Is a Burke and James Monorail junk?
Fishhead
are they useable??? and worth the $$$
------------------------------------------------------------
gregarpp icqmail.com for reply
Nicholas O. Lindan
>
> 4X5 format with red bellows??
>
> are they useable??? and worth the $$$
>
Depends on what the $$ are, doesn't it?
--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio noli...@ix.netcom.com
Technical Management Consulting & Engineering Services:
New Product Development; Electrical Engineering;
Software, System and Circuit Design. Oh, & Photography
Francis A. Miniter
As Nichol Linden said, it depends on the dollars. I have two B&Js. One
is a 4x5 and the other is a 5x7. They are bulky (but that is somewhat
unavoidable with large format), they lack modern "features" and if such
things are important to you, don't get one. The real weak link in them
for most people is the mechanism for locking into position. It works,
but lacks the rigidity that I would like it to have. You cannot walk
off with the camera on tripod and expect the attachment between the
monorail and the tripod to stay locked in position. It will move.
What these cameras do give you are reasonably well made view cameras
with a full range of movements and easily rotated ground glass. If you
are on a budget, it is either B&J or Calumet. The 4x4 opening on the
front standard of the 4x5 will take any lens up to about 20 inches
f/6.3, and that is about as much extension as you will get out of the
bellows and the Grover monorail. On the other hand, with a fabric
bellows, I can crunch down to 75 mm on the 4x5. With the red bellows on
the 5x7, I think I can get down to 90 mm, 105 for sure. The 5x5 opening
on the 5x7 is large enough to take a small Packard shutter. I suppose
this is really my only complaint. I would like to be able to mount a
decent sized Packard shutter.
Francis A. Miniter
Fishhead
Would you go for the calumet if the prices were the same?
Or should I stick with my Speed Graphic :)
>===== Original Message From min...@attglobal.net =====
Richard Davis
"Fishhead" <fishh...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3AF4...@MailAndNews.com...
> 4X5 format with red bellows??
>
> are they useable??? and worth the $$$
When you go to buy a monorail, you need to get out your calibrated
wobblometer. This is a delicate device that looks something like a small
ballpeen hammer. You use it to pound on the front standard to see how much
it wobbles when you hit it. On a scale of 1 to 10, with a locked down
Linhof Kardan GT a 9 (almost no wobble), and a 1926 Seneca a 1 (wobbles even
when you don't hit it), a Burke and James rates about minus 2 (IMHO). It
wobbles when you THINK about hitting it.
Francis A. Miniter
to say that there may be more work on part involved. But at this point
it is my work over my dollars.
Francis A. Miniter
Francis A. Miniter
Fishhead wrote:
> How would this camera compare to an old calumet in the same condition?
The Calumet is probably steadier, I think.
>
>
> Would you go for the calumet if the prices were the same?
Yes
>
>
> Or should I stick with my Speed Graphic :)
Different Animal. The bellows extension on the Speed Graphic does not
allow for lenses longer than 10 inches (12 inches if infinity is all you
care about). Nor are the movements anywhere near as flexible: no rear
movements at all, no front swings. If you want the flexibility of
movements, the Speed Graphic is not the camera. If all you want is a
large format camera that you can carry around like a medium format
camera for convenience, the Speed Graphic is a really nice one, with the
added cache of the glamour of press cameras through the decades.
Francis A. Miniter
Joseph O'Neil
<fishh...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
>4X5 format with red bellows??
>are they useable??? and worth the $$$
They also go under the Kodak and the Calumet name, if memory
serves me correctly.
I've got one. Built like a tanks, heavy as two tanks, but it
works just fine. Someday I'll get that brand new Sinar, but untill
then, as a general purpose workhorse, they are just fine.
So depends what you are looking for. other brands are more
elegant, seem to look up tighter, and have finer movements, but if you
need a basic camera on a budget, theya re just fine. In fact the oen
I have was used by a pro-studio for commercial advertising photography
for years before I bought it. There are possibly thousands of
toasters and blenders out there who had their 15 minutes of fame in
catalogs thanks to this camera.
:)
joe
Gary Beasley
All that said I wish I could find a buyer for mine. I have a 5x7 with
a bunch of extra stuff but it was too heavy and hard to use for the
field work I wanted to do. Looks nice sitting on the shelf though :-)
Fishhead
>>> Fishhead wrote:
>>>
>>> 4X5 format with red bellows??
>>>
>>> are they useable??? and worth the $$$
>>>
>>>
>>>
Fishhead
thanks!!!
>===== Original Message From beasl...@mindspring.com (Gary Beasley) =====
>On Fri, 04 May 2001 11:49:35 GMT, jon...@multiboard.com (Joseph
>O'Neil) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 3 May 2001 21:38:51 -0400, Fishhead
>><fishh...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
>>
>>>4X5 format with red bellows??
>>>are they useable??? and worth the $$$
>>
>> They also go under the Kodak and the Calumet name, if memory
>>serves me correctly.
>> I've got one. Built like a tanks, heavy as two tanks, but it
>>works just fine. Someday I'll get that brand new Sinar, but untill
>>then, as a general purpose workhorse, they are just fine.
>> So depends what you are looking for. other brands are more
>>elegant, seem to look up tighter, and have finer movements, but if you
>>need a basic camera on a budget, theya re just fine. In fact the oen
>>I have was used by a pro-studio for commercial advertising photography
>>for years before I bought it. There are possibly thousands of
>>toasters and blenders out there who had their 15 minutes of fame in
>>catalogs thanks to this camera.
>>:)
>>
>>joe
>>
>>
>>http://www.oneilphoto.on.ca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>All that said I wish I could find a buyer for mine. I have a 5x7 with
>a bunch of extra stuff but it was too heavy and hard to use for the
>field work I wanted to do. Looks nice sitting on the shelf though :-)
------------------------------------------------------------
gregarpp icqmail.com for reply
Richard Knoppow
>To throw a curve ball how about a graphic I or II vs the calumet..
>
>
>
Previous thread snipped...
The Graphic View is a very usable camera, well built, but has a
shorter bellows draw than the Calumet camera. The Grphic View II has
center tilts rather than base tilts. They do not have the continuously
revolving back of the Calumet camera, sometimes helpful in studio
work, but not essential.
The Graphic is a little smaller and lighter than the Calumet.
A note. The Calumet CC-400 started out as the Kodak 4x5 Master View.
There is little difference between them. The design available under
other names.
The Burke & James may NOT be this camera. B&J built monorail cameras
under the Grover name for decades. These are good cameras with full
movements but of a rather different design.
The red bellows makes me think the camera being asked about is one
of these rather than some version of the Kodak/Calumet camera.
As has been said monorail cameras are excellent for studio work but
can be inconvenient for field work because they don't fold as
compactly. Its possible to remove the rail on some cameras pretty
easily. When done the camera folds up as compactly as a flat bed.
I believe there are some illustratons of Graphic View cameras on the
Graflex site at http://www.graflex.org
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dick...@ix.netcom.com
Fishhead
I just need to find someone to buy my speed graphic...
>===== Original Message From dick...@ix.netcom.com =====
------------------------------------------------------------
gregarpp icqmail.com for reply
Christopher Bush
Calumet. The main reason is the dedicated tripod head that I could never
get to fully lock in place if I were pointing the camera up or down. I
personally would go for the Calumet. Accessories are easy to find and the
operation, while not being that of a Sinar or whatever, is pretty friendly.
I also like the long rail you can get. Better than 1:1 with my 203 Ektar!
--
Christopher Bush
http://www.christopherbush.com
"Fishhead" <fishh...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B04...@MailAndNews.com...
Fishhead
I might consider that.
How did you have the camera mounted to a tripod?
Did you use a tripod without a head on it?
Is your 203mm mounted in a graphlex shutter?
I have one also that I want to get a lens board for. What is the copal size
of
the shutter? #1?
thanks
>===== Original Message From "Christopher Bush" <cb...@dialupnet.com> =====
Christopher Bush
If I put in on my Tiltall and used the Tiltall head with the Graphic head
tightened as far as I possibly could, I suppose it worked. I did find a
tripod collar someone had made to clamp the rail directly to a tripod and
that saved me.
My 203 is in a Kodak Supermatic shutter (size #0), not a Graphlex. Main
problem is no flash sync. Since I'm doing more studio work now, I end up
using my 10" Caltar instead.
I gotta say the red bellows are pretty darn cool.
--
Christopher Bush
http://www.christopherbush.com
"Fishhead" <fishh...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B05...@MailAndNews.com...