Gaoersi Portable vs Shen-Hao XPO 4X5

[laffan]

hello Folks ; :)
I'm still doing my search on LF , seem the new Shen-Hao XPO 4X5 is good option for me :)
I also saw the modern types as the Gaoersi Portable 4x5 , and wondering if those cameras are the successor for the traditional bellows box-like camera :rolleyes:

Thanks

[Lachlan 717]

The portable is a quick-to-use camera. You'll find that it has many limitations over a bellows camera.

First is movements. It only has rise/fall. No front tilt/shift.

Second in lens options. You're limited to whatever cones are produced.

Third is focus range. You're limited to the range of the helical mount.

But, it can be a good street camera, as it is quick and easy to use. Also okay for a basic one lens system (as the cones take up way too much space).

Personally, I'd give it a miss for a medium format system for quick and easy, and I'd give it a miss for landscape.

All in all, I'm not a big fan. Much prefer a Speed Graphic with its movements and lens choices. This is just a dumbed down 4x5 camera; certainly not a successor.

[Lars Daniel]

No tilt means no-go! :D

[shadowleaves]

hello Folks ; :)
I'm still doing my search on LF , seem the new Shen-Hao XPO 4X5 is good option for me :)
I also saw the modern types as the Gaoersi Portable 4x5 , and wondering if those cameras are the successor for the traditional bellows box-like camera :rolleyes:

Thanks

Once I saw a photographer shooting architectures using a Gaoersi/Fotoman-like 4x5 P&S camera (not sure exactly which, they do look similar). These cameras use a lens cone assembly with helical focusing ring to focus the lens, thereby limited to lense around 180mm or so for 4x5. They are cool with wide angle and superwide lense, provided you don't use tilt/swing or horizontal shift. With the included viewfinder and rangefinder (on Fotoman), operations are generally faster than those of a typical 4x5, as you don't even need a dark cloth. Good for architecture or aerial photography, but not really for landscape (need tilting) or portrait (need longer lense).

[laffan]

Thanks all , what other stuff dose the Shen-Hao XPO 4X5 needs to be ready for landscaping, architectures and portraits ?
https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=3420

[Matus Kalisky]

well, the obvious parts: lens, tripod + head, film holders, film, dark cloth, possibly a 4x loupe, cable release and light meter (digital camera can do the job too).

I would check what is the minimal bellows draw on that camera to find out whether you do not need a bag bellows for wide angle lenses (say 75mm and wider) - most often one does need them.

For the choice of lenses first decide which focal length you would use most I would suggest something in 120 - 180 m (like 35 - 50 mm in small format). Get just one lens first and learn to use it. Add more lenses later once you get the feeling what is the LF like.

Be sure to look around here - there is wealth of information on lenses, tripods, heads and any other accessories you can think of.

[Lachlan 717]

Well, it certainly looks like you love them when looking at your list of cameras you own.

Cameras:
Custom 6x17cm field camera
Fuji G617
Gaoersi 617
Razzle 612

Let me update:
Shen Hao 617 Field
Shen Hao XPO 4x5
Horseman LE-45
Fiji G617 - Sold as it was a very limited camera;
DaYi Shift II (buried in the back room's mess; never used)
Gaoersi 617 - Sold, as it was only slightly less limited than the Fuji.
Dazzle 612 - Sold as it was a rubbish, limited paper weight.



If you are into wide angle, you won't need tilts (I have no problems with 150mm and lower with Fotoman 617).

Surely, you jest. Don't need movement under 150mm? Do you only take infinity shots with no foreground? I used some tilt the other day on a 72mm shot. I often use it and swing with my 90mm and 110mm. I'd be interested to find out if anyone else agrees with 150mm...


1. No dark cloth needed...faster.
2. Viewfinder....allows quick adjustment to follow moving subjects.
3. Handholdable...when shooting off boats, or where tripods are not convenient. I use
Fotoman 617's for wildlife photography. Try that with a field camera and no finder.
4. Rangefinder and helical focus - with depth of field and hyperfocal scale. This I
consider a big advantage. Stopped down I'm good from 5ft to infinity with 90mm.

As I said, give me a Speed Graphic any day over one of these. It can do all of this and has (limited) movements, a wider range of lenses and a curtain shutter if you want to mount a barrel. All better functions/specifications than the Gaoersi.


These guys made a fortune using only the 617 format (linhof)....

Let's keep this apples with apples. When KD and PL started shooting, there was the choice of the Linhof, the Fuji G617 and the Horseman 617 in "normal" cameras, and a couple of revolving/scanning 617s. KD started on the latter and moved to a Linhof when he found the limitations of the scanning cameras (mainly with long shutter speeds). He didn't have the options that we do with Ebony and Shen Hao field cameras.

[Lachlan 717]

You won't get these kind of images with a field camera without finder (can't compensate for subject movement)-

http://www.mangelsen.com/store/Collector_Edition_Prints___2010_Collection___Blueberries_Galore___Grizzly_Bears___6216?Args=

http://www.mangelsen.com/store/Collector_Edition_Prints___Panoramics___Antarctica___South_Georgia___Iceland___Antarctic_Slide___Gentoo_Penguins___6173?Args=

I think I could take these with my camera. Penguins and bears are both relatively slow moving animals, and it's not as if these shots are tightly cropped. In fact, if I add a cold shoe to my Shen, and an $80 Gaoersi view finder (i.e. The same brand as is on the OP's reference camera) this would be easy (what can you add to your Fotoman or the 4x5 Gaoersi to compensate for lack of movements?) You don't need a helical mount to have hyperfocal ability... Add a tripod with pan and I'd have no issues with these.

Here I was expecting your links to be of birds in flight shot on 4x5. How wrong I was...

[Lachlan 717]

Shooting from a boat with Shen Hao...LOL. Sure you can add a finder to your shen, but that thing was not designed to hand hold from boat....was it? And I doubt you would then be using tilts while handheld...LOL. You're trying to milk the camera to do things it was not designed for.

You seem confused....first you say "I think I could take these pictures with my camera", and then later you say "add a tripod with pan and I'd have no issues with these". Make up your mind, or is this just talk without thinking it through. A tripod on a small boat makes little sense (you could never compensate fast enough for the wave action). Good luck handholding that monster, never designed for it, and don't drop the clumsy beast while trying to hold and fire it.

Yeah, you don't need helical to get hyperfocal ability. We all know that. But, having the helical with hyperfocal markings, a camera designed with finder and easy to hold sure is nice. Either way, Peter Lik and Ken Duncan have done well by them. You at one time had 3 of these babies, apparently you liked them, but your style changed. Mangelson shot those Penguins with a Technorama, and obivously as a pro didn't want to muck around with a shen hao not designed for handholding. It is so obvious it is the wrong camera for the task.

Movements? My 90mm on Fotoman 617 is good from 5ft to infinity. Where's the problem?

Bird photography.....yeah, at 1/500th and wide open.... I got a better chance then you.

Wow, Van, I didn't realise that there was no photography before Fotoman came around.

Couple of things about being confused, Van: first, I didn't realise that the OP wanted to know about shooting Fotoman cameras from boats. I thought the OP wanted to know about a Gaoersi Portable versus the new Shen Hao XPO.

Second, I didn't realise that the OP wanted to know about 6x17cm format. I assumed that this was about 4x5.

Third, I didn't realise that the OP wanted to know about shooting from small boats.

Forth, I didn't think that I ever mentioned using tilts when had holding my camera. In fact, I don't recall ever mention hand holding my camera. (Which should clear up your confusion about my comment on using a tripod. I write "should", but I have my grave doubts).

Fifth, who are you to tell anyone what the camera was designed for, and who are you to chastise me for how you assume I use it? That's got me particularly confused.

Sixth, where do you get the notion that I "…apparently…liked…" the Fuji or the Razzle? Both are very, very average cameras by today's standards. And, no, my "style" has not changed. Again, I am not sure, nay, confused, as to where you gleaned this information from; certainly not from anything I have written here.

Seventh, to have DOF from 5 feet to infinity with a 90mm lens requires f22. I am confused as to how you can shoot at f22 on a small boat where I couldn't compensate fast enough due to the wave action to get a sharp shot?

Eighth, I am really, really confused as to why you avoided explaining how you avoid the need for tilt with a 150mm lens. Even at f45, you are not at 5 feet to infinity. And, you can be sure that the diffraction caused at this end of the f-stop range will surely stuff things up. By the way, how's shooting at f45 on a small boat with wave action going with image sharpness?

Anyway, this is probably boring everyone to tears, so here are my final thoughts on this:

*If you want something to shoot handheld 4x5, I suggest getting a Speed Graphic.
*If you want the (currently) ultimate in versatile 4x5 field camera, I suggest getting the Shen Hao XPO.
*If you don't think penguins can be photographed with a field camera, have a look at this site (http://classic.ipy.org/start/index.php/site/news-archive/frank_bickerton_and_the_australasian_antarctic_expedition_1911_142/) from almost a century ago (I'll help you , Van; that's well before any Fotoman camera was built).
*If you don't think bears can be photographed with a field camera, have a look at this site (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_RsCdaHlwY9g/SbwaaGML6tI/AAAAAAAAGGk/k-IbL0DP2yY/s1600-h/bears_haynes.jpg) (Again, I would hazard a guess that this shot precedes Fotoman, Van.
*And, just for you, Van, here is a 113 year old photo of a sailing boat (http://www.shorpy.com/node/4666) taken on a glass neg.

[Lachlan 717]

Your arguing over two completley different styles of cameras, for different purposes, which is crazy.

Um, Van, did you take the time to read the initial question posed by the OP? I think s/he wanted advice on the "two completley different styles of cameras".

Are you calling him/her "crazy", or are you solely directing that sledge at me?

Either way, why don't you just forget about me, read this thread from the beginning (excluding my posts) and perhaps offer some relevant advice to the OP if you are able to?

[shadowleaves]

Ok I used both Shen-hao TFC617 and now has a Fotoman 617 (probably the opposite pathway as compared to Lachlan?) and I think I do have some experience here. These comparison applies to the interesting topic on Gaoersi/Fotoman 4x5 P&S cameras vs non-folding field cameras like Shen-hao XPO or Ebony 45S/45SU/RSW45 etc as well.

In short these are just apples and oranges...I enjoy/enjoyed using both cameras. I really don't need to reiterate the pros or cons of either one, but at the end of the day it is the way each photographer chooses to take pics that determines which camera is better. Some people care about tilting, shifting, swinging, precise focusing, switching lense all the time whereas other people just want to take some snapshots before a decisive moment goes away. There isn't really good or bad here. All roads lead to one purpose - to take pics.

There were three reasons for me to switch to Fotoman. First, most of my trips in the near future will be backpacking ones. I won't have the luxury to drive a car and hauling a lot of gears. The advantage of Shen/Ebony 617 in the system weight only emerges when you have more than three lense, whereas I use 90mm and 180mm for most of the time, and I don't find myself keeping switching lense at one spot.

Second, although I deem the Fotoman viewfinder as pretty much unusable, it does have 3 hot shoes allowing you to use linhof 617's viewfinder (see pic below), which I just bite the bullet and bought. Didn't regret though, the linhof brightline finder is just so much more accurate. Fotoman VF is like crap compared to it - its framing will change more than 50% just as you move your eye around the eyepiece, plus its ridiculously low eye relief just drives us eyeglass wearers nuts. You can certainly use GG all the time, but that defeats the whole point of using these big P&S cameras. If I might suggest, get some linhof finders before GBP or Euro rises up to high level again....
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4779926777_2aeeeeaa62_b.jpg


Last but not least, while one can use tilting/swinging on a field camera to take some interesting pics, P&S also have its unique advantage. Bruno Morandi did some really wonderful photojournalism work including this one with a traditional 617 camera, which is pretty much impossible to take using a field camera:
http://www.dragonimage.net/images/rsgallery/display/Maroc034-1.jpg.jpg

[Lachlan 717]

Shadowleaves,

I thought that Bruno used an X-Pan, not a 6x17. Totally different proposition for shooting travel/photojournalism compared to any LF camera (the X-Pan is my suggested lightweight traveling camera).

As for "The advantage of Shen/Ebony 617 in the system weight only emerges when you have more than three lense (sic)", what about the volume in your pack due to the size of the nose cones? Was this any concern for you?

[shadowleaves]

Shadowleaves,

I thought that Bruno used an X-Pan, not a 6x17. Totally different proposition for shooting travel/photojournalism compared to any LF camera (the X-Pan is my suggested lightweight traveling camera).

As for "The advantage of Shen/Ebony 617 in the system weight only emerges when you have more than three lense (sic)", what about the volume in your pack due to the size of the nose cones? Was this any concern for you?

Ok I might have been misled by the 6x17 print ratio form his work...:p

I have three lense (90, 180, 300), and the two systems (each with 3 lense) take up exactly the same space (bottom part of a Kata UL-222). The nose cones are bulky but the camera body takes much less space than the TFC body and rollfilm holder did. Of course if you have four or more lense (e.g., 72, 90, 180, 300) then TFC617 has its advantage in gross volume. But in that scenario neither system will be good for backpacking anyway.

I have a Fuji TX-2 (Japanese version of Xpan II) and most of my travel pics were taken with it. But still, I wish I was using a 617 for many of those occasions which I used xpan instead...

[Lachlan 717]

I have a Fuji TX-2 (Japanese version of Xpan II) and most of my travel pics were taken with it. But still, I wish I was using a 617 for many of those occasions which I used xpan instead...

Same (well, I have the X-Pan). But I miss the 6x17 for its movements. Sometimes I don't want to shoot at f22 so that I get enough DOF. Give me tilt and swing!! Oh, and 6x17cm images...

[shadowleaves]

no....I was offered a good price for a used 180 VF and bought a new 90 VF from linhofstudio. For the 300 lens I guess I'll just stick with ground glass.

Your DC solution is very interesting but I really need a full horizontal view for my 90.


Hi Shadowleaves,
I agree with yu. It's about picking the tool that works best for different jobs, rather then trying to use a flathead screwdriver on a phillips screw (can be done, just no fun). No one camera does it all, but each different type can work better for certain tasks.

I found a way for the fotoman finders to work for me, although not at 100% (but good enough for most stuff). So recently I got the idea to try a digital solution. I purchased a Sony TX7 and mounted it to the Fotoman with a male flash shoe (Manfrotto 262 Nikon Flash Adapter) attached to the bottom of it (all looks quite good). This camera has a huge 3.5 inch viewfinder, and operates in 16:9. I covered it with an OPTEX LCD Screen Protector, then drew my crop lines on it with a Sharpie CD/DVD marker for both lenses. For the 90mm lens I lose a bit on the ends (but 100% see vertically), since the Sony sees 25mm and lens sees 18mm. For 150mm and above you get 100% accuracy. I still use the Fotoman finder, only pullinig out the Sony for when crops need to be very accurate (I hate darkcloths...as you said defeats purpose for buying these babies). I read the Linhof finder sees 90% (consistantly), but was looking for closer to 100%. It also shoots superb HD video in AVCHD format, and by playing with the exposure slider, different moods are created, which guides me for my final exposure. Less suprises.


The linhofs are obviously nice, but pricey if you need one for each lens. Did you adapt a mask (for each lens) over the front of the linhof finder to reduce costs?

[GPS]

no....I was offered a good price for a used 180 VF and bought a new 90 VF from linhofstudio. For the 300 lens I guess I'll just stick with ground glass.

...

It is well possible to use the Linhof 90mm viewfinder for a 300mm lens, with the appropriate mask, with very reasonable precision. A longer lens would be more difficult though. I use the same viewfinder with a home made mask on my 6x24 camera with the 300 mm lens and never had any issues with its precision.

[R Mann]

While all of the side comments on cameras and formats have been interesting - if one wanted a point and shoot with no tilt there appears to be only the Chinese option in 4x5.

I would like someone who has recently handled a Gaoersi to comment on the build quality and handling. There is also a Dayi that takes Toyo backs being offered from dealers in China - anyone ever see one of these in person?

Or, if one wanted this type of camera would it be better to build your own? I ask because in other threads there are a number of homebuilt 4x5 point and shoot examples.

[Lachlan 717]

Or, if one wanted this type of camera would it be better to build your own? I ask because in other threads there are a number of homebuilt 4x5 point and shoot examples.

Have you had a look through this thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=45775&highlight=Home+made)?

There's a surfeit great P&S cameras there. Be warned, though; you'll come away jealous of the builders' skills and imagination...

[Lachlan 717]

Red light? Film count? Gaoersi film flatness?

You still don't seem to realise that this thread is about 4x5. It even says it in the title.

And you have the audacity to call me slow...

[R Mann]

My thanks to all you have commented - I find the information you get on this forum of great value - even when a thread seems to stray off the target. Nothing is better than the experience of others who have been using some of the equipment that is very hard to see and handle before investing.

Fotoman products have left the market place, so unless one happens to hit a used one at the right time, I think the only 4x5 options for less than $1000 are Goersi, Dayi, or make one yourself. The homebuilt thread was interesting, but I wonder about the time that you would need to invest to have a useable product (and how many mistakes I could make it trying to put one together).

[Lachlan 717]

I am talking about my camera, helical focusing, general workmanship (do you mind?), which would be the same throughout the product line. I already told you before they come in 6x9/612/617/45/57/810, and I wouldn't expect much difference other then around film handling (sheet vs rolls). The quality holds same for all models, and helical ring is the same also for all Fotomans/Gaoersi (you think the helical will change other then focus scale for different focal lengths?). Kapeesh? Also few people can make a comment about the Fotoman or Goersi in 45 to 810 versions, simply because they are unpopular . I would think any comment is better then nothing. Have you "handled" a Fotoman or Goersi in 4x5 model? Bet not, so I guess you're making general comments like the rest of us. Right? If you think I am off topic, look at page two with a BIG picture of a Fotoman 617 with linhof finder. I guess everyone is all over the place.

Nice attempt to deflect the discussion, Van, but please tell me what red light, film count and Gaeorsi film flatness have to do with anything here?

Oh, and by the way, your presumptuous shooting from the hip is once again wrong. I have held a Fotoman and a Gaeorsi 4x5. I also own a Shen Hao XPO, having worked with the company direct in its design. As I did with the Shen Hao 617. As for the Fotoman 617, I was looking at one in Friday night at the Camera Exchange in Melbourne. Perhaps call them? Check if I'm making this up? Want me to get their number for you?

So, perhaps stop gobbing off like a petulant, naive mid-pubescent schoolboy trying to bluff knowledge.

"Kapeesh"? Stop insulting the Italian language. Capisci?

[R Mann]

Fotoman Camera Ltd is gone, but "Fotoman China" is alive (Charlie is happy with Chinas 1.5 billion market).... at http://www.fotomancamera.com.cn/ . My friend has bought cones and other items with a turn around of about 10 days. Contact information (Charlie) is listed here ... http://www.apug.org/forums/forum186/65174-fotoman-2.html .

Everything is available. However, they just updated their website, and I think they have a mix up (since they were allowed to use Paul Droluks website which is in English). They list production ceasing, but this letter is clearly the identical one Paul wrote when he shut down Fotoman Camera Ltd about 1.5yrs ago. I expect Fotoman China to be alive and well, just a mistake (which I plan to write to confirm) between their Chinese site and the English version. The products are identical, although Paul Droluk (owner Fotoman Camera Ltd) said their suppliers are different, and they do not warranty eachothers products.


Thanks for the update - I was unaware that they were still in business.

[shadowleaves]

You guys might wanna take a look at this. There are other choices besides cone-based P&S and field cameras...

Chamonix Saber, offered by Chamonix Studio (part of Chamonix View Camera)

Lens range 120mm-150mm, coupled rangefinder focus, can fold to very compact dimensions. Designed based on Polaroid 3x4, but takes full 4x5 shots...

Ping Hugo for more information....

http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/saber.html

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4785523806_164f7d07cc_b.jpg
http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/_images/saber3.jpg
http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/_images/saber2.jpg



Oh, and by the way, your presumptuous shooting from the hip is once again wrong...

[Lachlan 717]

So you held a Fotoman and a Goaersi 4x5 in your hands, and now you're an expert...wow. Working with a company in its design, eh? You mean telling them what you wanted, then they built it for you. This makes you an expert? Looks to me like you're the one trying to bluff knowledge...are you an engineer, woodworker, work for them (I doubt it, you would have already mentioned it)? And why would I call the Melbourne Camera Exchange just because you "saw" a Fotoman 617, after all I already own two! I think you are the one doing the bluffing-

1. Unaware of lack of hyperfocal scale on Goersi models.
2. Assuming focus range is limited to range of the helical mount. A 10mm spacer between the cone and body cuts the near focus in half, and you get even closer with a 25mm spacer (they also have 40mm, or you can stack them). This is possible only with Fotoman cameras. Of course you lose infinity focus temporarily while doing this, but great if you're into close-up stuff.
3. Unaware of quality differences between helical mount on Goersi (which you owned) and Fotoman which you saw in store. You're the expert, why no comments, you should have looked closer. Paul Droluk had this to say about the construction.....

"HFM - our Helical Focus Mount is truly a thing of beauty, if I do say so myself. It's buttery rotational feel is the result of a 6-start, fine pitch helicoid thread. The Gaoersi HFM utilizes a single high pitch coarse thread, just like a screw, which results in a rough, imprecise feel. While the rough feel can be masked, to some degree, by a generous application of thick grease, this will lead to problems of high torque when subjected to cold temperatures or migration (read: mess) at elevated temperatures. Additionally, last we checked, it appeared as though the Gaoersi HFM utilized the same distance/DOF markings for several different focal lengths."

By the way, Shadowleaves (comment #14) also referred to his 617 system in his comparison with 4x5 models, it is expected when little else is available for help. There is no problem. Whatever is bothering you, I got the solution.....take a shot of vodka to kill the bug up your A$$. Before all this started, all I ever said was that considering you have 3 point and shoot large format cameras, you sure seem to like them, and then I added my views on the two categories of cameras. Lachlan, lighten up, you mean we have another problem (with kapeesh)? ;) Sudieva.

Notice Goersi helical mount has no provision for hyperfocal scale, while Fotoman does. You might see it clearer on the 3rd photo. Left photo is cone for Goersi 45.

For what it's worth, I am an Architect. I have years of design and build behind me. No, I'm not an Engineer; I consult with them to make my designs work. As I did with Mr Zhang. But, I doubt that you care about this; you'll just keep sending up more smoke in the pathetic hope that it'll distract from your lack of acknowledgement of your previous foibles. As you have here.

But, hey, if you think that I just told them what I want and they built it, that still puts me 2 cameras ahead of you in the actual, not assumed/professed, knowledge of intended camera use that you waxed so lyrical about earlier in this thread.

You bet that I'd not "handled" either a Fotoman, nor a Gaoersi. I have. Thus, you lost the bet. Now you come back with the oh-so-childish "So you held a Fotoman and a Goaersi 4x5 in your hands, and now you're an expert…wow". You set the criteria on this point, and pathetically now run away from it, casting belittling comments back at me as you try to hide in the haze of hyperbole and irrelevant rebuttal.

So, you think I'm bluffing. Man up and call the camera store. Then post the results of the call, like the name of who you speak with there. I doubt that you will, as you know that I'm not bluffing.

If you don't call them, your silence will be deafening.

You talk about red light, film counters and film flatness in a thread about 4x5; why? I'm still waiting to read your response.

Again, you silence on these points is deafening.

Christ, you can't even spell Gaoersi and you charge me with bluffing?

By the way, a 90mm on a 5x7 (i.e. the format generally accepted as having the most relevant width relative to the 6x17cm format) focuses from 4.63 feet to infinity at f22 when a focus distance of 10 feet is used. Not the f45 you claim. And if you want to go with the smaller format of 4x5, it's f32 at 10 feet to get 4.54 feet to infinity. So, how about YOU get YOUR facts straight. Or, are you going to challenge Schneider's figures: https://www.schneideroptics.com/info/depth_of_field_tables/index.htm? Or perhaps challenge this site: http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html?

Guess you'll be off to put some green leaves on the fire now. I hear that they're really good at producing smokescreens.

[Gordon Flodders]

Red light? Film count? Gaoersi film flatness?

You still don't seem to realise that this thread is about 4x5. It even says it in the title.

And you have the audacity to call me slow...

Slow is not quite the correct terminology. With so much attitude you may be better off with a Holger :D
Surely all architects aren't really such a PITA?

GF.

[Lachlan 717]

Slow is not quite the correct terminology. With so much attitude you may be better off with a Holger :D
Surely all architects aren't really such a PITA?

GF.

Wow, comments from the cheap seats. Perhaps you could clarify it for me? Having such a condescending tone surley implies you have a grasp on the subject. Or was that just too much Toohey's Blue talking?

Looking forward to your response, GF.

[Gordon Flodders]

Access to LF forum is provided by many hard working individuals and is supposed to form a network of ideas and opinions, therefore contributors are expected to share knowledge rather than insults. The fact is one can get wonderful results from any box with a lens on it, if one has some idea of which way is up.
Whilst the Chinese cameras may or may not exhibit minor shortfalls, any experienced photographer should be more than capable of dealing with this and not blame the manufacturer for their own inadequacies.
The Gaoersi is an amazing bit of kit and no one should ever expect a Linhof for such an amazingly low price.
As you claim to be an architect, surely it would be a relatively easy task to design something as simple as a camera, then proceed to vent your anger by beating some metal into a shape that suits your needs.
And it would be far better to drink the Vodka. :p

GF.

[Drew Bedo]

If movements are not an issue for you and compact cary/portability are important; why not look at the Polaroid conversions? Razzle, Alpinhaus and Byron are all affordable options that have range-finder focusing.

[shadowleaves]

Exactly....see my post #32 for yet another choice...


If movements are not an issue for you and compact cary/portability are important; why not look at the Polaroid conversions? Razzle, Alpinhaus and Byron are all affordable options that have range-finder focusing.