Best rollfilmholder 6x12?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
I want to buy a rollfilmholder6x12 for my Toyo field AII. But I don`t know the use and quality of the different models. I work outside, and in winterconditions, so the holder must be easy to use. Can anybody help me? I live in Europe, Where can I do the best buy?
-- Lars Westvig (Lars.Westvig@nl.telia.no), October 31, 1998
The "Best" has either Sinar or Linhof engraved on the back. Are these the best for you is another question.
. The most straight forward to use is the Horseman 6x12 (US$850) and the optical quality is virtually the same. The difference being that with the Sinar Vario roll film holder you can use 120 or 220 film. With the Horseman 6x12 you can only use 120 film. Since you can get twice as many shots on 220 (12 6x12 frames) as you can on 120 this may be a factor for you to consider. With the Horseman Roll Film Holder 612, you will need to remove your groundglass & frame and attach the holder to your camera via the Graflock sliders; same with the 6x12 Techno Rollex (US$2920). The Sinar Multiformat Rollfilm Back II (US$2620) fits into the camera like a standard sheet film holder between the groundglass frame and the camera body. It will also let you shoot all the different formats between 6x4.5cm and 6x12cm even on the same roll if desired. Additional film cartridges to fit the Sinar cost US$75. Preloaded cartridges will make your life easier, especially in the cold. On the otherhand, you could buy three Horseman 6x12 backs for the same price as one Sinar.
I have used both the Sinar and the Horseman. I like using the Sinar more, but with mittens or gloves. I dunno. Where I live the problem is too much sweat.
-- Ellis (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 31, 1998.
There is also another difference in 612 backs and cameras.
The Linhof Techno Rollex and Technorama 612 have an image area of 56 x 120mm Most of the others (Horseman, Sinar, Calumet, etc.) are 56 x 111 to 56 x 112 mm. This is quite a difference in negative area
-- bob salomon (email@example.com), November 01, 1998.
Lars, How about using 4x5 film in normal filmholders and cropping the final image to 6x12 cm? This gives you the flexibility to decide on any format, square, rectangular. vertical, horizontal and panoramic without the expense of purchasing a rather costly roll film holder. It also allows you to tailor your development to each individual negative. Believe me, no one is going to be able to tell the difference between an image shot on roll film or 4x5 and then cropped if the film is the same quality to begin with. Just think of how much 4x5 film you can buy for the price of a roll film holder! This works well for me, after all, its the final print that counts, not the amount of money you spent on equipment to make it! ;^D>
-- Doremus Scudder (ScudderLandreth@compuserve.com), November 01, 1998.
Gene Kennedy wrote an excellent article surveying rollfilm holders for LF cameras in the July/August 1998 issue of View Camera magazine.
-- Ellis (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 03, 1998.
Whateveer you do, don't buy a Calumet 6x12 back. It shreds film and has other problems. My studio partner had one and finally returned it. They no longer make them for a good reason, they are lemons!
-- Richard Stum (info@KinesisGear.com), November 06, 1998.
While the suggestion to use 4x5 film and crop is very good, there are some times when a rollfilm holder may be more convenient. I am considering a rollfilm holder for a photo expedition in the high Andes because it is very dusty and I think that it might be more convenient and make for easier loading. Also less to carry than many 4x5 film holders.
I also want to scan the film and Nikon makes a new 35mm-220 film high res film scanner (Super Coolscan 800 ED, about $3000) that could quickly pay for itself, as compared to scanning 4x5 film through a service bureau. I don't know if it is possible to crop down the 4x5 and then scan it in the Nikon. Worth checking though for you large format fans that want a high quality, high resolution (400 DPI) film scanner with defect correcting software (Digital ICE). My 35mm scans of Andes shots are mind blowing.
-- Neil Murray (email@example.com), August 12, 2001.
I have had considerable problem with 120 roll film flatness for 6x7 size. How bad is it gonna be at 6x12? Also, in the enlarger the stiffness of 4x5 sheet film cropped to 6x12 should be much better than roll film, unless you are using a two glass negative carrier.
-- Wilhelm (firstname.lastname@example.org), August 12, 2001.