Lens/Tripod/Tripod Head HELP Needed

Hello all.

I have a Linhof technikardan 45 (not s) that I bought used last summer and
I am still trying to put my kit together. So FRUSTRATING.

I have two lenses in my kit, a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90 f/6.8 in Prontor
01 and a Linhof Symmar-S 150 f/5.6.

My initial desire is to start with landscapes, then move to portraits.
Neither of the two lenses I have really fits the bill. I have the option
of getting a 120 Super-Symmar HM f/5.6 or an Apo-Symmar 180 f/5.6. Can
anyone give me some advice? The Stroebel book (6th ed.) says that the
Super-Symmar HM is optimized for infinity focus (I guess so is the
Apo-Symmar, though).

Why are the 90, 150, and 210 focal lengths considered to be the three
standards for 4X5? I mean, the 210 isn't even long enough for a decent
head & shoulders portrait.


OK, tripods. I went in to the local Manfrotto rep aiming for a 475 and
ended up getting a 028, which is entirely the wrong tripod for open air
shooting. Any thoughts on the 475?


My biggest problem is the head. I realize ball heads are extremely stable
(if high-quality) but aren't 3-D heads more precise in their movements? Is
there a ballhead out there that will take a quick-release plate with 2
3/8"holes spaced exactly for the Technicardan's monorail?

I am so frustrated with my gear, I just want to start using it. Thanks!!

Nicholas J. Coscoros wrote:

Hello all.

I have a Linhof technikardan 45 (not s) that I bought used last summer and
I am still trying to put my kit together. So FRUSTRATING.

I have two lenses in my kit, a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90 f/6.8 in Prontor
01 and a Linhof Symmar-S 150 f/5.6.

My initial desire is to start with landscapes, then move to portraits.
Neither of the two lenses I have really fits the bill. I have the option
of getting a 120 Super-Symmar HM f/5.6 or an Apo-Symmar 180 f/5.6. Can
anyone give me some advice? The Stroebel book (6th ed.) says that the
Super-Symmar HM is optimized for infinity focus (I guess so is the
Apo-Symmar, though).

Why are the 90, 150, and 210 focal lengths considered to be the three
standards for 4X5? I mean, the 210 isn't even long enough for a decent
head & shoulders portrait.


OK, tripods. I went in to the local Manfrotto rep aiming for a 475 and
ended up getting a 028, which is entirely the wrong tripod for open air
shooting. Any thoughts on the 475?


My biggest problem is the head. I realize ball heads are extremely stable
(if high-quality) but aren't 3-D heads more precise in their movements? Is
there a ballhead out there that will take a quick-release plate with 2
3/8"holes spaced exactly for the Technicardan's monorail?

I am so frustrated with my gear, I just want to start using it. Thanks!!

What about a Pentax Spotmatic and a 50mm? That might be a little less
frustrating. Or are you trolling?
Get on with it and stop fondling...

nicholas wrote:

What about a Pentax Spotmatic and a 50mm? That might be a little less
frustrating. Or are you trolling?
Get on with it and stop fondling...

Hey I'm going to flame myself because of the above post..
Basically I can't stand all of the negativity I see in the rec.photo
usenet groups and I'm buying into it. Sorry
Nicholas (THE OTHER ONE), may I suggest you look at the fantastic kit
you've managed to aquire and see that as some sort of _limiting_ factor
in your system and take that as a starting point for what you are trying
to achive. Head and shoulders portraits with large format are extremely
difficult (frustrating x100) to achieve and perhaps you are blessed by
the fact you don't own a more tele type of lens :-)
Regarding heads, pan and tilt types are more precise but they are slower
to use--sometimes. I prefer them for heavy cameras because one wrong
move on a ball head with a 2kg+ camera can be not so forgiving.
Otherwise with camera equipment often whatever gets-you-there is the
best and often what is lightest is what gets-you-there if you get ;-)
what I'm saying...
Good luck and all the best, Nicholas

I have a Linhof technikardan 45 (not s) that I bought used last summer and
I am still trying to put my kit together. So FRUSTRATING.

I'll assume this isn't a troll.

If you've had the camera since last summer but haven't been photographing
with it because you still haven't been able to "put your kit together," I'd
suggest you're worrying too much about equipment. The two lenses you have
are perfectly fine lenses and both focal lengths are well suited to
landscape work. You don't tell us why they "don't fit the bill" and if you
haven't been using them I don't understand how you could know they don't fit
the bill. But apart from that, replacing either or both with either of the
two you mention, or even adding one of the two you mention to your existing
lenses, isn't going to make a significant difference in your large format
photography at this stage.

90, 150, and 210 aren't the three "standards." There is no standard, you use
the focal lengths that work for you. 90 and 150 combined with something
longer than 210, often a 300, are common combinations because they give
three different angles of view ranging from moderately wide to moderately
narrow and one will usually work for almost anything you're likely to
encounter in general photography (as opposed to specialties that require
special equipment). But there's no standard to which you should necessarily
try to adhere. Photographers buy whatever lengths work for them.
Unfortunately until you actually start making photographs you won't know
what works for you.

I hope this doesn't sound unduly harsh or unresponsive. As Kris
Kristoferson said, "I recognize the symptoms girl, I have the same
diseasse."

"Nicholas J. Coscoros" wrote in message
.Berkeley.EDU...
Hello all.

I have a Linhof technikardan 45 (not s) that I bought used last summer and
I am still trying to put my kit together. So FRUSTRATING.

I have two lenses in my kit, a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90 f/6.8 in Prontor
01 and a Linhof Symmar-S 150 f/5.6.

My initial desire is to start with landscapes, then move to portraits.
Neither of the two lenses I have really fits the bill. I have the option
of getting a 120 Super-Symmar HM f/5.6 or an Apo-Symmar 180 f/5.6. Can
anyone give me some advice? The Stroebel book (6th ed.) says that the
Super-Symmar HM is optimized for infinity focus (I guess so is the
Apo-Symmar, though).

Why are the 90, 150, and 210 focal lengths considered to be the three
standards for 4X5? I mean, the 210 isn't even long enough for a decent
head & shoulders portrait.


OK, tripods. I went in to the local Manfrotto rep aiming for a 475 and
ended up getting a 028, which is entirely the wrong tripod for open air
shooting. Any thoughts on the 475?


My biggest problem is the head. I realize ball heads are extremely stable
(if high-quality) but aren't 3-D heads more precise in their movements? Is
there a ballhead out there that will take a quick-release plate with 2
3/8"holes spaced exactly for the Technicardan's monorail?

I am so frustrated with my gear, I just want to start using it. Thanks!!

I would say that you would be doing yourself a disservice if you didn't put
some effort into using the equipment that you currently have before you start
trying to add new elements to your kit. As was mentioned before, 150 and 90
are great focal lengths for landscape work and the lenses that you have are of
good quality.
Try setting some "self-assignments" for yourself and then executing them.
Perhaps you might try looking at some literature on large format and draw some
inspiration and technical help from them. (I always suggest the Ansel Adams
"Examples" book as a good mix of technical details and aesthetic
consideration.)
Frankly, portraiture with LF can be really clumsy and not very
satisfying...it's my observation that most of the LF photographers that I know
have a Medium Format SLR system that they fall back on for portraiture.


argon

"Nicholas J. Coscoros" wrote in message F.Berkeley.EDU...
Hello all.

I have a Linhof technikardan 45 (not s) that I bought used last summer and
I am still trying to put my kit together. So FRUSTRATING.

I have two lenses in my kit, a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90 f/6.8 in Prontor
01 and a Linhof Symmar-S 150 f/5.6.

My initial desire is to start with landscapes, then move to portraits.
Neither of the two lenses I have really fits the bill. I have the option
of getting a 120 Super-Symmar HM f/5.6 or an Apo-Symmar 180 f/5.6. Can
anyone give me some advice? The Stroebel book (6th ed.) says that the
Super-Symmar HM is optimized for infinity focus (I guess so is the
Apo-Symmar, though).

Why are the 90, 150, and 210 focal lengths considered to be the three
standards for 4X5? I mean, the 210 isn't even long enough for a decent
head & shoulders portrait.


OK, tripods. I went in to the local Manfrotto rep aiming for a 475 and
ended up getting a 028, which is entirely the wrong tripod for open air
shooting. Any thoughts on the 475?


My biggest problem is the head. I realize ball heads are extremely stable
(if high-quality) but aren't 3-D heads more precise in their movements? Is
there a ballhead out there that will take a quick-release plate with 2
3/8"holes spaced exactly for the Technicardan's monorail?

I am so frustrated with my gear, I just want to start using it. Thanks!!

180 is perfectly fine for portraits.
What you have is a lot more cropping room.
Remember that your negs are so big and provide so much information
that they'll be sharp all the way. So what if you crop to a 3"x4" area?
You've still got 2-3x the area of a blad and with the lens you've got
they'll still be extremely sharp pics.

rant on
Unfortunately many people try too hard to fill the frame.
With big negs, like the square of a blad or TLR, you've got pleanty of
room to crop. Make use of it. Enjoy the fine results.
rant off

150mm or 180mm might also be fine landscape lenses. Often a little compression
is good, bringing things together.
Don't infer "wide angle" as implicit with "landscape".

What is chosen by many as a lens selection may not be for you.
Are you happy with what you got? Good.
If not, why did you buy it in the first place?

Now go SHOOT something and let us see the results!

Collin

"Argon3" wrote

Frankly, portraiture with LF can be really clumsy and not very
satisfying...

I have done quite a bit of it and never noticed any problem except
the extreme boredom of the subject. Tell them it will be tedious
and keep up a bit of a patter. I have taken environmental portraits
by available light and they come out fine, though take a few dupes
in case the subject moves during the 4-second exposure.

All formal portraiture before the mid 50's was large format.

And the Playboy magazine centerfold is done with an 11x14
Deardorf.

I will admit that a Hassy is a far more convenient and can
catch fleeting expressions.

On the subject of FL for portraits: I find long lenses and large
format don't mix, don't know why, but they don't. I think nothing
of taking a portrait with a 200 on a 35mm camera, but the idea of
using a 600mm on a 4x5 is absurd.

I have a 300 and I find it takes me too far from the subject.
I like a 210 and for environmental work it is a 150. The 150
lens, for some reason, doesn't give the same big-nose effect
as it does with a 50mm lens on a '35, it may be that with 4x5
you are shooting from above at a seated subject and so the nose
doesn't have a chance to get bulbous.

For the original poster with the Linhof/Grandagon/Symmar/Manfroto
outfit. I agree - the system you have is a disaster. You should
sell it on ebay, I don't know that you will get more than a $100
or so, given the sort of equipment it is. Don't even bother
trying to take any pictures with it: they won't come out.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

In article
keley.EDU,
"Nicholas J. Coscoros" wrote:

My biggest problem is the head. I realize ball heads are extremely stable
(if high-quality) but aren't 3-D heads more precise in their movements?

If you want absolute precision, get a geared head. With LF, many folks
get the camera level with the ball head and use the pan feature to get
it pointed where they want, then use camera movements for the precise
stuff. Really Right has a nice little article on ball heads:
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/tutorials/qr/index.html

Is
there a ballhead out there that will take a quick-release plate with 2
3/8"holes spaced exactly for the Technicardan's monorail?

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/body...4x5/index.html

I got their plate for my Tachihara and it works great. I use it on a
Kirk BH-3 head.

You'll need a head that takes the Arca-Swiss style QR plates, but those
come from many sources: Arca-Swiss, Fobo, Kirk, Really Right Stuff,
Acratech, and others.

Drew

P.S. Beat Cal!

--
Drew W. Saunders

dru (at) stanford (dot) eee dee you

In article ,
Drew Saunders wrote:

You'll need a head that takes the Arca-Swiss

All quick releases and quick mounting systems, regardless of make or
type, can be used on any ball, pan, levelling or geared head. It just
depends on which QR or quick mounting system you buy.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.

Nicholas J. Coscoros wrote:

Hello all.

I have a Linhof technikardan 45 (not s) that I bought used last summer and
I am still trying to put my kit together. So FRUSTRATING.

I have two lenses in my kit, a Rodenstock Grandagon-N 90 f/6.8 in Prontor
01 and a Linhof Symmar-S 150 f/5.6.

My initial desire is to start with landscapes, then move to portraits.
Neither of the two lenses I have really fits the bill.

Those are better than the landscape lenses I own or at least as good.


Why are the 90, 150, and 210 focal lengths considered to be the three
standards for 4X5? I mean, the 210 isn't even long enough for a decent
head & shoulders portrait.

Have you tried it? 210 isn't bad for head and shoulders, it is too short for
a head shot though.


I am so frustrated with my gear, I just want to start using it. Thanks!!

Paralyzation from overanalazation. Go burn some film with what you got.

--

Stacey