Ebony 617S: Is it worth buying?

[darr]

I would like to acquire a panoramic view camera and the Ebony 617S looks interesting although expensive. The advantages would be the 6x17 GG view, roll film and being able to use some of the lenses - lensboards configurations I already have for landscape photography. I prefer using roll film for panoramics and I currently use an in-house ATL 1000 processor.

I am thinking of selling my 45SU to help cover some of the funding since this camera gets used for landscape work only and my two Arcas are used weekly as most of my work is done in the studio environment. I would use this camera like I have done with the 45SU for occasional landscape photography. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Kind regards,
Darr

[Ling Z]

IMHO, a dedicated 617 view camera has too many limitations. I would get a 5x7 camera with a 617 roll film holder such as Canham 617 RFH. This setup not only costs less than Ebony 617S, but also can be used to shoot 5x7 and 4x5 with a reduction back.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

Why don't you just get a roll film 6X17 camera like a Fotoman or used Fuji G617 or GX617? You don't really need any movements with the 6X17 format. If I remember correctly, the Ebony 617 is something like 7 or 8 grand, which really seems like several arms and legs to pay for a 6X17 camera. While the Fuji or Fotoman doesn't offer movements, they cost a fraction of the cost and will be much easier to work with in the field. I just don't understand why anyone would want a 6X17 view camera- it's the worst of all possible worlds!

If you're gonna fork out the big bucks to get an Ebony, go for the 4X10, which ironically is less expensive than the Ebony 6X17. 4X10 blows away 6X17 any day...

[Cesar Barreto]

Hi, Darr.
For that kind of money I would also consider the Gilde camera. I've been using 6x17 format for some years with Linhof and Tomiyama cameras and I miss movements a lot, mainly rise and fall. But I also think that the Gilde camera may be somewhat more versatile and fast on the field.

[Michael Alpert]

Since you prefer roll film for 6x17, this camera would work well, with full movements for perspecitive control. I recommend a wide-angle fresnel if you will be using very wide lenses. Part of the cost is the Horseman back, which is quite expensive. The camera itself looks beautifully engineered.

[Kuzano]

I pondered 617 and considered the 617 back for my large format, looked at the fuji and fotomans, could not come to a decision...
Yes limitations on the dedicated cameras and very expensive.
Then, it occurred to me. I have a very clean and usable...(and I use it a lot)... G690bl which shoots excellent 6X9 images, naturally.

So, I started using it on a panning tripod and am now doing panos at any dimension, by taking the 6X9's with overlapping images, scanning them, then stitching them together in CS3. I frankly do not think that a $3000 camera will give me better images than I am getting with my $500 Fuji. The stitch function is incredibly accurate. Some care must be taken on exposure, but I find the blend function on the stitch to be quite efficient. I use the 100mm standard lens, since I can create any wide angle view I want with increasing numbers of images. The 65mm lens distorts after a couple of images. I use a 6CM attachment on my tripod socket to move the rotation point of the tripod forward to be centered under the nodal point of the lens-simply a bracket that screws into the tripod socket and has a tripod socket hole threaded in the forward end.

I am finally coming to the conclusion that all the money I spend on equipment will buy tons of ink, papers for printing, etc. No more gear..... well, there is that.....?

[Capocheny]

IMHO, a dedicated 617 view camera has too many limitations. I would get a 5x7 camera with a 617 roll film holder such as Canham 617 RFH. This setup not only costs less than Ebony 617S, but also can be used to shoot 5x7 and 4x5 with a reduction back.

Hi Darr,

I'd also suggest considering Ling's recommendation... IMHO, it'll give you more options than going with a dedicated 617 camera.

Plus, 5x7 is a pretty sweet format to shoot with.

Happy Easter

Cheers

[Colin Graham]

That Gilde Cesar mentions could be quite cool indeed. It has front tilt as well and shift and rise. Plus you can remove the magazine and compose on the ground glass any time, midroll, whenever.

But I'd definitely wait until the dollar gains on the euro a little.

[Ling Z]

That Gilde Cesar mentions could be quite cool indeed. It has front tilt as well and shift and rise. Plus you can remove the magazine and compose on the ground glass any time, midroll, whenever.

But I'd definitely wait until the dollar gains on the euro a little.

I agree Gilde is the most versatile 617 system, however, it's heavy, bulky and expensive as well. I bought a Gilde system with a 72XL lens several years ago with a tremendous discount, as the system was used by Dr. Gilde for one tradeshow. The Gilde system's design is very cool, it is built like a tank, and has rise/fall and tilt movements. However, unless I really need all of these movements, I still use my Linhof 617 IIIS camera more often.

[vann webb]

I have the fuji GX617 and have been happy with it. However, if I had my druthers and more money at the time that I bought it, I would go with a 6 x 17 camera that has shift capability. Shift can be very important in panoramic photography. The camera needs to be absolutely dead level more often than not. Shift really opens up the possibilities for composing a better panoramic photograph, IMO. It is not unusual at all to wind up wanting to take the photograph from a spot that places the horizon inappropriately unless you tilt the camera, or have shift. Tilting the camera is usually a disaster of converging lines unless you are shooting clouds, etc. You can do without tilt capability more easily than shift on a dedicated panoramic camera. The Horseman SW would be my first choice for pure panoramic photography, but it's an expensive rascal too. JMHO.