what waS your last photography related purchase?

[GLS]

Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90mm f4.5

 

[Ian Grant]

Oh boy, an Eyelid shutter

Seller says 1900, my 1940 Kodak Ltd catalogue lists them along with Thornton Pickard roller blind shutters. Norkra (barn door, and Dallmeyer Packard shutters.

I like my shutters and have many to use with Brass/Barrel lenses none of the need for a Galli lash up Sorry Jim @( Many of the shutters were not sold or poorly marketed in the US.

Ian

 

[Roger Thoms]

Oh boy, an Eyelid shutter

Seller says 1900, my 1940 Kodak Ltd catalogue lists them along with Thornton Pickard roller blind shutters. Norkra (barn door, and Dallmeyer Packard shutters.

I like my shutters and have many to use with Brass/Barrel lenses none of the need for a Galli lash up Sorry Jim @( Many of the shutters were not sold or poorly marketed in the US.

Ian

So how about a YouTube video showing this bad boy in action.

Roger

 

[Ian Grant]

So how about a YouTube video showing this bad boy in action.

Roger

Well that's a possibility. I have quite a few different shutters some quite rare.

There's this Thornton Pickard "Time" Patent shutter from 1888/90:

The knotted end of the piece of cotton thread had pulled throughits anchor point on the capstan roller. I replaced it and the shutter works perfectly.

This differs from all other TP roller blind shutters by having the spring mechanism on the outside rather than inside the bottom curtain roller. It's very smooth, I, Instant-- single speed, and T.


Then there's the Le Mignon, kindly given to me by another member of this Forum:

Or the J Wrench shutter, the Gitzo, TP Studio shutters, Norka, Dallmeyer Packard, and others

Ian

 

[removed account4]

some Japanese paper to make translucent, some pads of paper ( Bristol, black watercolor paper and a few others ) to print on, unlined bound notebooks for notes, pencils and bookbinding supplies

 

[mshchem]

I'm starting to suspect that this is all being recorded by my wife for blackmail. I have coming a Hassleblad Zeiss Planar 100mm f3.5 made in 2000 C.E. If I have my acronyms correct it's a CFI lens all I know is I paid a lot of money for it. Hasselblad stuff is approaching Leica Insanity. I'm not selling anything for a while. It's more fun to play with cameras than to brag about your 8 shares of Tesla.

 

[PFGS]

Amber glass bottles for Dektol and some of those snazzy red LED bulbs.

 

[darkosaric]

Always low on fixer, bottle of Rodinal last long, PQ Universal as well...so I got 5l of Adox rapid fixer.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

An Ionizing air blower - desktop electrostatic eliminator. Used where static electricity causes problems such as dust attraction to negatives and other components. I'll be pairing it up in my new 13x14 foot darkroom with a hepa air purifier.

MFL

 

[GLS]

I'm starting to suspect that this is all being recorded by my wife for blackmail. I have coming a Hassleblad Zeiss Planar 100mm f3.5 made in 2000 C.E. If I have my acronyms correct it's a CFI lens all I know is I paid a lot of money for it. Hasselblad stuff is approaching Leica Insanity. I'm not selling anything for a while. It's more fun to play with cameras than to brag about your 8 shares of Tesla.

You won't regret it. I have that lens and it is superlative.

 

[darkosaric]

Hasselblad stuff is approaching Leica Insanity

I was never into medium format much, but I remember like 10 years ago I could get Hasselblad system for very good price, I did not buy it. But the prices now are pretty high indeed, and I don't think it will go down. Times when everybody was saying "film is dead, go digital" is gone, film grows, and the prices of top equipment as well.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Three yards each of black 7oz and white 7oz canvas to make a really big dark cloth for my 14x17 view camera.

 

[mshchem]

I was never into medium format much, but I remember like 10 years ago I could get Hasselblad system for very good price, I did not buy it. But the prices now are pretty high indeed, and I don't think it will go down. Times when everybody was saying "film is dead, go digital" is gone, film grows, and the prices of top equipment as well.

I got the lens yesterday, has all the original packaging. Like Christmas. Real Zeiss, made in Germany, it would cost $12,000 to make today. I am going to sell some of my stuff to offset these extravagancent purchases. This lens, taken care of will last another 50 years.

 

[mshchem]

Always low on fixer, bottle of Rodinal last long, PQ Universal as well...so I got 5l of Adox rapid fixer.

View attachment 253782

You are correct, fixer seems to go fast. Adox uses such nice bottles. I stocked up on XTOL and Kodak Rapid fix when Tetenal announced their restructuring, and I'm glad I did. The new Kodak fixer comes in a flimsy round bottle.

 

[Nokton48]

Minolta Autocord Low Tripod by Nokton48, on Flickr

I've been enjoying Irving Penn's books. Made this lowpod with a round heavy heavily machined base which came yesterday. Everything else is repurposed (excepting the Autocord)

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm starting to suspect that this is all being recorded by my wife for blackmail. I have coming a Hassleblad Zeiss Planar 100mm f3.5 made in 2000 C.E. If I have my acronyms correct it's a CFI lens all I know is I paid a lot of money for it. Hasselblad stuff is approaching Leica Insanity. I'm not selling anything for a while. It's more fun to play with cameras than to brag about your 8 shares of Tesla.

One of the most enjoyable lenses I own.

 

[markjwyatt]

wrong location- but I guess I could add two Retina filters for my new/old Retina IIIc- MedY and DeepY. Cover closes with either attached (typically will be the MedY).

 

[mshchem]

One of the most enjoyable lenses I own.

I want a SWC. That's coming after I sell all my mint RZ 67 II stuff. I never use it, and 6x7 is a weird size. I like 6x6 and 6x9.

 

[Donald Qualls]

6x7 is a weird size.

It's not weird. It's almost identical aspect ratio to 4x5 -- 56x70 mm vs 101x127 mm -- but, of course, MUCH cheaper to shoot (and faster to use) than the sheet film in holders, and more than 1/2 the linear dimension (about 5/8 the film area). I bought my RB67 largely for the frame size (I've got 6x6 and 6x9 cameras in multiples).

 

[removed account4]

6x7 is a weird size

I can't figure out if my graphic 23 roll film back ( 9 exposures I think ) is 6x9 or 6x7 whatever it is I LOVE that size..
not quite quarter plate but good enough for government work

 

[MattKing]

I can't figure out if my graphic 23 roll film back ( 9 exposures I think ) is 6x9 or 6x7 whatever it is I LOVE that size..
not quite quarter plate but good enough for government work

Sounds like 6x8 - although why a graphic 23 roll film back would feature that I can't figure!

 

[Donald Qualls]

A 23 should be 6x9 -- as in "2 1/4 x 3 1/4" -- and 8 exposures. But if it's 9 exposures, it pretty well has to be 6x8 (56x75 or so?), just barely wider than 3:4. Graflex did make 6x7; the RH10 and RH20 (the latter I presume for 220 film).

 

[mshchem]

I can't figure out if my graphic 23 roll film back ( 9 exposures I think ) is 6x9 or 6x7 whatever it is I LOVE that size..
not quite quarter plate but good enough for government work

The old Koni Omega press cameras shot 9 frames of 6x7 on 120. If you have a Graflex 23 roll film holder, these changed over the years, some where more like 2 1/4 × 3 1/8 not as wide as standard 6x9. The RH8 is 6x9, RH10 is 6x7. One thing that's always bugged me about 6x7 format is they don't fit in standard 8x10 print files. I always crop someway or another so the "ideal format" argument of 6x7 and 645 formats don't mean much to me. I tend to print 5x5 inch or 8x8 inch prints from a 6x6 camera. For the first 50 years of 120 it was usually 2 1/4 × 3 1/4 contact prints. Then square Instamatic and SX-70, and of course those crazy Swedish cameras sitting up on the moon. No to me 6x7 feels crowded.

 

[mshchem]

I can't figure out if my graphic 23 roll film back ( 9 exposures I think ) is 6x9 or 6x7 whatever it is I LOVE that size..
not quite quarter plate but good enough for government work

Since Mamiya adopted the graflock back for the RB, is it possible you have a RB 6X8 back? I remember lusting after the New RB 67, and being comforted that Graphic backs would fit.

 

[GLS]

t's not weird. It's almost identical aspect ratio to 4x5 -- 56x70 mm vs 101x127 mm -- but, of course, MUCH cheaper to shoot (and faster to use) than the sheet film in holders, and more than 1/2 the linear dimension (about 5/8 the film area)

6x7 is not 5/8 the film area of 4x5. Not even close.

Based on those dimensions you quoted 6x7 gives around 30% of the area captured by 4x5.