Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43

Thread: Rangefinder Cameras

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by PRJ View Post
    I built a 4x5 Polaroid conversion about 17 years ago. Made it from several different cameras. Basically it is a Polaroid 110b with a 135 Symmar and a Sinar back. I made it to have something portable and fast. And it works perfectly for that. I'd like to make another one someday and do it perfect. I built one for a friend that was perfect and I wish I had it myself. The one I have has been reworked a couple of times and even took a shot to the snout faceplanting on a windy day when it was blown over while sitting on a tripod. Still works though. I don't know why anyone would want to carry around a Linhof or a Speed Graphic. The Polaroid conversion is so much better. If you do one or get one done make sure the end is lopped off. Makes the camera waaaaay lighter.

    Here is the camera-



    Here is an image from it. No way I would have gotten this image without the Polaroid conversion. Light was disappearing.I needed to run back to the car, grab a camera then get back to the Saguaro. Just made it before the sun set. Did my best guesstimate on the exposure and shot it. Handheld... Not even a Grafmatic was fast enough to make a second exposure.

    Maybe they want to use wider and longer lenses, or do macro work, or do all of that. Maybe that want control over Scheimpflug or image shape when not hand holding.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by PRJ View Post
    I built a 4x5 Polaroid conversion about 17 years ago. Made it from several different cameras. Basically it is a Polaroid 110b with a 135 Symmar and a Sinar back. I made it to have something portable and fast. And it works perfectly for that. I'd like to make another one someday and do it perfect. I built one for a friend that was perfect and I wish I had it myself. The one I have has been reworked a couple of times and even took a shot to the snout faceplanting on a windy day when it was blown over while sitting on a tripod. Still works though. I don't know why anyone would want to carry around a Linhof or a Speed Graphic. The Polaroid conversion is so much better. If you do one or get one done make sure the end is lopped off. Makes the camera waaaaay lighter.

    Here is the camera-



    Here is an image from it. No way I would have gotten this image without the Polaroid conversion. Light was disappearing.I needed to run back to the car, grab a camera then get back to the Saguaro. Just made it before the sun set. Did my best guesstimate on the exposure and shot it. Handheld... Not even a Grafmatic was fast enough to make a second exposure.

    Maybe they want to use wider and longer lenses, or do macro work, or do all of that. Maybe that want control over Scheimpflug or image shape when not hand holding.

    And maybe they don’t want that fall off in the corners.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    193

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    Maybe they want to use wider and longer lenses, or do macro work, or do all of that. Maybe that want control over Scheimpflug or image shape when not hand holding.

    And maybe they don’t want that fall off in the corners.
    You don't read so good so much, do you Bob? The OP wants something to use in the mountains, with one lens, and wants to be able to handhold it.

    You really are one of the worst wet diapers around here. Everything you post is an argument about some stupid thing or another.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by PRJ View Post
    You don't read so good so much, do you Bob? The OP wants something to use in the mountains, with one lens, and wants to be able to handhold it.

    You really are one of the worst wet diapers around here. Everything you post is an argument about some stupid thing or another.
    You ever look at Arizona Highways?

    You ever see all those handheld sports pictures like Ty Cobb slinging into third or Jackie Robinson stealing home or new photos like Weegee’s? All hand held large format.

    And, if you look at the corner fall off in your shot you really don’t have a useable 45 image even though your lens more then covers 45.

  5. #25
    Drew Bedo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Houston Texas
    Posts
    3,225

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    So then, Does a Polaroid 4x5 conversion fill the needs of the zOP?
    Drew Bedo
    www.quietlightphoto.com
    http://www.artsyhome.com/author/drew-bedo




    There are only three types of mounting flanges; too big, too small and wrong thread!

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    193

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    You ever look at Arizona Highways?

    You ever see all those handheld sports pictures like Ty Cobb slinging into third or Jackie Robinson stealing home or new photos like Weegee’s? All hand held large format.

    And, if you look at the corner fall off in your shot you really don’t have a useable 45 image even though your lens more then covers 45.
    You still don't read so good so much, do you Bob? Or maybe it is just comprehension.

    What people did 50 years ago is irrelevant if there are better ways today. Maybe you just don't get it.

    The camera doesn't vignette. When I first started using it I had a hood that just nipped the corners. Here is an image that I took years later with the same camera.

    Like I said, you are just a wet diaper around here. Can't accept anything that you don't know and you just continue to argue about mundane garbage.


  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by PRJ View Post
    You still don't read so good so much, do you Bob? Or maybe it is just comprehension.

    What people did 50 years ago is irrelevant if there are better ways today. Maybe you just don't get it.

    The camera doesn't vignette. When I first started using it I had a hood that just nipped the corners. Here is an image that I took years later with the same camera.

    Like I said, you are just a wet diaper around here. Can't accept anything that you don't know and you just continue to argue about mundane garbage.

    So, why did you post a vignette image as an example?

    Did you read and understand what the op wrote?

    “ Now I'm back to wanting a 4x5 again. (Yes I'm crazy.) I still have my 4x5 darkroom equipment including many film holders, so I'm thinking of a rangefinder 4x5, no handholding pet se'”

    “No handholding”

    So why even suggest your choice?

    How do you know that he doesn’t want a 150 or 180 or 210 rather then a short normal?
    How do you know that he might prefer a wide lens rather then a short normal?

    It’s great that you like your conversion. But the vast majority of 45 users and the vast majority of serious hand held shooters don’t prefer your choice. Primarily because it is a very limited type of camera with a quickly diminishing parts supply that is usually put together by a limited group of builders at an astonishingly high price for what it doesn’t offer.
    But if it fits your needs then enjoy it.

    There are far more versatile choices available.

  8. #28
    multiplex
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    local
    Posts
    5,356

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Hi Wayne

    Years ago Bostick and Sullivan made something called a HOBO, you could hand hold it if you wanted or throw it on a tripod.
    I think it came with 1 lens, was pretty bare-bonz.... [both 5x4 and 8x10] its not a RF but still, maybe it is similar to what you want? unless you need a technical field camera
    and a speeder or polo-conversion doesn't work.

    Good luck with your quest !
    John

  9. #29
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North GA Mountains
    Posts
    8,924

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    [...] at an astonishingly high price for what it doesn’t offer.
    LOL



    I see the MT has gone up in price about $3K.

    OP has disappeared, but if you come back, I suggest you take a look at the Polaroid conversions closely. Listen to those that actually use the camera (and are active LF shooters), not ex-dealers. It may not work for you, but it may be just what you need.

    The combined VF/RF is a better experience than my Linhof MT...
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram | Portfolio
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Loganville , GA
    Posts
    14,409

    Re: Rangefinder Cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Corran View Post
    LOL



    I see the MT has gone up in price about $3K.

    OP has disappeared, but if you come back, I suggest you take a look at the Polaroid conversions closely. Listen to those that actually use the camera (and are active LF shooters), not ex-dealers. It may not work for you, but it may be just what you need.

    The combined VF/RF is a better experience than my Linhof MT...
    Then try the Wista RF.

    It’s whatever suits ones needs.

Similar Threads

  1. Luxurious Cameras vs. Plain Jane Cameras and your Camera of Choice!
    By audioexcels in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 29-Feb-2012, 23:12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •