The holder design confuses me too. It doesn't seem to use septums or a dark slide.
The holder design confuses me too. It doesn't seem to use septums or a dark slide.
meh. it's the over-designed answer to the question no one is asking. Terrible ergonomics, overly heavy (machined billet? WTF), too big, expensive, etc. There's plenty of better/cheaper choices already out there.
People with talent in CAD/CAM and and access to the right tools should make something useful. A graflok back that can shoot instax as an idea. Or maybe a way of remaking pack film. Those are things that are worth solving.
An overpriced/overdesigned handheld 4x5? Why bother. it's already been done better, cheaper and more elegantly.
Yes...the (functional) horse needs to lead the (design) cart, in all aspects...otherwise, why bother?
What are the existing options? The various Polaroid conversions? I had a Chamonix Saber equivalent and another Chinese cottage craft product that I enjoyed but didn't work out so well in the end. RF not reliable enough. The 110B type conversion is for me too bulky and not quite the same idea.
BTW The designer does have a mail box and might appreciate constructive criticism.
"A graflok back that can shoot instax as an idea."
Mine on order:
https://shop.lomography.com/en/lomo-...k-instant-back
Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
All of which are designs 50 years old, if not much more. But of course we have the usual bashing of products you'll never use or even see. Let's see what they come up with using modern manufacturing techniques.
Certainly send them some feedback if you like. I am always happy to see what products come on the market, NEW, in the 21st century. I was not really a fan of the Mercury camera concept either, until I actually talked with him and subsequently bought several different cameras and parts.
It has 3 compartments that can hold a sheet of film. They form a kind of serpentine. Film is transported between them. No idea how he wants to do that, but from what I see is that the film has to bend around some pretty sharp corners.
I like the idea of getting away from the classic film holders. They are large and heavy for just 2 sheets. My experience with Grafmatics has been not good so far. So yes, rethinking the way film is handled isn't a bad idea. But I'm not sure about the way he's taking.
All old stuff where you might happen upon a working one if lucky. Most of them (expensive) antiques. Finding spare parts like a bellow you need to trust someone in his shed making one that can serve you an keep working long enough to make it worthwhile.
I don't see the problem with a machined billet. Program once, push button to make another one. Compared to the tooling needed to make the cast aluminium frame of a wista this is progress and much cheaper for the volumes of production needed these days. I never saw a 4x5 camera as the pinnacle of ergonomics. Most are terrible to use.
I do agree that there is a market for some "new" versions of older pieces of gear. A new and better Grafmatic (also not really a very ergonomic thing). An Instax back although with the resolution Instax has this might not be really that interesting. Remaking pack film... don't know. I fear that is an industrialisation issue that will need a lot of tooling and machines. Another thing might be a new shutter.
As for overpriced... anything with particular names on it is overpriced for what it is. They are not better, certainly not cheaper. And I never have had anyone call a 4x5 "elegant". I did hear "boat anchor", "anvil" and others.
I think he missed a great opportunity by not including a shutter. As far as I'm concerned, I feel the weakest part of 4x5 are the shutters. It just is too hard to get them serviced here in europe.
Expert in non-working solutions.
I guess the inventor never heard of https://mercurycamera.com/ which is a universal body+lens design for up to 5x7 film sizes. Uses a viewer instead of range finder and is completely modular. his design is certainly not "The first portable 4x5 camera system".
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
http://www.searing.photography
If realized, this would be an RF-*coupled*, interchangeable lens handheld camera. The examples listed are much bulkier or not coupled. The Razzy and Chamonix Polaroid conversions are kind of close in terms of how you can shoot them.
"Overpriced" is a strange accusation to lob at a prototype that doesn't have a price.
Not like I have skin in the game, but like Corran I find the kneejerk dismissal pretty bizarre. If anything we should all applaud this young designer's efforts. But I agree he shouldn't be going around claiming firsts.
Bookmarks