chamonix is 4X5 N1/N2 or Toyo 4X5 CF

[Alan Edward Klein]

John, Contact Hugo Zhang who is president of Chamonix and explain your situation. He's very approachable. It's early in your order so he might be able to switch models with no problem. I found him very helpful in making the determination of which model was best for me. He'll also answer technical questions regarding matching other things like lenses to work best on your model, issues regarding lens boards, bellows, accessories, etc. Hugo is the owner of the company. You can see him on Youtube videos demonstrating some of them.
hugo zhang <hugoz_2000@yahoo.com>

 

[John Wiegerink]

John, Contact Hugo Zhang who is president of Chamonix and explain your situation. He's very approachable. It's early in your order so he might be able to switch models with no problem. I found him very helpful in making the determination of which model was best for me. He'll also answer technical questions regarding matching other things like lenses to work best on your model, issues regarding lens boards, bellows, accessories, etc. Hugo is the owner of the company. You can see him on Youtube videos demonstrating some of them.
hugo zhang <hugoz_2000@yahoo.com>

Al,
I think that the 45N1 will be just fine for my type of photography. I will still contact Hugo for his opinion on the two when it comes to my style of shooting and see what he says. Either one will be an improvement over my older Toyo for weight and usability. The Toyo 4X5 can still get the job done, but the 45N1 or N2 would make the job much easier. JohnW

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Good luck with whatever you decide.

 

[grat]

Keep in mind, the 45N-1 (Classic) is actually more like a 45N-1.5. If you look at the 45N-2 page, items 1, 4 and 5 have been retrofitted to the 45N-1 (Classic).

The remaining differences are the Universal bellows (good for wide angle, but you can use a 90mm and "some" movements with the classic bellows, and imho, the red looks stunning).

The rear standard, particularly the lever locks, look easier to use, but I rarely adjust my rear standard anyway. Primarily, I move the rear forward +30mm for the 6x17 back. You can set the knobs position with the lower half, and then loosen the top half, slide the standard forward, and lock the top half back down. It's easier to do than explain.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Keep in mind, the 45N-1 (Classic) is actually more like a 45N-1.5. If you look at the 45N-2 page, items 1, 4 and 5 have been retrofitted to the 45N-1 (Classic).

The remaining differences are the Universal bellows (good for wide angle, but you can use a 90mm and "some" movements with the classic bellows, and imho, the red looks stunning).

The rear standard, particularly the lever locks, look easier to use, but I rarely adjust my rear standard anyway. Primarily, I move the rear forward +30mm for the 6x17 back. You can set the knobs position with the lower half, and then loosen the top half, slide the standard forward, and lock the top half back down. It's easier to do than explain.

grat,
Yes, for me, the N1.5 is all I need. If they hadn't fixed the focus shift problem with the front mounted Fresnel I would have gone with the 45N2. I like the black metal and Teak on the 45N1 and love the red bellows for sure. JohnW

One more thing in my favor when it comes to the 45N1 and that is my wide angle of choice for light weight field work is an old 100mm Wide-field Ektar. Some might say this isn't a wide angle or it's not wide enough. To that I say big bull chips. I should be able to use the wide-field Ektar on the 45N1 with no problem.

 

[grat]

One more thing in my favor when it comes to the 45N1 and that is my wide angle of choice for light weight field work is an old 100mm Wide-field Ektar. Some might say this isn't a wide angle or it's not wide enough. To that I say big bull chips. I should be able to use the wide-field Ektar on the 45N1 with no problem.

As an FYI, that lens will cover 4x5 without problems, but I don't think you're going to have much in the way of movements. One source reports an image circle of 166mm, the other reports 183mm. 163mm is the minimum required for edge-to-edge coverage on 4x5.

My Fuji 105mm f/5.6 has the same issue.

 

[John Wiegerink]

As an FYI, that lens will cover 4x5 without problems, but I don't think you're going to have much in the way of movements. One source reports an image circle of 166mm, the other reports 183mm. 163mm is the minimum required for edge-to-edge coverage on 4x5.

My Fuji 105mm f/5.6 has the same issue.

I have never measured the image circle of the 100mm Wide-Field Ektar, but have never had a coverage problem on my Toyo 4X5. Of course I don't seem to use much in the way of front rise or any other movements with it either. Also, I'm almost always at f22. I'm thinking its coverage must be closer to the 183mm figure. Some day I might drag out my 8X10 camera and put the 100mm Ektar on that just to get a good idea as to what it will and will not cover. JohnW

I hit edit to add this: I have Kodaks data book "Kodak Lenses" 5th edition and also Kodaks "Camera Techniques for Professional Photographers" circa 1962 and neither one list image circle for the lenses. They just list them by format covered. They say the 100mm Wide-Field Ektar covers 4X5, but then says if you use camera movements it's best on a 3 1/4 X 4 1/4 format camera. Tells me you would run out of coverage with full rise on most 4X5 cameras with the 100mm Ektar. In the field (mostly landscapes and such) I'm not using many movements, so I can get by with the 100mm Ektar, but if I had to shoot buildings and such I also have a late 90mm Super Angulon, along with other lenses as well. I guess I'll find out how it works when I receive my Chamonix 45N1?

 

[abruzzi]

I like the 100 WFE on 4x5 because, unlike a lot of more modern wides for 4x5, the 100 WFE is tiny. You get a tiny bit more circle than a 90 Angulon but that is mostly due to having 10mm more distance from the longer FL. If you want movements, you really need to look at a Super Angulon, Nikkor or Fujinon SW, or Rodenstock Grandagon. All great lenses, but all much larger than the WFE. Also remember that the image circle specs are at infinity. If you're focusing closer you'll get incrementally larger image circles.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I like the 100 WFE on 4x5 because, unlike a lot of more modern wides for 4x5, the 100 WFE is tiny. You get a tiny bit more circle than a 90 Angulon but that is mostly due to having 10mm more distance from the longer FL. If you want movements, you really need to look at a Super Angulon, Nikkor or Fujinon SW, or Rodenstock Grandagon. All great lenses, but all much larger than the WFE. Also remember that the image circle specs are at infinity. If you're focusing closer you'll get incrementally larger image circles.

Yes, size is what I like also. They don't get much smaller than the 100mm WF Ektar. I also have a 203mm f7.7 Ektar to go with it for staying on the small side. The other small lenses I have are the 180mm f9 Fujinon A, plus the smaller Fuji 135mm, 150mm and Fuji 210mm L lens. I have nothing longer except my huge convertible Protar on my 8X10 and that ain't going on the Chamonix4X5. I just hope my patience hold out until the camera gets here. I was never very good at that "Christmas Eve" type thing. JohnW

 

[abruzzi]

I just hope my patients hold out

Just give them a shot of morphine and they'll wait...

Seriously, I really love the 203/7.7--such a beautiful lens. I've started trying that one out on 5x7, but it doesn't really have any movements to speak of on that size, but perfect on 4x5.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Just give them a shot of morphine and they'll wait...

Seriously, I really love the 203/7.7--such a beautiful lens. I've started trying that one out on 5x7, but it doesn't really have any movements to speak of on that size, but perfect on 4x5.

Yes, my brother-in-law was on morphine toward the end, and he didn't wait around very long regardless. It doesn't work for everybody, I guess. We'll see if my “patience” holds out. Ha-ha! I had an old Korona 5X7 that the 203mm Ektar was on. I should have kept that camera and if I had it to do all over again it would be on display in my living room right now. At the time I was more into 4X5, so I sold it. When I got it, I stripped it down to the last screw and refinished all wood parts and buffed and polished the metal. It was gorgeous when I got done. I also had an old wood tripod that I did the same too. One day I had it setup in the living room and my wife walked by and made the comment that it was beautiful, and it was one camera she wouldn't mine having on display in the living room. To this day, that's the only camera she has ever said that about. I have owned hundreds of cameras, but that was the only one that caught her eye. Did I say she doesn't care for cameras? I hope she likes the new one on order. Who cares, it's mine anyway. JohnW

 

[abruzzi]

I looked up the Korona--it looks like a close cousin of the Kodak 2D. Unfortunately my 2D only has a 4x5 reducing back, but its otherwise in very good condition

 

[John Wiegerink]

I looked up the Korona--it looks like a close cousin of the Kodak 2D. Unfortunately my 2D only has a 4x5 reducing back, but its otherwise in very good condition

Yes, the Korona and the Kodak 2d were first cousins. I had a Kodak 2D 5X7 for a short time and never used it. I took it in on a trade for a Nikon FM when I was still dealing in used photo gear. You might have thought I was exaggerating when I said I had owned hundreds of cameras, but it was and is the actual truth. I'm just now thinning the herd down and slapping cameras and lenses on the big auction site. My wife keeps telling me to sell, sell, sell cuz if I croak she's just going to get a BIG dumpster. She says I might as well have the money and buy one or two things I really like. As you can tell, she's the only one with any brains in this family. I'm 72 and no one in my family knows the difference between a Kodak Medalist and a Korona view camera. They couldn't care less, but they surely know the different models of iPhones. Ahhh, the good old days got up and went! JohnW