If you were designing a camera

[Dave Wooten]

Vertical stability

A 7x17 camera which one can change the orientation of the back from horizontal to vertical and vice versa easily would be nice. I think it would need a back that can be attached to the focusing base on either the long or short side (field changeable) and a higher front standard to accommodate the vertical orientation.

Or a 7 x 17 back for a 14 x 17 camera...

 

[jgjbowen]

A 7x17 camera which one can change the orientation of the back from horizontal to vertical and vice versa easily would be nice. I think it would need a back that can be attached to the focusing base on either the long or short side (field changeable) and a higher front standard to accommodate the vertical orientation.

robsoe,

check out Richard Ritter's ULF cameras @
http://www.lg4mat.net/ulfcamera.html

Barry,

I know Richard's original camera used aluminum for his rail system, but he abandoned it due to all of the problems associated with aluminum tripod legs, ie the don't get along too well with dirt!. So it depends on how you want to use aluminum in your camera.

 

[Jeremy]

Didn't Richard switch to carbon fiber?

 

[sanking]

A major plus for me would be the ability to place the back in either horizontal or vertical orientatioin with the banquet and panorma cameras like 7X17 and 12X20.

Also, you should definitely consider the advantage of composites like carbon fiber. They beat aluminium in terms of rigidity at a given weight.

Sandy

 

[jgjbowen]

Didn't Richard switch to carbon fiber?

Yes, he did

 

[barryjyoung]

robsoe,

check out Richard Ritter's ULF cameras @
http://www.lg4mat.net/ulfcamera.html

Barry,

I know Richard's original camera used aluminum for his rail system, but he abandoned it due to all of the problems associated with aluminum tripod legs, ie the don't get along too well with dirt!. So it depends on how you want to use aluminum in your camera.

Wow, quite an interesting design Mr. Ritter has there. It seems to answer most of the requests fielded here. So has anybody bought one? I would say that is an incredible design effort.

 

[barryjyoung]

A major plus for me would be the ability to place the back in either horizontal or vertical orientatioin with the banquet and panorma cameras like 7X17 and 12X20.

Also, you should definitely consider the advantage of composites like carbon fiber. They beat aluminium in terms of rigidity at a given weight.

Sandy

Hi Sandy:

The Ritter camera is convertible, carbon fiber and looks to be very lightweight. I am very impressed. Is there anything you do not like about it?

Thank you

 

[jgjbowen]

Wow, quite an interesting design Mr. Ritter has there. It seems to answer most of the requests fielded here. So has anybody bought one? I would say that is an incredible design effort.

Barry,

Yes, I own one. Richard just started delivering cameras less than 6 months ago, so there aren't a lot of them out there. I believe it will be reviewed in either the March or May issue of View Camera.

I really like the light weight and versatility of the camera, but then again, I've never used any other ULF camera. The ability to change from horizontal to vertical, back swing and tilt, front rise, swing, tilt and shift along with 34" of bellows and the bail back are all very nice features I was able to take Richard's prototype out for a test drive at a Fine Focus Workshop. Based on that experience I had Richard make a few modifications to better fit my oversized hands (I'm 6'6" and a former basketball player, so my hands are larger than the average bears).

 

[sanking]

Hi Sandy:

The Ritter camera is convertible, carbon fiber and looks to be very lightweight. I am very impressed. Is there anything you do not like about it?

Thank you

No, I like it a lot. In fact I have considering having him build me a 20X24" camera based on the design. The convertible feature should be a big selling point. It sure will be IMHO for most persons with previous experience trying to use non-convertible 7X17 and 12X20 cameras in vertical orientation.

Sandy

 

[barryjyoung]

Barry,

Yes, I own one. Richard just started delivering cameras less than 6 months ago, so there aren't a lot of them out there. I believe it will be reviewed in either the March or May issue of View Camera.

I really like the light weight and versatility of the camera, but then again, I've never used any other ULF camera. The ability to change from horizontal to vertical, back swing and tilt, front rise, swing, tilt and shift along with 34" of bellows and the bail back are all very nice features I was able to take Richard's prototype out for a test drive at a Fine Focus Workshop. Based on that experience I had Richard make a few modifications to better fit my oversized hands (I'm 6'6" and a former basketball player, so my hands are larger than the average bears).

Well, it looks like a very well thought out design. I am sure you will get many years of happy use from it. Thanks for the reply.

 

[vet173]

Hi Barry, How have you been doing? I've been meaning to get up and say hi. My preference would be for wood. Metal is REAL cold in the winter. I had a problem with grit that got into the focus track of my 2x3 graphic. galled and never was right after that. Balance, rigidity over weight. With 7x17 I don't think you are going to be using a lot of front movement. Most shots will be considered wide for the most part. Lenses used will be at the coverage limits. I would not consider any other camera without triple extension but for this one I would go for the double. I want a front standard that will let me use heavy glass. Think of my 420 5.5 berlin dagor we were looking thru. With the packard shutter and the lens in front of that. Weight is considerably out from tilt pivot point.

 

[barryjyoung]

Hi Barry, How have you been doing? I've been meaning to get up and say hi. My preference would be for wood. Metal is REAL cold in the winter. I had a problem with grit that got into the focus track of my 2x3 graphic. galled and never was right after that. Balance, rigidity over weight. With 7x17 I don't think you are going to be using a lot of front movement. Most shots will be considered wide for the most part. Lenses used will be at the coverage limits. I would not consider any other camera without triple extension but for this one I would go for the double. I want a front standard that will let me use heavy glass. Think of my 420 5.5 berlin dagor we were looking thru. With the packard shutter and the lens in front of that. Weight is considerably out from tilt pivot point.

Hmmm, no name I recognize, but I calculate a 90% probability that you have an APUG tee shirt, a Starbucks Extreme Polar coffee mug in red and that you crew chief a funny car.

 

[vet173]

Hmmm, no name I recognize, but I calculate a 90% probability that you have an APUG tee shirt, a Starbucks Extreme Polar coffee mug in red and that you crew chief a funny car.

Dat be da one.
John Berry

 

[barryjyoung]

Dat be da one.
John Berry

Hey John:

Great news. between the time I sent the last message and now, I finally got the manual pulse generator to work on the CNC mill. Wooo Hooo! I worked on that modification for more than a week. Now I am building a new bench to hold the very much larger milling table which will show up soon. Once that is done and the new table is mounted and the machine is permanently wired, we will be making film holders fast as pancakes.

Nice to hear from you again, how is the Saltzman enlarger working for you?

 

[vet173]

Barry,
Glad to hear you got the mill up and going. Where is it, in the dining room? I didn't think you had room for more in the garage. The Salsman is doing great, when you get some 8x10 negs come on down. I'll give you a call or email an set up a get together. Would like to see that 7x17

 

[jacobus]

I'd try an "oyster" design to get all in one: carriage, camera, tripod and cover. Its basis could be a jumbo trolley ( aluminium) whose reinforced bottom will become the camera bed and the tripod base ( folding legs outside). Handle and its rails would be replaced by a stronger "telescopic" construction to carry the front standard which alternatively could be inserted in- or outside the "oyster" for shooting; rear standard should provide all movements and fine-focusing, and will be collapsible ...

There are good alu suitcases (trolleys) on the market which almost cry to be converted into such a shooting capsule for film sizes up to 30x40cm or even bigger.

Just a rough idea.

 

[jd callow]

My 2c

These are some of my main questions.

1. Would you buy a camera made from aluminum or would you only buy a wooden camera? no pref, but mis matched metals are an issue

2. What is more important rigidity or light weight? First rigidity followed by portability low weight doesn't equal portability

3. How important is it to you that the camera is beautiful? Is it a tool, or a showpiece or both? tool

4. What features can you live without? What features can you not live without? can not live without short lenses or rear and front rise and fall

5. Would you pay twice as much for a camera that had graduated movements and detent stops? geard (is that what you meant) movements are great, but detents are more important

6. Do you use triple extension bellows often enough to add 50% to the price? not for me

7. Synthetic bellows are less expensive and more weather resistant than leather. Would bellows material be a deciding factor in your purchase and do you think there should be a choice? nope

8. Do you REALLY need rise and fall on the back? $$$$$$ ether rear r/f or a ton up front