Sinar P or P2?

What has the P2 got which the P does not? Is the P2 worth more than double
the price of the P (I know that the answer can only be a subjective one, but
please try to answer).

I know only one photographer who can justify either of them. The one who can
does intricate, exceedingly complex setups for photographing anthropological
specimens in a museum setting.

The Sinar Alpina is no longer made but can be found. It takes all the same
accessories - other than those that mount on the rail. I paid $125 for mine.
Perfect condition.

"nobody" wrote in message
...
What has the P2 got which the P does not? Is the P2 worth more than
double
the price of the P (I know that the answer can only be a subjective one,
but
please try to answer).

"nobody" wrote in message
...
What has the P2 got which the P does not? Is the P2 worth more than
double
the price of the P (I know that the answer can only be a subjective one,
but
please try to answer).


The P2 is a refined P design and the accessories including rails are
interchangeable. I do not use DB mounts or E-shutters, so I cannot speak to
that. Either camera will serve you well if it is in good condition. I looked
at both P & P2 and opted for a P2 after using an F2 for about a year. The
difference between these is day and night. The F@ is light and somewhat
flimsy and lends itself nicely to backpacks and field work/play. The choice
is a matter of what you can afford. Nice equipment is not a matter of
brains, only of means (money). I greatly prefer the P2 for its precision
adjustments, assymetrical tilts & swings, ease of focusing, and its robust
construction.- and, no, I did NOT buy it new. Sinar would likely send you
the P literature if you call them. I just got a used Zoom roll film holder
and they sent me the operating instructions without charge. Are you
contemplating using a digital back in the future? If so, ask Sinar if the P
will accept the P2 digital adapter.

Thanks, I have already found what that P is better than F2, at least for
focusing. I am using the F2 with a P rear standard, and trying to get
also a P or P2 front standard, it makes it easier for focusing and
transferring the movments to the front standard. I shall probably end up
with a full P or P2, having bought an F2 (all 2nd hand, of course). I would
like to do digital work, but the price of the digital back is really
prohibitive. Still, I mustn't grumble, I have a nice Flextight Precision II
Imacon scanner, which goes a treat with 4 x 5.
nobody


On 25/11/05 23:08, in article , "Mark
McGilvray" wrote:


"nobody" wrote in message
...
What has the P2 got which the P does not? Is the P2 worth more than
double
the price of the P (I know that the answer can only be a subjective one,
but
please try to answer).


The P2 is a refined P design and the accessories including rails are
interchangeable. I do not use DB mounts or E-shutters, so I cannot speak to
that. Either camera will serve you well if it is in good condition. I looked
at both P & P2 and opted for a P2 after using an F2 for about a year. The
difference between these is day and night. The F@ is light and somewhat
flimsy and lends itself nicely to backpacks and field work/play. The choice
is a matter of what you can afford. Nice equipment is not a matter of
brains, only of means (money). I greatly prefer the P2 for its precision
adjustments, assymetrical tilts & swings, ease of focusing, and its robust
construction.- and, no, I did NOT buy it new. Sinar would likely send you
the P literature if you call them. I just got a used Zoom roll film holder
and they sent me the operating instructions without charge. Are you
contemplating using a digital back in the future? If so, ask Sinar if the P
will accept the P2 digital adapter.

"nobody" wrote in message
...
Thanks, I have already found what that P is better than F2, at least for
focusing. I am using the F2 with a P rear standard, and trying to get
also a P or P2 front standard, it makes it easier for focusing and
transferring the movments to the front standard. I shall probably end up
with a full P or P2, having bought an F2 (all 2nd hand, of course). I
would
like to do digital work, but the price of the digital back is really
prohibitive. Still, I mustn't grumble, I have a nice Flextight Precision
II
Imacon scanner, which goes a treat with 4 x 5.
nobody


snip

I envy you your scanner. I'm using an Epson 4990 and Gretag Macbeth Eye one
Photo - the calibration toys cost more than the scanner, but it works
surprisingly well for proofing. I send my best take out for drum scans. You
are right about digital backs -$20-30k for a decent setup is prohibitive.
Add to that, the technology is changing so quickly that you have obsolete
equipment in short order. Likely you are aware of these sellers:

http://www.keh.com/hmpg/index.cfm

http://www.mpex.com/

I have gotten better pricing on used Sinar components from these vendors
than I was able to get on ebay recently. However, after Xmas look for lots
of equipment on ebay as "professional" photographers bite the bullet.

The scanner was a real bargain, and I took a risk, which paid off! Keep your
eyes open, it should be possible to get an Imacon 2nd hand of course for
less than half the price of the Canon DS (the 16MPs one)!
The loss of ICE is a problem, but I learned to live with it. It is also time
consuming, but, for me, it is all worth it.
Thanks for the sites.
nobody


On 28/11/05 19:10, in article , "Mark
McGilvray" wrote:


"nobody" wrote in message
...
Thanks, I have already found what that P is better than F2, at least for
focusing. I am using the F2 with a P rear standard, and trying to get
also a P or P2 front standard, it makes it easier for focusing and
transferring the movments to the front standard. I shall probably end up
with a full P or P2, having bought an F2 (all 2nd hand, of course). I
would
like to do digital work, but the price of the digital back is really
prohibitive. Still, I mustn't grumble, I have a nice Flextight Precision
II
Imacon scanner, which goes a treat with 4 x 5.
nobody


snip

I envy you your scanner. I'm using an Epson 4990 and Gretag Macbeth Eye one
Photo - the calibration toys cost more than the scanner, but it works
surprisingly well for proofing. I send my best take out for drum scans. You
are right about digital backs -$20-30k for a decent setup is prohibitive.
Add to that, the technology is changing so quickly that you have obsolete
equipment in short order. Likely you are aware of these sellers:

http://www.keh.com/hmpg/index.cfm

http://www.mpex.com/

I have gotten better pricing on used Sinar components from these vendors
than I was able to get on ebay recently. However, after Xmas look for lots
of equipment on ebay as "professional" photographers bite the bullet.

"Mark McGilvray" wrote
However, after Xmas look for lots
of equipment on ebay as "professional"
photographers bite the bullet.

I have noticed the first two weeks in April are a good
time to buy. The sellers usually want the $$ right quick,
though.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
Fstop timer - http://www.nolindan.com/da/fstop/index.htm