition which doesn't require movements.
At home in its landscape orientation it works beautifully (although to perform the axis tilt tricky due to the mechanism - base tilts works fine).
I have no experience with the Chanonix, and as such cannot comment.

Marko
16-Nov-2007, 10:46
How about 8x10 Chamonix? How much does it weigh and is there a 4x10 back for it?

It increasingly looks like an 8x10 with a reducing back might be a good compromise. Anybody using this kind of setup?

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
16-Nov-2007, 10:51
One major difference is bellows extension. The Chamonix runs from 70mm to 420mm (according to an eBay listing) and Shen-Hao Bellows draw from 110-550mm (From Badger Graphic).

I occasionally use 4x10 splitters on my 8x10 Deardorff. Although the camera is much heavier than either of the 4x10s, the splitters work just fine and I don't bother with cutting film or buying new film holders.

Hugo Zhang
16-Nov-2007, 10:52
Marko,

The Chamonix 8x10 in maple is about 3.8kg and the walnut one is 3.9kg. There are 4x10 backs to go with it, as there are 5x7 and 4x5 backs.

Jan Pedersen
16-Nov-2007, 10:58
One major difference is bellows extension. The Chamonix runs from 70mm to 420mm (according to an eBay listing) and Shen-Hao Bellows draw from 110-550mm (From Badger Graphic).


Another good reason to use the 8x10 with a 4x10 back. Believe the 8x10 has 580mm bellows extension, maybe Hugo can confirm that?

Hugo Zhang
16-Nov-2007, 11:01
Jan,

The bellows for Chamonix 8x10 is 95mm-680mm.

Hugo

Jan Pedersen
16-Nov-2007, 11:12
680mm even better :D

Thanks Hugo.

Songyun
16-Nov-2007, 11:12
680mm even better :D

Thanks Hugo.
Are you on the list?

Jan Pedersen
16-Nov-2007, 11:15
Yes, the 8x10

John Bowen
16-Nov-2007, 12:48
If light weight is an important feature, you might want to wait a few weeks until Richard Ritter releases his new lightweight "smaller" cameras. Richard has been producing a line of lightweight ULF cameras for over a year now and is currently working on a 4x5-8x10 version of this camera. I'm on Richard's waiting list. The latest ETA for these cameras is approximately 12 weeks....

See this thread for more details http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=29532&highlight=Ritter

John

jetcode
16-Nov-2007, 13:12
550mm is all I need except for macro work but even then 680mm wouldn't make a huge difference, 840mm would as I could 2x from a 210mm macro.

Songyun
16-Nov-2007, 14:06
550mm is all I need except for macro work but even then 680mm wouldn't make a huge difference, 840mm would as I could 2x from a 210mm macro.
840mm is 3X for 210mm :)

jetcode
16-Nov-2007, 14:27
840mm is 3X for 210mm :)

help me out here - 1x is 420mm 210mm x 2, 2x is double 1x which is 840mm - can you show me your computations?

the following is courtesy of Bob at HP Marketing found in another thread:

Lens extension for 1:1 is twice the focal length. For 2:1 it is doubled again.

Songyun
16-Nov-2007, 14:41
help me out here - 1x is 420mm 210mm x 2, 2x is double 1x which is 840mm - can you show me your computations?

the following is courtesy of Bob at HP Marketing found in another thread:

Lens extension for 1:1 is twice the focal length. For 2:1 it is doubled again.
bellow extension = focal length * (1+m)
so 420= 210*(1+1) 1X
You can get it by Gauss formula.
1/u+1/v=1/f
m=v/u so v=f*(1+m)

vinny
16-Nov-2007, 14:45
I use an 8x10 Wehman with a splitter board. It's an 8.7lb camera with the extension bed attached, 8lbs w/0 and the camera will focus a 450mm at infinity before needing the extension bed. These cameras hold their value well if you decided it wasn't for you and you needed to sell.

jetcode
16-Nov-2007, 15:06
bellow extension = focal length * (1+m)
so 420= 210*(1+1) 1X
You can get it by Gauss formula.
1/u+1/v=1/f
m=v/u so v=f*(1+m)

thanks songyun - it looks as if I can get about 1.6x with 550mm of bellows using a 210mm macro which is pretty decent - joe