Chamonix Saber

[lbenac]

Hello,

I think that there were not that many produced so not many forum members that have hold one but if such is the case I would love to hear from users their impression of the camera.
I have put my name on the waiting list for next year - details to be finalized when the production run takes place.
I am looking at this as a "replacement" for my two Fuji 6x9 that i will soon put on sale.
Ideally I would like to put on it my Fujinon-NW 125/5.6 but I think that on this run Hugo will provide the lens as mandatory.

Cheers,

Luc

[EdSawyer]

I have one. I bought it new from someone who waited the year for it but then decided they didn't really need it. It's great, I've used it a ton. Mine has a 120mm APO Symmar, which is probably the best lens for this camera. (Its' the one it was designed around). Can't complain about much with it. I wish it had a hot-shoe, but I can live without it. I wish the grip/handle was a little better, but I could DIY something there if I was really motivated. I wish the viewfinder/rangefinder was a little more accurate regarding the framelines, and I wish it had framelines or lines for a 6x** back (6x9, 6x12, etc.)

I use it primarily with 3 backs: grafmatics, horseman 6x12 back, and Fuji PA-45 back. it's great with all 3. I haven't used the ground glass and double darkslide holder much at all, since the above 3 choices work better for me. The build quality on them in general is great, the DD film holders are beautifully made.

I had/have a pair of Fuji GW690III and GSW690III also - great cameras. The fujis are more rugged and quicker to shoot than the Saber, but the saber has so much more film realestate, it's the better choice for ultimate image quality in that regard. The fuji lenses are great, though I think the APO Symmar is their equal.

Enjoy,
-Ed

[lbenac]

Hello Ed,

Thank you for your answer and I am glad that you like it - it is very encouraging. My reasoning is that if I am going to carry as much weight as a GW690, I might as well have the real estate.
Right now there is a used one for sale on APUG (by an unknown member from HK :( ) with a Symmar-S 150. The price is $1,300 plus 3% plus shipping. I get a feel that a new one in June might cost a lot more. I am still hoping that Hugo will change his mind and let me send him my lens.

Cheers,

Luc

[Matus Kalisky]

I have come across this camera by accident (on eBay is one right now) and really like the idea. This the first really light and compact 4x5" RF I have seen.

Do I understand correctly that it is a 3x4" Polaroid camera updated with 4x5 back? I guess that the RF and lens mount/bellows are original (that is probably the origin of the 120-150 focal length limitation and minimal focus 1.5m).

Seems like an interesting option for 6x12 as well.

Ed, how do you find the rangefinder?

[lbenac]

Well I sold the two Fuji and just pull the trigger on the Saber for sale at APUG.
It has a 150mm Symmar-S. I would have preferred something shorter 120/125mm but it was available with no waiting list to worry about.
I have four Grafmatic and HP5+ in the fridge (the film ;) ).
Somebody is looking to look for the mailman everyday...

Cheers,

Luc

[Kuzano]

It looks like any one of 10,000,000 variations of the Polaroid 100 to 450 cameras, plus the 185, and 195 models hiding in closets around the country. Albeit some modifications along the same lines as the various Pathfinder 110, 110A, 110B and 120.

Where's the mystery? Has the same Zeiss Ikon rangefinder on the top, a nicer lens added, and probably a selection of backs.... each one different for the film format desired. A little stick-on walnut shelf paper added.

Hmmm. What did I miss here.

Polaroid Camera...
$10 to $50 on eBay, some creativity, drilling, screwing, etc.... $100 bucks plus a good lens. For that matter the Polaroid Pathfinder 127mm Rodenstock Ysarex, commonly found for $100, in a good running shutter, also on eBay. Total investment couple of hundred....????

[Frank Petronio]

It looks like any one of 10,000,000 variations of the Polaroid 100 to 450 cameras, plus the 185, and 195 models hiding in closets around the country. Albeit some modifications along the same lines as the various Pathfinder 110, 110A, 110B and 120.

Where's the mystery? Has the same Zeiss Ikon rangefinder on the top, a nicer lens added, and probably a selection of backs.... each one different for the film format desired. A little stick-on walnut shelf paper added.

Hmmm. What did I miss here.

Polaroid Camera...
$10 to $50 on eBay, some creativity, drilling, screwing, etc.... $100 bucks plus a good lens. For that matter the Polaroid Pathfinder 127mm Rodenstock Ysarex, commonly found for $100, in a good running shutter, also on eBay. Total investment couple of hundred....????

There you go destroying the magic right when I was going to "patent" the process and charge thousands for my versions too. I figure if I wrap them in the skins of exotic dead animals I can still get away with it.... Finding Asian Elves to work on the cameras is expensive.

Please don't tell them how the rangefinder goes wonky if you look at it funny. Or that it is still a delicate strut camera with a lot of plastic parts so it's pointless to put a fancy lens on it since nothing will ever be parallel or consistent in it over time.

(I've owned two conversions, not as slick as the Sabre. The Yasarex is a very fine lens, seems silly to "upgrade".)

[lbenac]

Feel free to modify one for me and sell it to me for $500. If it works and the backs are secured, I will buy it :)

Cheers,

Luc





It looks like any one of 10,000,000 variations of the Polaroid 100 to 450 cameras, plus the 185, and 195 models hiding in closets around the country. Albeit some modifications along the same lines as the various Pathfinder 110, 110A, 110B and 120.

Where's the mystery? Has the same Zeiss Ikon rangefinder on the top, a nicer lens added, and probably a selection of backs.... each one different for the film format desired. A little stick-on walnut shelf paper added.

Hmmm. What did I miss here.

Polaroid Camera...
$10 to $50 on eBay, some creativity, drilling, screwing, etc.... $100 bucks plus a good lens. For that matter the Polaroid Pathfinder 127mm Rodenstock Ysarex, commonly found for $100, in a good running shutter, also on eBay. Total investment couple of hundred....????

[lbenac]

There you go destroying the magic right when I was going to "patent" the process and charge thousands for my versions too. I figure if I wrap them in the skins of exotic dead animals I can still get away with it.... Finding Asian Elves to work on the cameras is expensive.

Please don't tell them how the rangefinder goes wonky if you look at it funny. Or that it is still a delicate strut camera with a lot of plastic parts so it's pointless to put a fancy lens on it since nothing will ever be parallel or consistent in it over time.

(I've owned two conversions, not as slick as the Sabre. The Yasarex is a very fine lens, seems silly to "upgrade".)

Hey Frank,

If I may ask why did you buy two? Different color for the leather or different focal length or you got a good deal from Dean or you were bored ;)

Cheers,

Luc

[Frank Petronio]

Like a lot of photographers, I've (past tense) wanted a compact, handheld 4x5 and always paid attention to the modified Polaroids like the very expensive Littmann. I bought my first Razzledog 110 modification ~ 2004 with the common Yasarex lens and thought it performed fine. Dean Jones is also a tip-top gentleman and a very trustworthy and fair person to deal with. His cameras are priced sanely too.

However my comments about the modified Polaroids are that you're asking a lot from a simple camera that didn't need to be super-precise to only make Polaroid size prints. Frankly I don't think the rangefinder or the front standard are up to the task for critical, wide-open work at portrait distances. And while they are compact and nice enough cameras, to spend thousands on them is rather like getting gold and leather trim in a Yugo... it just seems silly.

I don't discount them out of hand at all. I even bought a second one a couple of years later to take on a trip to Italy, where it worked nicely (except for the rangefinder needing adjustment). I think they are good landscape - shoot at infinity cameras. Of course a simple wooden box would be too. And a $200 Crown Graphic is stronger, more versatile, has a better rangefinder (imho), interchangeable lenses, a better back, etc. and it is only slightly larger - a boxier form factor is the penalty (but it will close up with a 180mm in a Copal 1 lens attached so it may actually save room if you need to carry lenses separately).

That Saber does look nice, no question, I just doubt it is worth the money and it seems likely to be prone to the same complaints I already expressed with regards to the rangefinder and front end.

I also like to bust on Ebony buyers and incite class resentment and fight for those poor photographers, it's my way of sticking it to the man!

[Kuzano]

However my comments about the modified Polaroids are that you're asking a lot from a simple camera that didn't need to be super-precise to only make Polaroid size prints. Frankly I don't think the rangefinder or the front standard are up to the task for critical, wide-open work at portrait distances. And while they are compact and nice enough cameras, to spend thousands on them is rather like getting gold and leather trim in a Yugo... it just seems silly.

Well Frank, by bringing Yugo into the discussion, you raise the topic to a new level. Do you know the last two additions added to the Yugo in the last year of production. An ashtray in the rear seat, and a rear window defrost. Interestingly, it turns out the advantage of the rear window defrost was really played out in keeping your hands warm when pushing your stalled Yugo to the nearest mechanic, leaving the rear defrost unit turned on.

Perhaps a heated ground glass, or something similar on a Littman might intrigue some buyers.

I have been carving on Polaroid Pathfinders off and on for some time. It's kind of a cathartic mental masturbation combined with a peaceful complacency during long evenings. (actually achieving orgasm has been elusive).

I've narrowed it down to the fact that the Rodenstock Ysarex 127 is perhaps the best option for the Pathfinder. It is a much higher quality lens than most would admit.

I've also decided that people are trying to use WAY TOO MUCH of the original pathfinders. The door, front standard and struts, and the bellows section are the only really useful parts toward building a totable, yet mediochre camera that would attract a price of sorts. So I've cut down my most recent pathfinder to this:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y174/kuzano/Polaroid110bcutdown006-2Medium.jpg

Now this, with a hunk of Walnut and a set of carving knives, in front of the TV for many nights and a setback simple Graflok system, would allow for an infinity focus camera, handheld, or tripod with GG viewing. Eventually I need to actually finish one of these projects. NOTICE: I have bypassed the rangefinder. Messing with the rangefinder cam is far too labor intensive for the return.

Don't get me wrong...... I have nothing against Dean/Razzle, Alpenhouse and others getting the prices they do for their creativity. I've actually been impressed with the variety of mods that Dean has come up with. Littman is a whole nother animal of course.

And with all these people stockpiling unmolested Pathfinder camera's until the "stale date" runs out and they must be converted, it's only natural that someone would come up with a way to use up all the Polaroid Automatic camera's which is the case with the Chamonix Saber. Soo much inventory out there... is there enough time?

[lbenac]

Like a lot of photographers, I've (past tense) wanted a compact, handheld 4x5 and always paid attention to the modified Polaroids like the very expensive Littmann. I bought my first Razzledog 110 modification ~ 2004 with the common Yasarex lens and thought it performed fine. Dean Jones is also a tip-top gentleman and a very trustworthy and fair person to deal with. His cameras are priced sanely too.

However my comments about the modified Polaroids are that you're asking a lot from a simple camera that didn't need to be super-precise to only make Polaroid size prints. Frankly I don't think the rangefinder or the front standard are up to the task for critical, wide-open work at portrait distances. And while they are compact and nice enough cameras, to spend thousands on them is rather like getting gold and leather trim in a Yugo... it just seems silly.

I don't discount them out of hand at all. I even bought a second one a couple of years later to take on a trip to Italy, where it worked nicely (except for the rangefinder needing adjustment). I think they are good landscape - shoot at infinity cameras. Of course a simple wooden box would be too. And a $200 Crown Graphic is stronger, more versatile, has a better rangefinder (imho), interchangeable lenses, a better back, etc. and it is only slightly larger - a boxier form factor is the penalty (but it will close up with a 180mm in a Copal 1 lens attached so it may actually save room if you need to carry lenses separately).

That Saber does look nice, no question, I just doubt it is worth the money and it seems likely to be prone to the same complaints I already expressed with regards to the rangefinder and front end.

I also like to bust on Ebony buyers and incite class resentment and fight for those poor photographers, it's my way of sticking it to the man!

Actually you probably have gone through more pricey equipment than many :p

I hope that the concern regarding the front standard/bellow assembly are somewhat unfounded. That is one of the reason that I would have preferred going with a 120 instead of a 150 - it sticks less out. That said I know it is a concern with any folder in the long run.
The appeal to me is that the Saber is light (something like 900 gr.) and looks functional (easy way to attach a Grafmatic, tripod mounts on both side,...).
This is a deciding factor. If I had to carry the weight of a Crown Graphic, then I would simply take my 45N2.
The Razzle look beautiful but at close to 4 pounds, the same applies.
Inasmuch as I do mostly landscape or cityscape and that you have already taken all the available models on the West Coast :D, I think that the Saber will be a good alternative to the Fuji and with a larger negative.
As far as the price, been a defender of social equality, you will agree that the hours of work it likely takes to make the conversion need to be fairly rewarded even if the workers are located in China. So even if $1,300 is a little bit on the high side, when the price of the lens as been taken out, I certainly don't find it unreasonable.

Cheers,

Luc

[lbenac]

Don't get me wrong...... I have nothing against Dean/Razzle, Alpenhouse and others getting the prices they do for their creativity. I've actually been impressed with the variety of mods that Dean has come up with. Littman is a whole nother animal of course.


Was that not the guy that put a patent on converting Polaroid from Polaroid to 4x5 :rolleyes: and was saying that nobody could do that but him?

My take on the price of these camera is that you are not paying so much for the base material but for the hours of work - which I find fair. Specially as I do not have hours to spend on such a project.

Hopefully you can complete your project and have the satisfaction to use your own work which will be even more rewarding.

Cheers,

Luc

[Frank Petronio]

Yes the Littmann saga is entertaining. Better to Google it than to try to repeat it here and draw renewed attention to him.

[Kuzano]

Actually you probably have gone through more pricey equipment than many :p

I hope that the concern regarding the front standard/bellow assembly are somewhat unfounded. That is one of the reason that I would have preferred going with a 120 instead of a 150 - it sticks less out. That said I know it is a concern with any folder in the long run.

Cheers,

Luc

Actually Luc, this is not quite correct. the opening on the bellows on the Polaroids is actually only 3X4 inches (approximately) at the rear opening, which does not allow shooting 4X5 at the normal film plane opening for Polaroid. So, you have to move the GG and film holder opening for 4X5 back somewhat. It turns out that using a 150mm lens at the stock location and making the proper setback for the GG/Film plane allows the angle from the center of the lens to all four sides of the 4X5 opening appropriate.

Close measurement of focal length and correct parallelism are crucial here.

In the case of the setback, in fact, the front lens standard would have to be moved to the rear to correspond to the new placement of the GG/film holder to achieve the 4X5, if one wanted to use the stock Rodenstock Ysarex 127. It should also be noted that the Ysarex is also a Lanthanum coated lens, much like the highly sought Apo Lanthar 105 on the Bessa II, which runs those cameras up to many thousands of dollars. Last Apo Lanthar Bessa II I saw sold, brought over $7000 dollars. Another plus for the Ysarex.

Bottom line on your comment, using a 150 should not involve any more stress or weakness on the front struts or standard. In fact, I consider that the struts/front standard on a Pathfinder would be far more stable than conversion of any of the Polaroid Automatic bodies as in the Saber.

Furthermore, in my personal observation, the struts on either of the Polaroids is likely to be more stable than many of the lighter wood field cameras, such as Tachihara, Ikeda, Wista, etc. Heck, Frank, perhaps even the Ebony cameras.

[lbenac]

Bottom line on your comment, using a 150 should not involve any more stress or weakness on the front struts or standard.

Excellent than it just the looks and does not change the reliability.




In fact, I consider that the struts/front standard on a Pathfinder would be far more stable than conversion of any of the Polaroid Automatic bodies as in the Saber.

This makes sense to me and certainly justifies the weight difference.



Furthermore, in my personal observation, the struts on either of the Polaroids is likely to be more stable than many of the lighter wood field cameras, such as Tachihara, Ikeda, Wista, etc. Heck, Frank, perhaps even the Ebony cameras.

Good news, it means that my Saber might live longer...

Thanks for all the info

Luc

[goodfood]

Hi, Ibenac, I agree what you want. I'm more or less same equipment as you. I have a light weight woodfield,a Super Technika with cam 135mm lens which is too heavy. So I bought a 110A and plan to change it's back for lighter weight and easy to use. May be after my retire. I work in South Burnaby,BC, Canada.

[lbenac]

Hey, now we are really neighbor :-)

[Fred L]

I saw those Sabers and had a momentary lust for them but then remembered I had a Byron conversion http://salihonbashome.blogspot.com/p/byron-conversion-service.html.

The beauty of the Byron, aside from being able to actually get close to the viewfinder while wearing glasses, is the very slim profile, esp compared to some other conversions out there, such as the one that shall not be named. Daniel has done a really great job customizing the camera so that it's much more than a Graflok back attached to the camera.

You just need to save your pennies for this conversion though ;)

[Allen in Montreal]

...... it's much more than a Graflok back attached to the camera.



That looks sweet indeed!

[lbenac]

That looks sweet indeed!

Very much so, but the body and the lenses are not included in the price of the conversion - ouch!!!

[Fred L]

Well you do have the original 127 Ysarex when you send him your camera for the conversion. I recently sent him a 90 Angulon to have fitted on a lens board and I expect to use this lens ALOT. Framing accurately will be hard at first but I have the gg if precision is needed, otherwise it's a street shooter.

[lbenac]

I just received my Saber and will take some shots this week-end.
1) very light
2) well balanced with a Grafmatic on
3) critical focus is likely not its forte
4) I might have found a use for my Chamonix folding viewer, it fits on the ground glass (I will have to spend some time comparing focussing with the RF and with the GG with the folding viewer)

Cheers,

Luc

[Fred L]

Hopefully you can adjust the rf on the Zeiss finder so it matches up with the gg. Have fun with your new camera and post some photos when you get a chance !

[lbenac]

Hopefully you can adjust the rf on the Zeiss finder so it matches up with the gg. Have fun with your new camera and post some photos when you get a chance !

Hopefully it was done when they converted the camera...
But yes I need to read about this RF to see if it can be adjusted when needed.

Cheers,

Luc

[EdSawyer]

Luc, good to hear you got it and are having fun with it.

Lots of haters and skeptics on this thread... they must be jealous. ;-)

as an FYI for the clueless opiners, the Saber is a ground-up new camera, not a conversion. It uses some polaroid design elements, and bits and parts, but the entire chassis is a new CNC milled aluminum piece. Check their site. It's far better than any other polaroid "conversion" by the usual suspects, with the added bonus of being able to put a top-notch modern lens on it like an apo symmar, which will undoubtedly trounce a ysarex or whatever vintage-lens-of-choice one might have in mind.

Enjoy!
-Ed

[lbenac]

One thing that IMHO is missing is a handle on top of the right part of the chassis.
I found that the left hand grip naturally on the piece of wood there but the right hand specially with the hoop of the Grafmatic sticking out is not very ergonomic.
I think that a piece of wood formed on top of the metal would make a big difference.

Cheers,

Luc

[EdSawyer]

Luc, I agree re handle. One could use a right handed L-grip, like the vivitar one, which would help. Or a big ergonomic handle on the left would be ok too.

[lbenac]

Now that is what it is all about.
Domke FX3

Chamonix Saber with one Grafmatic mounted
3 Grafmatic on the side
GG on the left pocket
Filters and whatnot on the right pocket


24 shots of joy

Luc

[Matus Kalisky]

Luc, I would love to hear what is your impression of the camera in the use - how is the viewfinder/rangefinder and the whole construction. Are you able to get photos in focus wide open at portrait distances? If you have not tried yet, please do :)

[Frank Petronio]

You know I am skeptical, especially of the rangefinder, but with that Domke picture you just sold a bunch of them. If I keep hearing good reports I would buy one myself, I mean why bother with medium format if you can do this?

Good luck and thanks for posting about this.

The handle would be nice if you could make it folding so it wouldn't impact the size so much. What I don't like about the 110s is they are so unnecessarily long... this eliminates that.

FWIW, someone should build something new like this, sans rangefinder, from the ground up. It would sell like hotcakes.

[Hugo Zhang]

In the last two years, Chamonix has made a few dozen of them and most of them were sold within hours inside China when they came out. I usually have a wait list for them and this Saber is getting recognized as words spread.

But due to the difficulties of finding and importing old Polaroid cameras in good conditions as parts to build these Sabers, we will stop making them this year after shipping the last batch of two dozens to people on my list.

Unless your guys have some better ideas and we will certainly look at them.

Good shooting and thanks!
Hugo

[Fred L]

and the used market just went orbital ;)

[Matus Kalisky]

Hugo - we never are short of ideas :p

Realistically - the small size (tiny is probably a better word) of the market would make such move unrealistic I guess, but just thinking loudly - get RF made by Voigtlaender/Cosina (they do these for their 35mm and 6x7 Bessa camera and are good) and make the body yourself (and adaptable to reasonable range of lenses). Lenses in the range 90 - 150 (or whatever would be doable) are plentiful.

Makes me wonder how much could such a camera cost though. The Bessa III 667 (Fuji GF670) is about $2000 and that includes lens, shutter, meter, AE coupling.

... what do you think?

[Frank Petronio]

Frankly the Cambo Wide type cameras are pretty close, and you could always add a separate shoe mount rangefinder (Lots of used ones on the market).

[Kuzano]

The handle would be nice if you could make it folding so it wouldn't impact the size so much. What I don't like about the 110s is they are so unnecessarily long... this eliminates that.

FWIW, someone should build something new like this, sans rangefinder, from the ground up. It would sell like hotcakes.

Frank, I'm sure you saw my post on this thread, where I deal with the problem of the unnecessarily long Polaroid Pathfinder.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=84183&page=2

I need to get on this project, after I move my shop, which I am in the midst of. I have a very tiny, but workable 4X5 graflock back from a lightweight 4X5 monorail. I need to build a bridge body from the back of this cut down pathfinder to about an inch behind the pathfinder body, so I can use either a Ysarex 127 or a Fujinar 150 and fill the 4X5 negative.

I'm actually thinking a hardwood body that the remaining body of the Pathfinder slides into, to hide the raw Pathfinder chrome and then extends far enough to mount the GG in the proper position away from the film opening in the back of the Pathfinder, to shoot light onto the full 4X5.

No rangefinder. I am now 68 and there is only one thing that I concern myself with hand holding from now on.

BTW.... Really like your new website... and not just for the ladies, or the men.

I have about a half dozen of the auto polaroids and I may have a go at the Saber style of conversion, but I just don't consider that strut system very durable, and since I am not pursuing ANY rangefinder system... The ZI rangefinder goes where it should go... In the wastebasket.

[Frank Petronio]

Thanks Kuzano, there are a lot of good options already out there, especially once you decide to commit to one lens, or have no movements, or avoid the rangefinder... it becomes pretty simple. And for a lot of shooting that is all you ever need.

[lbenac]

You know I am skeptical, especially of the rangefinder, but with that Domke picture you just sold a bunch of them.

Frank,


Is my assumption correct that the Saber is a lot lighter and takes less space than Dean's Razzle?

Cheers,

Luc

[Fred L]

Nor speaking for Frank but the Saber seems to be based on the folding Polaroids with drop down rf housing (the 450 just as an example) whereas other conversions are based on the 110b cameras. I don't have a Saber but would bet a few bucks that the 110b's are heavier. Using them is very different as well, esp focusing. Both would appear to be great street shooters if you use Grafmatic holders.

The 110b looks to be an easier conversion if you want to shoot 4x5 but with some serious mods, the smaller Polaroids such as Chamonix uses make for very compact cameras.

[lbenac]

I took the Saber out yesterday:
1) walk in the woods under the snow
2) walk in the city (derelict building...)
I am developing today.

The first thing that I noticed is that I do not get clear cut borders as with the 45N2 and Riteway film holder.
I do not remember using Graftmatic much with the 45N2, so I am not 100% sure if it is a Saber thing but I think that it is most likely. Looking at the inside of the beast. The size of the opening might just be pushing it for 4x5 and the borders are also not straight line and I think that some of the indentation match the camera.
Not a big deal there is still plenty of real estate but something to remember to be generous with the framing.
I have more shots to develop where I paid some attention to the framing on the RF to compare to what I get on film so will report later today.

Cheers,

Luc

[lbenac]

The handle would be nice if you could make it folding so it wouldn't impact the size so much. What I don't like about the 110s is they are so unnecessarily long... this eliminates that.

I should correct myself, I was more thinking along the line of a wooden shape bolted to the aluminium frame to give the hand a little bit of volume to grip on.
I am thinking of maybee experiment with some plasticine of something of the kind to get a feel for it.

Cheers,

Luc

[lbenac]

Result of the first set - outdoor under falling snow (yes I had to dry the lens back home :o

All the shots are likely at f8 or top f11

HP5 @ 800 in 510-Pyro

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s11/v35/p715327042.jpg


http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s3/v41/p644923908.jpg


TMY-2 @ 800 in Tmax Dev

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s3/v40/p1006664002.jpg

First Note
It is light and easy to operate
Focusing takes a little bit of getting used to but better than what I feared. This is with the RF.
Next week-end I will try with tripod and GG to compare.
That said for me it is all about the RF as with a Grafmatic on it is pretty much like having a MF folder

Second Note
Where the @#$%^* is Tri-X 400 in 4x5
I could see myself shooting Tri-X @ 1600 in 510-Pyro or @ 1250 in Diafine.
I might have to consider pushing TMY-2 to 1600 in TMax Dev or TMax RS

Third Note
I am considering mounting my Xenar 150/5.6 to try out instead of the Symmar-S 150/5.6. Just because I like the Xenar very much. Would there be a difference in registration of the distance to the film plane or in the working of the RF cams?
I wish I would be a little bit more technically oriented

Result after the first day - it is light, it is fun - maybe I should get a second one with a 120mm before Hugo run out
Cheers,

Luc

[Frank Petronio]

Even though lenses are marked 150mm, that is only an estimate, they all vary a little bit so you'll just have to try them and see whether the RF and GG agree.

Now test it against a Mamiya 7 or Fuji GW690. Or may you shouldn't ;-p

[Kuzano]

Hugo - we never are short of ideas :p

Realistically - the small size (tiny is probably a better word) of the market would make such move unrealistic I guess, but just thinking loudly - get RF made by Voigtlaender/Cosina (they do these for their 35mm and 6x7 Bessa camera and are good) and make the body yourself (and adaptable to reasonable range of lenses). Lenses in the range 90 - 150 (or whatever would be doable) are plentiful.

Makes me wonder how much could such a camera cost though. The Bessa III 667 (Fuji GF670) is about $2000 and that includes lens, shutter, meter, AE coupling.

... what do you think?

And not to worry.. .It won't be long before someone is converting the GF670 to a 4X5 format camera. :D

[fbf]

Now who wants to sell his? :D

[lbenac]

Even though lenses are marked 150mm, that is only an estimate, they all vary a little bit so you'll just have to try them and see whether the RF and GG agree.

Now test it against a Mamiya 7 or Fuji GW690. Or may you shouldn't ;-p

I had a GW690 and the RF was nice but the one that I prefer is the one on my Kodak Medalist :)

[lbenac]

Next I took the six-shooter to the streets

HP5 @ 800 510-Pyro

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s11/v27/p6944638.jpg

This is where of course the lack of movement can be felt the most.

Cheers,

Luc

[goodfood]

Hi, Luc, I had a Kodak Medalist, sold it due to the 620 film and the weight. Need to load the 120 film to 620 spool. Got a Bessa II with Color Skopar, it's only half of the weight of Medalist. But 4X5 film size is double of 6X9 cm. I still like the RF 4X5. You make a good choice. This Sunday morning I'm in Mission, no snow.

[lbenac]

Hi, Luc, I had a Kodak Medalist, sold it due to the 620 film and the weight. Need to load the 120 film to 620 spool. This Sunday morning I'm in Mission, no snow.

I still have and will keep my Medalist. I had it converted to 120. I have the hood, leather case and series 6 filters. While the leather case looks smashing, I don't use it much and carry the whole thing in one of the smallest Domke bag. It fits like if it had been made for it. I took it just this morning for a walk around the Burnaby lake, beautiful with the snow.

Cheers,

Luc

[Matus Kalisky]

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s3/v40/p1006664002.jpg
Luc
Luc, I really like this one, but the rest is great too. Do you only use Grafmatic holders or the Chamonix adjusted holder? I understand that "normal" 4x5 holders need to be modified in some way.

Seems you are getting on well with the Saber. Please keep posting your experience and results. Looking forward for some wide open stuff :)

- Frank -
To compare 4x5 with 150/5.6 lens to 6x7 with 80/4 lens is indeed close - if I am not wrong the DOF should be comparable. After all - you have used many cameras and could maybe share your insight on MF vs LF. We all know you keep using the Technika - so - why not Mamiya 7, Bessa III or GW690 instead?

[Frank Petronio]

At 11x14 I think it is hard to distinguish, once you go larger the 4x5 holds up better.

[lbenac]

Luc, I really like this one, but the rest is great too. Do you only use Grafmatic holders or the Chamonix adjusted holder? I understand that "normal" 4x5 holders need to be modified in some way.

Seems you are getting on well with the Saber. Please keep posting your experience and results. Looking forward for some wide open stuff :)

- Frank -
To compare 4x5 with 150/5.6 lens to 6x7 with 80/4 lens is indeed close - if I am not wrong the DOF should be comparable. After all - you have used many cameras and could maybe share your insight on MF vs LF. We all know you keep using the Technika - so - why not Mamiya 7, Bessa III or GW690 instead?

1) Yes I use only Graftmatic. here are two pins at the bottom and two screws at the top that fit into the grooves on the side of the Grafmatic to keep it in place.
These grooves are not present in normal holders.

2) For now, I am not really convinced by HP5 pushed to 800. TMY-2 might be a better alternative for pushing (but more expansive)

3) I need to try on a tripod to get a better sense of what the lens/camera can do in the best conditions and go from there

Cheers,

Luc

[EdSawyer]

I use mine with grafmatics also, (i have 5 of those), and also with a horseman 612 back a lot. The horseman keeps film costs in check vs 4x5. I also use it with a fuji pa-45, it is great to bring to get togethers and shoot and give people instant prints. They love the novelty of it. I get more comments when out shooting with the Saber in public than with any other camera, for the most part.

Hugo, have them keep making them if they can! There's no shortage of the polaroids on ebay, from what I have seen.

Ed

[lbenac]

One more from last Saturday. This time at F16.

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s11/v36/p769620229.jpg

Cheers,

Luc

[option8]

Since Ive got a Saber with the same lens as the 110A/B cameras...I figure I could give a little of my personal experience.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5308/5676680433_9e84949b93_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/5676680433/in/set-72157623838141122)

I like hiking in the SE Utah desert...where I personally would not want to take anything heavy. And as you can see in the list at the bottom of this post, there's a reason I took the Saber along with my SX70. Its damn sure light and compact.
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6195/6029406412_dc47ddf88b_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/6029406412/)http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6148/6036129852_7a14e1276b_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/6036129852/)

If you have ever held a Land Camera from the 1970s, you know the bellows struts are not the most solid things made. Its perfectly fine for my needs, but maybe not yours.

The Saber is a "suit your needs" kind of camera. If you have a need for something like it, get one (if you can? is it that hard now?). Its not for replacing anything in your large format gear collection, but add to it.

Earlier someone posted their beginning of a 4x5 110 conversion and removing everything possible...a damn good idea. This is about as small as Ive ever been able to make one. Compacted graflok and body:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6636676815_f016e2c2de_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/6636676815/in/photostream)

Here are some straight, no chaser, weight comparisons:

Polaroid 250 Land Camera - 2lb 10oz
Chamonix Saber 127mm Rodenstock in Copal 0 - 1lb 15oz
Unmodified Polaroid 110A/110B - 4lb 8oz
Converted Polaroid 110A/B 4x5 Compact Graflok - 3lb 11oz
(4lbs 8oz with focusing panel ground glass attached)
Converted Polaroid 110A/B 4x5 Compact Body & Graflok - 3lb 6oz

[letchhausen]

In the last two years, Chamonix has made a few dozen of them and most of them were sold within hours inside China when they came out. I usually have a wait list for them and this Saber is getting recognized as words spread.

But due to the difficulties of finding and importing old Polaroid cameras in good conditions as parts to build these Sabers, we will stop making them this year after shipping the last batch of two dozens to people on my list.

Unless your guys have some better ideas and we will certainly look at them.

Good shooting and thanks!
Hugo

Why don't you ask future customers to supply the Polaroid that you need? I'm interested and I've got a 195 and two 450's collecting dust around here....

[option8]

Why don't you ask future customers to supply the Polaroid that you need? I'm interested and I've got a 195 and two 450's collecting dust around here....

Dont sacrifice the 195!? Unless you plan on keeping the shutter housing since its the only piece on the camera which gives it the identity "195".

And the 450 has its flashcube shoe...obtrusive unless you have some sort of adapter for a standard flash shoe (DIY i have seen).

[lbenac]

I have been working like a dog including Saturdays and week-ends have been rainy.
I took a few shots to test the focusing. Both shot at f5.6 (wide open) with focus at two different objects separated by about 15 cm, Delta 100 on tripod to eliminate shaky hands, distance about five meters.
Here are the crops reduced to 1600 - hopefully it is enough to show that focus is showing a difference between the two and is at the right place.

#1 focus on first camera
http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s11/v36/p269316219.jpg

#2 focus on Medalist
http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s3/v43/p466706463.jpg

BTW I tried mounting another 150mm lens and the RF was totally out of sync with focus a meter behind the RF.

Cheers,

Luc

[Matus Kalisky]

Luc, the focus looks OK.

Nice collection you have there :)

[lbenac]

After using the Saber for some time, I made a few changes:

1) Removed the release button and cable and replace by a Gepo tied to the handle

Why?
Because the release button while looking very professional is not smooth enough which result in small camera movements. Now I can release with the camera firmly in hand.

72503

2) Glued a spirit level in the empty space where the release button was seating

Why?
It looks better than an empty slot and it is usefull on a tripod

72504

3) Glued an eye piece on the RF window.

Why?
I get a better definition for the centre and I can see the yellow frame better


72505

No big deal but little things that I like.

[Sergio Caetano]

Is there something good made in China ?????????
Who can believe on that ?????

[lbenac]

Chamonix Saber HP5 Pyrocat HD

Taken at minimal focussing range - about 6 feet - as limited by the bellow extension

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s3/v42/p639653438-4.jpg

[xiaubauu]

I just got mine 2 days ago, 127mm Rodenstock... pairing it with 3 Grafmatic and monopod. I found the focusing mechanism to be quite stiff due to the friction around the focusing arm. Need to use some lubricant to clear it. It's now butter smooth and really focus quite fast and smoothly. But of course, I haven't developed anything yet so I am not sure how critical the focus can be... not putting a huge hope on it.

[Matus Kalisky]

Luc, that is a nice portrait.

Concerning the minimal focus distance - is the bellows would allow for more extension - would the RF manage to focus a bit closer (.i.e. remain coupled) ?

[xiaubauu]

Some photos I took around June... Lotus Pond in People Square, Shanghai.
My Sabre is serial at 068, an auspicious number for the chinese~ maybe it will make me take better photos~~~
80402

[xiaubauu]

I find it's a must using monopod in operating the Sabre...

[EdSawyer]

nice shot! Mine is serial # 71 or 75 I think. I use mine handheld all the time - find it works pretty well that way. Monopod is not a bad idea though.

enjoy!
-Ed

[lbenac]

Mine is 090.
I used it both hand-deld or with a light carbon tripod.
I have found that the monopod weight 1kg less as the carbon tripod.
I will give it another chance.

Cheers,

Luc

[xiaubauu]

Mine is 090.
I used it both hand-deld or with a light carbon tripod.
I have found that the monopod weight 1kg less as the carbon tripod.
I will give it another chance.

Cheers,

Luc

I used the Gitzo GM2561T, I think it's very light (I think the lightest from gitzo) and the height is just nice for RF focusing.

[lbenac]

I received from a forum member an Horseman 6x12 back.
I used it with the Saber as a very lean and light kit for 6x12.
The composition with the RF is of course guestimate but beats taking the GG on and off.

http://www.lucbenacphoto.com/img/s4/v62/p1356039072.jpg


BTW, the JPEG does not come out very well but the print is very nice.

Cheers,

Luc

[EdSawyer]

I use mine with a horseman 6x12 back a lot also, it's a great compact rig.