Wanderlust 4x5 P&S

I wonder this too actually.. I have a Fuji Quickload holder and quite a bit of quickload film that would be even better again for this sort of "Run and Gun" sort of camera.... I suppose the same as the 6x12 back applies... a few elastic bands should hold her in place well enough... failing that a couple of velcro straps running across the camera to hold them in place. The only thing would be that the steel springs would likely be in the way...

If they were removeable it would be easier to adopt either a roll film back or quick/readyload holders. I very rarely shoot sheet film in double darks because its too much of a hassle to load and unload especially in the field... Quickloads make it faster and easier. Not to mention, having 20 shots worth of double darks loaded in your backpack defeats the purpose of this camera, where as 1 quickload holder and 20 sheets of film weighs next to nothing....

I simply can not wait to have this in my hands. :D

Put me down for one of these, assuming you can post to the uk. Will it take a grafmatic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexn

I wonder this too actually.. I have a Fuji Quickload holder and quite a bit of quickload film that would be even better again for this sort of "Run and Gun" sort of camera.... I suppose the same as the 6x12 back applies... a few elastic bands should hold her in place well enough... failing that a couple of velcro straps running across the camera to hold them in place. The only thing would be that the steel springs would likely be in the way...

If they were removeable it would be easier to adopt either a roll film back or quick/readyload holders. I very rarely shoot sheet film in double darks because its too much of a hassle to load and unload especially in the field... Quickloads make it faster and easier. Not to mention, having 20 shots worth of double darks loaded in your backpack defeats the purpose of this camera, where as 1 quickload holder and 20 sheets of film weighs next to nothing....

I simply can not wait to have this in my hands. :D

---

I still have a stash of pola 55 that I'm shooting with my Razzle, assuming this can take a 545 back, it'll be the ideal compliment to it for my environmental portaiture work.

Hi Ben, this looks awesome and I'll definitely buy one as I have a 90mm angulon to use on it. I just wonder if you've thought of having both horizontal and vertical tripod mount screws? Now I know most people will just think that's no problem because you can just tilt your tripod head 90 degrees with a camera this light, but I thought an ideal system would be to use this camera with a gorillapod SLR type tripod which has no head. Let's face it, with an anuglon you're looking at stopping down to f/22 for sharpness/coverage/DOF so I couldn't see myself using it much handheld. Think about it, this small light camera on a tiny lightweight gorillapod would be a super fun system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael_qrt

Hi Ben, this looks awesome and I'll definitely buy one as I have a 90mm angulon to use on it. I just wonder if you've thought of having both horizontal and vertical tripod mount screws? Now I know most people will just think that's no problem because you can just tilt your tripod head 90 degrees with a camera this light, but I thought an ideal system would be to use this camera with a gorillapod SLR type tripod which has no head. Let's face it, with an anuglon you're looking at stopping down to f/22 for sharpness/coverage/DOF so I couldn't see myself using it much handheld. Think about it, this small light camera on a tiny lightweight gorillapod would be a super fun system.

---

Would be nice to have both tripod mounts!

You would be able to hand hold this pretty easily though on a sunny day. In low light? Definitely not.

Actually if you could make the tripod socket on a raised incut square of 40mm side then it could attach straight into an arca clamp, which would be brilliant.

Thanks, guys! We're sticking with one tripod thread, because adding a second on a different axis would really increase the cost... Gorillapod now sells models with little ball heads, so I can't see any reason to put two on.

My QuickLoad holder may just barely fit under the springs, but basically anything that's thicker than a double dark will need to be rubber banded to the back. Luckily the shape of the front makes rubber banding easy and secure! And the spring back will be simple to remove—just two screws.

The camera fits the Calumet C2 rollfilm holder perfectly, but because the holder is so much heavier than the camera, you need to hold the whole thing by the holder, not the camera. Sort of like when you attach a giant telephoto to an SLR, you carry it by the lens. Luckily the chunky side of the C2 provides a nice grip!

I want to head out and take some test shots, but of course it's overcast today, when yesterday was 60°F and sunny. Oh well, the first test shots will be very truthful renderings of Chicago. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Syverson

My QuickLoad holder may just barely fit under the springs, but basically anything that's thicker than a double dark will need to be rubber banded to the back. Luckily the shape of the front makes rubber banding easy and secure! And the spring back will be simple to remove—just two screws.

The camera fits the Calumet C2 rollfilm holder perfectly, but because the holder is so much heavier than the camera, you need to hold the whole thing by the holder, not the camera. Sort of like when you attach a giant telephoto to an SLR, you carry it by the lens. Luckily the chunky side of the C2 provides a nice grip!

---

I think I can get another trash Readyload holder and come up with a new thickness on the sides that is very near the thickness of a Double Dark. I should be able to work with whatever your final decision is, because I don't want to ask for any design change that will slow down your process or increase your price beyond how you see it now.

It occurs to me that you are creating one hell of a product, and people ought to be open-minded to your cost increases and work with their own accessory equipment to get their own end result. (I do also fully understand that many people simply want a fully capable product without being creative. That's all well and good, but they still want your camera for $100. :confused:)

I am sure I can afford to modify one inexpensive EasyLoad or Quickload holder. Fuji Quickload holders are still quite expensive in spite of the poor inventory of Quickload packet. However, the last Kodak Easyload resolved all of the issues with earlier models, and yet are dirtcheap, compared to the Fuji's. The Kodak holder handles the Fuji Quickload Packets quite well. This gives me a relatively dust free sheet of film, individually packaged all the way to the processing tank. Also light and compact.

I would not very likely use a Grafmatic as long as Quickloads seem to be readily available on eBay, even current dated. I dislike loading the Grafmatic Plenums and still being limited to 6 sheets (is that right?) plus the weight.

I can't really see the purpose of a light camera, with a heavy back attached, such as the Calumets, Horsemen, and Grafmatics. The Dayi for roll film and the Easyload for 4X5 or the double darks would be my choices. The Double Darks would be my lesser choice except one modified to be a ground glass. Most times, however, is see the camera being used as a P&S.

As far as holding the larger back. It actually appeals to me to use the side of the Easy/Quickload holders that stick out as a handle. I may even modify and attach a short cable release on the holder itself to actuate the shutter without modding your camera body.

I am a bit puzzled however. You mention holding the back on with rubber bands, bungee, or velcro. I am not opposed to that, but I sort of envision your back as securing the holders by sliding the holder into a top and bottom slots situation. I must be wrong if it can be rubber banded into place.

Will you please show me relatively close shots of the back showing from the end the holders slide into, and at an angle from the side showing the slots, or if the back surface just has side holder positioning to drop the holder in and bind in place with the elastic material of my choice.

The nice thing about the Easy/Quickload system is that I can afix the holder to the camera for the duration of an outing and leave it attached, simply inserting and removing film envelopes. The roll film process is another matter, but if I know more clearly what the back looks like without a holder in place, I can make any of my choices of film holders work without any mods to your design.

Again... Good, Good, Job.

Thanks Kuzano! The back is pretty simple:

http://bensyverson.com/images/2012/3/45-back.jpg

The ledge on the left will have two screws that will secure two flexible metal prongs. Removing those spring metal prongs is as simple as unscrewing two screws, after which you can rubber band anything to the back.

Looking at it again, I'm pretty confident that the QL holder would fit without any modification:

http://bensyverson.com/images/2012/3/45-ql.jpg

The C2 definitely needs to be banded, but it's actually quite natural-feeling once it's attached. It would certainly be lighter and less bulky to pack the 45 and a C2 vs the 45 and a Mamiya 7. And 90mm is a nice 50-ish lens on 6x7.

http://bensyverson.com/images/2012/3/45-c2.jpg

I was out shooting with the camera today, and had a blast. You could really shoot all day with this thing in your hand, which is not something I could say about many 4x5s. If you're bold, you can even shoot one-handed quite comfortably:

http://bensyverson.com/images/2012/3/45-onehanded.jpg

BTW, all these photos are from my blog "Ben Syverson holding things"

Ben, your iPhone needs tilts!

Rick "yeah, not helpful" Denney

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rdenney

Ben, your iPhone needs tilts!

---

Haha, the funny thing is I was subconsciously trying to level the iPhone so the buildings would be straight for that shot. Obviously I was a little off, but it goes to show how deeply that stuff gets ingrained!

Ben, you need something like this, http://www.iphone-tripodholder.com/ it would make image composition much easier with your iPhone. I have a iPad and try as I may I can't get my verticals right hand holding the stupid thing.

Looks like the camera is coming along nicely, good to see the prototype.

Roger

Thanks Roger! I have a couple cases with tripod threads, but I wasn't sweating the composition too much for that shot. It was really more of a snapshot to show the 4x5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Syverson

Thanks Kuzano! The back is pretty simple:


The ledge on the left will have two screws that will secure two flexible metal prongs. Removing those spring metal prongs is as simple as unscrewing two screws, after which you can rubber band anything to the back.

Looking at it again, I'm pretty confident that the QL holder would fit without any modification:

The C2 definitely needs to be banded, but it's actually quite natural-feeling once it's attached. It would certainly be lighter and less bulky to pack the 45 and a C2 vs the 45 and a Mamiya 7. And 90mm is a nice 50-ish lens on 6x7.

I was out shooting with the camera today, and had a blast. You could really shoot all day with this thing in your hand, which is not something I could say about many 4x5s. If you're bold, you can even shoot one-handed quite comfortably:

BTW, all these photos are from my blog "Ben Syverson holding things"

---

Less than I had envisioned, which is better than I expected. Simply an open box the size of the length and width dimension of most film holder. This is exactly what I would have hoped for.. Strap on your favorite holder and go shooting. I see you have the positioning groove for the ridge on the film side of the holder...good.

Thanks for the pics... very helpful and convinces me I can shoot up my ready/quick loads and more as I find it.

Lars

Yeah, I actually downloaded the ANSI standard for film holders, and used that as my guide. So any holder that sticks to the spec should work. So far, so good!

There's the old saying "Less is more," which is associated with Mies. But I actually prefer the Dieter Rams version, which translates as "Less, but better." Rather than just making a stripped-down version of a product, Rams was able to improve the product at the same time as simplifying it.

How tough would it be for the average guy to modify? This looks like the perfect base for all sorts of project cameras.

Hopefully it should be pretty easy to customize! The front facilitates rubber banding, the boreholes could be mount points for a variety of mods, and there are three cold shoes too! I'm excited about people using the camera as a base.

Ben do you have a time estimate on when we can get our hands on one of these cameras?

^^^ forreal! lol i have a lot of questions regarding lenses, but im sure theyve been answered somewhere in this thread (is there a specific 65 or 90 the body will be made for?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rdenney

Yes, it's worth noting those differences. It would appear from what Ole linked (despite my lack of German) that the 65/8 Super Angulon has a flange focal distance of 70mm, the 90/6.8 Angulon is 90, and the 90/8 Super Angulon is 100. All with a tolerance of +/- 0.5mm. I'll measure the 90mm Optar W.A. as soon as I'm there with it at the same time an infinity target is available (read: at home during daylight--Friday).

---

Okay, not the same Friday I originally promised. But I just mounted my Graflex Optar W. A. f/6.8 3-1/2" (90mm) on my Speed Graphic, focused it using the ground glass, and measured the flange focal distance. I measured 89.2-89.3mm. I cannot say what the tolerance is, or where this particular lens fits within that tolerance. But setting the minimum flange distance at 89 will work for my lens, though it may be a bit tight if you want some forgiveness. I used the depth-rod on a vernier caliper, but three measurements fell within that range.

Rick "setting this lens aside for this camera" Denney

Thanks, Rick! We're still crunching numbers trying to determine the optimal FFD.

We both agree now that we'd like markings for the Angulon (and looks like the Optar will be similar), and let the ƒ/8 and ƒ/5.6 users create their own markings. This camera is really designed for the compact 6.8's, so we'd like to make life easy for those users.

I got the film back from my first outing with the camera, and will scan tonight!

Ben, if your focus scale can be repositioned for infinity calibration, then the scale itself should be the same, barring differences in true focal length. The flange focal distances are different because the mounting point of the shutter is different. That's a single translation that should not affect the scale distance between different focus distances.

At this price point, I'd consider a well-printed focus scale on an adhesive strip (quality adhesive, quality strip material), with clear instructions on how to install it, a usable option.

Rick "how did you focus your prototype?" Denney

Rick, that was the original idea, but I'm now worried that people won't be willing or able to calibrate infinity focus on their own. I would rather ship it with a scale that will work for the Angulon & Optar, and let users of other lenses work out their own solutions...

The prototype has no markings as of yet, and has only been tested at infinity. It turns out that I loaded my film holders months ago, and they've since leaked. I got some test shots back that at least verified the design, but they're too flashed to post. That'll teach me to load holders and not use them! I'm loading up some fresh film tomorrow and will shoot some stuff just for fun!

Are you absolutely sure the plastic is opaque?

Rick "who has been burned--er--fogged by that assumption before" Denney

p.s., maybe you could provide the sticker with the scale on it for those who need it, with the stock marked scale for your target lenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Syverson

Rick, that was the original idea, but I'm now worried that people won't be willing or able to calibrate infinity focus on their own.

---

You might contact Paul Droluk and see whether he would allow you to use some suitably edited version of the infinity-calibration instructions that were posted for the Fotoman cameras:

http://www.fotomancamera.com/downloa...matCameras.pdf

Yeah, the plastic is 100% opaque.

It's a good idea to throw in a sticker for the customizers in the crowd. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oren Grad

You might contact Paul Droluk and see whether he would allow you to use some suitably edited version of the infinity-calibration instructions that were posted for the Fotoman cameras:

---

We probably will have some PDF like that, but in my experience, people just don't read the instructions. So I would love to have reasonable default markings for the majority of people who bristle when they hear "calibration." :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Syverson

We probably will have some PDF like that, but in my experience, people just don't read the instructions. So I would love to have reasonable default markings for the majority of people who bristle when they hear "calibration." :)

---

You're going to have a website with the instructional video showing how easy it is to calibrate, aren't you?

I'm a sucker for video, so yes. :)

Just to further complicate things, another couple of lenses worth accomodating are the fujinon and nikkor 105mm f/5.6s, flange distance about 103mm. With your quoted 20mm of throw on the helicoid these should just about be feasible.

Infinity is very far away- particularly at f/6.3 or f/8.

If you can compute a scale accurately for a given focal length, the most precise way to set up a lens is to focus on something in the close range, say at one meter, or less.

If you can do that, all the other distances will fall into place.

Half a millimeter out at infinity may not be noticeable, but it's a long way out in the close range.

jb7, I respectfully disagree. I've done that in a pinch before, but in reality, anything around 100m is effectively infinity. I calibrate based on the Sears Tower and other buildings downtown, which are around 3 km away.

The problem with calibrating based on 1m is that there's a gigantic margin for error. If you're a cm or two off at 1m, it means your infinity is hosed. It's easy to see if your infinity focus is slightly off, but it's nearly impossible to tell if 1m is slightly front or back focusing.

That's ok Ben, we can respectfully disagree-

This isn't the place to argue the point anyway, and whatever calibration method you choose, it's a relatively simple job-

However, infinity on a 65mm f/8 lens effectively begins at around 21m, there's no point in focusing much beyond that, because you're not taking advantage of the depth of field in front of the subject. There can be much hunting for infinity, on a ground glass, where infinity doesn't seem to change much. In my experience, there is far more measurable accuracy in the close range, and a corroboration for infinity is a simple thing.

Nice looking camera too, hope the testing goes well-

And again, not willing to argue the point further, don't want to hijack your thread-

No problem jb7! This is exactly the reason why I don't want to force the user to calibrate the camera. It's a can of worms I have no interest in. I'll have default markings, and the picky can customize the scale. The picky (like myself) will never be satisfied anyway, so there is no point even attempting it.

I'm all set with a f/6.8 Angulon and the markings would be great. This should be an excellent camera for travel. Thanks for your hard work...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Syverson

Thanks, Rick! We're still crunching numbers trying to determine the optimal FFD.

We both agree now that we'd like markings for the Angulon (and looks like the Optar will be similar), and let the ƒ/8 and ƒ/5.6 users create their own markings. This camera is really designed for the compact 6.8's, so we'd like to make life easy for those users.

I got the film back from my first outing with the camera, and will scan tonight!

---

OK,,, I'm ready. Calibrate Schmalibrate... waste of time. I will probably shoot most of my film supply on a tripod with GG viewing. Never been much for the technical stuff, let alone the overhype of movements. So glad you left them off. All this talk of infinity focus, calibration and hand holding is just a way for me to lower my keeper rate on film that is going into short supply and rising in price. I'm interested only in every image a keeper if possible.

When can I order and when will shipping start? I may want more than a couple to put my lenses and back refinements on. All this other discussion is making me sleepy. When it looks good on the Ground Glass, that's when I snap the shutter.

:cool:

Agreed.. I shoot near everything at F/22~F/32.. With a 90mm on 4x5, that pretty much gives me infinite depth of field...

I do not intend to use a ground glass with this camera, That really defeats the purpose of a 4x5 point and shoot. I want something that all I have to do is pull the dark slide, set at F/32 and snap a shot...
I wont use it hand held either really, again, F/22~F/32 restricts that, along with my favorite film being ISO50...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuzano

OK,,, I'm ready. Calibrate Schmalibrate... waste of time. I will probably shoot most of my film supply on a tripod with GG viewing. Never been much for the technical stuff, let alone the overhype of movements. So glad you left them off. All this talk of infinity focus, calibration and hand holding is just a way for me to lower my keeper rate on film that is going into short supply and rising in price. I'm interested only in every image a keeper if possible.

When can I order and when will shipping start? I may want more than a couple to put my lenses and back refinements on. All this other discussion is making me sleepy. When it looks good on the Ground Glass, that's when I snap the shutter.

:cool:

---

OK, that last post of mine was a bit harsh. Let me apologize and clarify.

Ben, You played all your cards already. The camera is done and just right for a number of buyers from what I see on this forum (and that's just on this forum)
If there is one thing I've learned in 40 years of Marketing, including Mercedes Benz, Corporate level computers and software, banking services... etc. It is "never keep a buyer who is waving cash in your face waiting!!!" You can always tweak the camera for the AR people later. While you allow them to cause others to wait is not tantalizing. It's weary, and reduces interest. Some of the early adopters... those who've said YES!!! already may leave the market.

Ok, was that less harsh... ? Perhaps not. show us the test scans and move on to orders and production, please, There's money awaiting you.:confused:

Kuzano, I opened up this project to this forum because I wanted to get feedback from you guys during development. This thread is not a marketing tactic. The camera is far from being ready to ship. We need to make CAD changes and order a second prototype, which will take weeks. Then we need to get a quote for tooling, which is not quick. Then we need to raise money for tooling, and after we do that, it will be weeks until we receive the first sample part. In the meantime, we need to build a website, shoot sample images, and talk to distributors.

In short, it will be ready when it's ready. Be patient. There's no incentive for me to offer preorders if people will be hounding me every day.

AR people? FU2.

Obviously, evolution can only be advanced by those who actually give a shit.
If your attitude prevailed, we'd still be trying to catch our next meal by throwing stones at it.

The ability to selectively focus is obviously wasted on you.
In fact, it might present you with a set of insurmountable challenges.
In that regard, Ben has produced a tool that is already hugely over specified.

There are a large number of people who proudly proclaim that a camera is just a tool.
When I hear that, I say, yeah right, just another tool.

And by the way, a camera that demands ground glass focusing is probably not a 'point and shoot'...

Some folks will want a GG, others won't. To some, this will be a point and shoot, and to others it will be an ultralight rigid field camera.

I'd love to include a plastic "GG" in each box, but depending on the added cost, it may have to be an inexpensive ($10 or so) add on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuzano

If there is one thing I've learned in 40 years of Marketing, including Mercedes Benz, Corporate level computers and software, banking services... etc. It is "never keep a buyer who is waving cash in your face waiting!!!"
...
Ok, was that less harsh... ? Perhaps not. show us the test scans and move on to orders and production, please, There's money awaiting you.:confused:

---

It seems there is one thing you definitely have not learned in 40 years of marketing... That making things takes time.

Yes, just what we want is hastily designed, il-conceived point and shoot camera that you have to focus on a ground glass. No I'll happily wait for a well designed camera that has been properly prototyped and tested.

Roger

Thanks, Roger! When you're spending tens of thousands on steel molds, you definitely want to be sure you're getting it right! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John NYC

It seems there is one thing you definitely have not learned in 40 years of marketing... That making things takes time.

---

Absolutely... And a good marketer never reveals his product to the open market before he is ready to take and fill orders. An appropriate way to get feedback for product design is a "focus group". Any one here heard of that term before. Well that's what a proper marketer learns in "marketing". Listing this camera on an open forum was clearly a marketing decision, without a product to sell.

You are very right, making things takes time, and product development is closely guarded. I can't have concieved that this camera would have been revealed in it's near totality, without being close to production. Ripe for thievery, and long enough from disclosure to production for people to lose interest and go elsewhere.

There was a lot of misplaced trust in posting design and images of prototypes, overlooking the fact that the propensity for skulking and stealing designs is not better percentage wise, because it's a "large format" forum, than any other open forum. The registration means nothing in terms of seeing the posts.


And regarding:


"Roger Thoms


Yes, just what we want is hastily designed, il-conceived point and shoot camera that you have to focus on a ground glass. No I'll happily wait for a well designed camera that has been properly prototyped and tested.

Roger "

What the HELL are you trying to say. It's clear the work done so far is not hastily designed, ill-conceived, or Point and Shoot only even up to this point. Furthermore the camera is already in prototype and being tested. Ben said yesterday he is taking pictures and will scan them right away. That, Roger is testing. The camera as it stands will serve the needs of many who have posted here, without further refinement. And if your need is not urgent in any way, you can wait for refinements. It does not appear to me that any of the refinements at this point would be in the design and casting work. It's done to a usable base camera, on which truly creative people can add improvements. Yes I understand that a lesser share of the market want a "no brainer" camera, and they are perfectly entitled to wait in line behind me for their goodies.

In addition Roger, your comment about not using GG viewing, but rather P&S, indicates your willingness to suffer a higher rate of NON keepers, thereby burning up film that is currently reduced in supply of various emulsions and inventory in general, and becoming pricier all along. Well Roger, I choose not to piss away the kind of money you are willing to part with because one chooses to show his/her prowess as a Point and Shooter. That's as opposed to a "hand holder", which you appear not to be (Thank the Lord). Me, I want to see the image to be taken, before I pull the dark slide.

And BEN... REALLY?

I have to wait until you design a web site. Are you really going to try to market your product with the least effective marketing tool ever designed... a web site on the internet. Please, this product will sell better on eBay to say the least. Or even on dedicated forums like this one, APUG and others. That's not to mention that a decent web site can be designed, up and running in a week, let alone weeks. I'd like a show of hands please on anyone who is making a profitable income on any product with a web site alone.... that's without the benefit of tons of effort on other means of reaching the target market. Instead relying on people to seek out your particular product on an already too full and confusing internet.

Lastly, your comment to me that it will "done when it's done" deserves an apology. That comment shows no respect for a sincere prospective buyer.... me and all others anxious to acquire the product. It effectively says "Hey, it's my deal, and I'll get it out when I am damn good and ready".

Lastly, the two listings impuning my marketing skills (John and Roger) were both rather childlike and moronic, revealing more about your lack of knowledge in marketing skils, than my own deficiencies.

Ben, you opened this can of worms with your "more like marketing post" than your search for help on the design. Again, a focus group, with any mention of the camera to the world at large, would have been far more appropriate. When you do get to the marketing and order taking, get some help, please.

Cross me off your list of interested potential buyers.

I would have rather PM'd all this garbage, as I did to you before and never received a response. Thank you very much. Consider the thorn removed, and good luck to you, sir.

"I'd like a show of hands please on anyone who is making a profitable income on any product with a web site alone.... that's without the benefit of tons of effort on other means of reaching the target market."

I am: gordy's camera straps

And I want one of these. 90mm. I'll wait.

Kuzano, I didn't see your PM because I'm not used to the new forum layout...

I'm a small business, trying to be open and transparent, and involve the small community I'm interested in. This is a fun $99 plastic camera. There is simply no reason for anyone to get upset.

If you don't like what I'm doing, that's perfectly fine, and actually it's one of the reasons I solicited feedback. Thank you for your feedback, and your point about timing. I happen to disagree, but let's keep this civil. I don't take marching orders. I'm going to do this camera right, and it will take exactly as long as it takes.

Edit: By the way, I've been making 100% of my income from internet sales for the past 10 years. No advertising.

Lighten up, Kuzano. The world doesn't revolve around your ingrate arse.

I am minterested.


For several years I've been wondering why camera Mf'rs dhven't done more of this type of manufacture, keeping expensive machining down to a minimum. What about a plastic Grafmatic to go along with the P&S?

The camera shown could work well with a spotting scope for LF super=telephoto too.