Two good, two bad

[Sean Lewis]

Cheers Steve, I was thinking of sending some scans to some calendar/card companies. I've got a good printer so I suppose I could rustle up a few myself, if I get it together I'll let you know.

Sean

[Peter B]

The update tonight is that I phoned Ffordes at lunchtime to check, and was told that it "seems to be sold as it is on the counter with a lens and a couple of filmholders", so (genuine) best wishes to the new owner. If I had REALLY wanted it, I could have had it.

The potential trade-in was then given an airing and the beauty of a rigid body became glaringly obvious as I fiddled to unfold, adjust and lock my camera. I believe that is probably one decision made then, so I'll not be going for the Ebony 45RW that Peter Walnes is selling. The upside, however, was that I could fit the 300mm lens and I think I now have to work out if I can live with an Ebony or Walker that will only take up to a 150 or 180.

And if I'm missing any glaring bad points of a non-folding camera (apart from fewer movements), please feel free to tell me!

Peter

[uniB]

Hi Peter,

Don't overlook the fact that with only 150ish bellows extension you won't realistically be able to do anything 1:1 as you need twice the bellow extension. I used to own a RSW45, a lovely camera but for me it's lack of extension meant it had to go in favour of a Chamonix 045N – a lovely camera which I'd only swap for a Ebony 45SU (if anyone out there wants to swap let me know )

I've no experience with the Walker but with the Ebony you can't easily use a 150mm with it as it doesn't allow for enough tilt.

I'd recommend the Chamonix to anyone, great movement, great price, light and solid. There is of course a Shen Hao copy of it now (those guys, you wouldn't want to sit next to them in an exam!), available from Robert White – the PTB 54. It doesn't look as well made as the Chamonix with it's wooden bed, but it is very cheap.

[Thingy]

Hi Peter,

Don't overlook the fact that with only 150ish bellows extension you won't realistically be able to do anything 1:1 as you need twice the bellow extension. I used to own a RSW45, a lovely camera but for me it's lack of extension meant it had to go in favour of a Chamonix 045N – a lovely camera which I'd only swap for a Ebony 45SU (if anyone out there wants to swap let me know )

I've no experience with the Walker but with the Ebony you can't easily use a 150mm with it as it doesn't allow for enough tilt.

I'd recommend the Chamonix to anyone, great movement, great price, light and solid. There is of course a Shen Hao copy of it now (those guys, you wouldn't want to sit next to them in an exam!), available from Robert White – the PTB 54. It doesn't look as well made as the Chamonix with it's wooden bed, but it is very cheap.

I'll swap my Linhof Kardan monorail for your Ebony! Weights only 4.1Kg, full range of movements and you can use all your lenses in thie existing mounts! (This way I might get an Ebony this side of August! ) You just know it makes sense!

[Tim Myers]

I've no experience with the Walker but with the Ebony you can't easily use a 150mm with it as it doesn't allow for enough tilt.

I have the SW45 and never have any problems with not having enough tilt when using a 150. Remember that if you want to go longer you can always use the 452 extension back.

[jb7]

Well this thread has turned into a bit of an Ebony love-in...
Also, the original proposition has been ignored somewhat-
So, just to bring it back on track a bit-

I've only owned two (and a half) big cameras-
My first was some kind of Cambo monorail, with huge antennae for standards-
I bought it because it was cheap, and came with a 150 Symmar-

The main two things I didn't like about that were
1. Its general ugliness
2. the size...

I quickly got an Arca Swiss F-Line, (171) and I still have it-
There's a lot to like about it, but if I were to choose two things-

1. Its modular design and construction-
I recently made an 8x10 back and bellows for it, for example, (American Black Walnut, for the wood lovers*)
and while it took a bit of work, it really was a pleasure to add onto the basic camera.
I also put a Packard behind the lens board for larger projection lenses,
and the camera takes them without complaint-
and they are quite heavy-

2. Although the newer Arcas are prettier (and smaller, and lighter) the 171 F-Line is still a good looking thing, and a pleasure to use.
Everything is where it needs to be, and using it is completely intuitive. It's strong too-

I suppose I sometimes look longingly at the Chamonix, and would appreciate the size and weight difference-
but until resources allow an additional camera, I think I'll be staying with the Arca...

I'll get me coat...



joseph



* btw, if anyone is interested in the 8x10 conversion, I posted it here-

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ ... hp?t=45345