Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,891   Posts: 1,520,854   Online: 1212
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North York, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    101
    </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jorge @ Sep 21 2002, 04:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Come to think of it, we must not be very smart if we are hauling these mosnters around&#33;</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
    LOL&#33;&#33;&#33; Somedays I think you&#39;re right&#33;

  2. #12
    b.e.wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Provo, Utah
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    141
    Where do you get 11x14 film? Or 12x20, or 7x17, or those other unusual formats? I must admit I&#39;m intrigued by the prospect of large contact prints (azo or POP maybe) but I&#39;m not good enough at B&W yet to ty it, so my questions are just research.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    The View Camera Store:

    http://www.viewcamerastore.com/catalog/default.php

    B&H

    http://www02.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/...SID=EF4D8D7FDA0

    Adorama

    http://www.adorama.com

    Etc, etc.
    In addition I beleive Bergger offers a conact paper. I think I am going to try it just to see what it looks like against Azo.
    YOur choices of film are less and less as the format increases. For 12x20 I only have two choices, either Bergger BFP 220, or Ilford HP5+. In 7x17 you have the same two plus FP4+. There is one company who is cutting film to size. And it is rummored to be FP4+. But if I am going to carry this thing, spend the time setting it up and then have it comeo out wrong because the film QA/QC was not up to par.....I am weary of trying this, rather stick with the original manufacturers.
    For 11x14 you have many more choices. Besides the 3 films mentioned, you also have some Kodak products. I beleive Tri X comes in 11x14.

    Bruce, ULF is a lot of fun, much more fun than 4x5, and with a modern lens...well you cant get anything better than that. BTW I also know of a place that enlarges up to 12x20 negatives.....




  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,030
    FWIW, I had an 11x14 Burke and James once. I really like the size of an 11x14 negative, but the B&J was, for me an intimidating camera---taking it to the field was just too big of a hassle. I&#39;d look for a self casing style---maybe a Korona or Century (or &#39;dorff---but then you&#39;ll need that second mortgage) What really costs are film holders. Try to get whoever you buy from to throw in at least one holder so you&#39;ll have something to play with until you can shop around for more. You&#39;ll also need a heavy tripod. If your moving up from 8x10 you&#39;ll be OK but going from 4x5 to 11x14 would probably require something sturdier.For film you&#39;ll be limited to Ilford and Bergger which is really not too bad---actually pretty good&#33; On the plus side, 11x14 contacts are great&#33; Argueably, the 11x14 is about as large a photo that will look good in most rooms in most homes without dominating the room. The slightly longer dimension lends itself well to landscapes and in portrait mode it gives a kind of roominess & intimacy(?) to a portrait. Well worth it if you can get into it cheaply. If you have to pay 5K for a camera and a couple of hundred for each holder why not go to 20x24 ? Good Luck&#33;

  5. #15
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,156
    Images
    20
    There are some deals to be had on the less well known banquet cameras. Check places like www.mpex.com and www.lensandrepro.com to see what you can find.

    I paid around &#036;550 for my American Optical folding 11x14" camera recently. It&#39;s generally in working order with a new bellows that alone must have cost around &#036;400, so I thought it would be a good risk at that price. The "new" bellows, though has a couple of loose ribs (but at least no leaks) that I should fix and some small cracks in the bed that need repairing, but for the price, it wasn&#39;t too bad, and the camera is usable in the meantime. I have four lenses from my 8x10" kit to cover the format, and it was easy to adapt the lensboard frame (using a Dremel with a router table attachment) to use the lensboards from my 8x10" camera, and I&#39;ve got an adequate tripod, so that takes care of a big portion of the expense for the new format. It has a double-extension bellows, reversible back, front axis tilt and rise/fall, and rear base tilt and geared swing. The rear standard slides forward for use with wide lenses, and it&#39;s light enough to take out of the house.

    I&#39;m still shopping around for filmholders. The best price on new Lisco/Fidelity holders seems to be at Calumet (better than B&H&#33. If you do look at one of these more obscure brands, be sure that they come with holders or that they will work with modern holders, because some of the older ones may use non-standard holders, and you will pay a fortune for custom holders (go to www.filmholders.com, though, if you need them). Fortunately, this camera was used by a working photographer (who had a beautiful new Lotus 20x24 in his studio, by the way), who confirmed that it worked with modern holders.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North York, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    101
    </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (David A. Goldfarb @ Oct 8 2002, 04:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I&#39;m still shopping around for filmholders. &nbsp;The best price on new Lisco/Fidelity holders seems to be at Calumet (better than B&H&#33. &nbsp;If you do look at one of these more obscure brands, be sure that they come with holders or that they will work with modern holders, because some of the older ones may use non-standard holders, and you will pay a fortune for custom holders (go to www.filmholders.com, though, if you need them).</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
    The Fidelity/Llsco factory has not made 11x14 holders for several months now as they have been discontinued. If you find a dealer listing them I would double check with them first - I honestly doubt ANY dealer would have &#39;new&#39; stock available.

    On the plus side S&S holders are available &#39;new&#39;. They are wonderfully made and sell for &#036;295 through Quality Camera. In comparison AWB&#39;s are &#036;454(expensive but a great holder) and Lotus are &#036;425Euro. (~&#036;417US).

    Cheers,
    Roger...

  7. #17
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,156
    Images
    20
    Thanks for the info, Roger. I&#39;ll check back with Calumet. I wouldn&#39;t be surprised, though if they still had them in stock somewhere if they were only discontinued in the past year, 11x14" holders not being such a hot selling item. The S&S holders were my second choice. I emailed Quality Camera about them a while ago, and they seem like a good deal.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,512
    Images
    4
    There are other alternatives to buying a traditional design camera.
    I am nearing completion of a homebrew 11x14 that is a little different. it consists of a pair of boxes that slide to gain focus. The inside box moves on a pair of geared tracks and movement is smooth with the use of roller bearings and knobs on each side of the box. The front standard is actually a 1/2 sphere that is mounted on the box in such a way that it allows the sphere movement to provide tilt and swing. The back of tha camera holds a frame that provides a base tilt with some bellows material to provide light proofing. The ground glass is in a holder that snaps onto this frame. After composing, I lock down the rear frame remove the ground glass, snap on a similar frame that holds a sheet of film on each side with its own darkslide.

    A rod on the front lens sphere with an elbow joint allows me to adjust the lens position from under the dark cloth with up to 36" of extension.

    The construction of the boxes is plywood, with holes drilled to reduce weight (except the bottom of the main box to allow for a metal plate) and then covered with an aluminum skin and epoxy painted. Braces for corners and rear holders are oak. Bearings, gears, gear tracks were purchaed from Small Parts Inc.

    the lens sphere is constructed some sort of a plastic lettuce drying device I found at Target, the inside mount that allows it to pivot is the most technical part of the camera, consisting of machined aluminum and small bearings.


    Is it a Wisner or Phillips or whatever? Of course not. But mine will cost about &#036;350, &#036;125 of that the cost of the aluminum lens pivot. Do I have unlimited movements? No, but I have front and rear tilt and plan to include rear swing to go with the front eventually.

    It may not be as light as a folding camera, but the dimensions are 13x17x24 and it can easily be strapped to a backpacking frame. The major drawback is the film holder and ground glass arrangement, but this is the best solution I can find unless I want to spend &#036;600 for a 11x14 back from Wisner and &#036;600 to &#036;700 for a pair of holders. I work mostly from a vehicle so i don&#39;t mind carrying 3 or 4 of the home made film holders. it is these holders were the weight adds up as they weigh about 4lbs each.

    Anyway when i get it finished I will post some images of the camera on the web. hope this stimulates some thinking.
    "Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
    Robert Adams

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North York, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    101
    </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (David A. Goldfarb @ Oct 8 2002, 05:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The S&S holders were my second choice. &nbsp;I emailed Quality Camera about them a while ago, and they seem like a good deal.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
    I&#39;ve only recently come across S&S myself (thanks to everyone on this forum&#33 - at &#036;100-&#036;150 less than the competition they are a bargain. Note that Sandy has just replaced the original light trap in the 11x14 holder with a slightly different material. I believe he said it&#39;s now the same material as they use in their other ULF sizes. Do check first when ordering to ensure you are getting the latest version.

    Cheers,
    Roger...

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,030
    Sorry, I meant 12x20, not 20x24&#33;

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin