audidudi Posted May 19, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted May 19, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Despite my efforts to convince myself otherwise, the results I'm achieving with it used as a "digital back" for my view camera (the original reason I bought it) aren't as good as I'd hoped and using a 2.5" LCD as a "ground glass" is proving far less satisfying than I'd expected. Also, the truth is that I'm happy enough with my LC1 for what little handheld shooting I do (relax, dugby!) plus I also have an LX1 for my briefcase and a CLux-1 for my pocket, and really, how many freakin' digital cameras do I need, anyway? Â Including the L1, the three Contax N-series lenses I bought for it, the Voigtlander 12mm lens, and the custom adapter I had machined so I can mount the L1 body to my Toyo, but not including the cost of the electronic adapters necessary to make the Contax lenses totally functional apart from a Contax body (I'm still working on this part), I'm already $5,200 into the project. For $6,495 (and less if I can find a good used one), I can buy a Betterlight 4000 4x5 scanning back that will produce larger, higher-resolution files than the L1, work on my Toyo as it comes out of the box, and allow me to use all of the view camera glass I already own. Â Yes, it's been a slippery slope and I did get carried away a bit with the Contax lenses, but the opportunity presented itself and I can probably sell them for about what I paid for them. The custom L1->Toyo adapter is obviously a write-off and I'll take a few hundred dollar hit on selling the L1, but I can't see any reason to hold onto it just for the sake of having a DSLR around. Hmm... Â Oh, well. I need to think about this a bit more but I suspect I've just proved once again that when you cut corners and try to save money in the short run, it almost always ends up costing you more in the long run... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 19, 2007 Posted May 19, 2007 Hi audidudi, Take a look here I think I may sell my L1.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
spylaw4 Posted May 19, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted May 19, 2007 Sorry to hear this Jeffrey! I can however understand your reasoning should you decide to proceed. You have been a mine of information on the L1 for which much thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted May 19, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted May 19, 2007 ...................... maybe you need 'The Norton' to help:rolleyes: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugby Posted May 20, 2007 Share #4 Â Posted May 20, 2007 Hi Jeffery, i've been wanting to ask what is your view camera project all about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
audidudi Posted May 20, 2007 Author Share #5  Posted May 20, 2007 Hi Jeffery, i've been wanting to ask what is your view camera project all about? Since you asked...  My primary subject matter is architecture, although not in the "pretty building" sense but more of an urban decay sense. Because my format of choice is square (although I'm growing to like 4:3 ... still can't stand 3:2) and I like to maintain a proper perspective on buildings (keep doorways and windows rectangular instead of trapezoidal, have rows of bricks run parallel, etc.), I often have to use movements to crop my images in camera and/or correct perspective, hence my use of a view camera.  I also like large prints, so I shoot primarily with an 8x10, although because the Toyo I use is modular, I also have the necessary bits to assemble 4x5 and 2x3 versions as well. Although there's nothing quite like seeing an 8x10 piece of film on a light table, there's also nothing quite like $13 per image of film-and-processing costs to make you very cautious about what it is that you shoot! I have six 8x10 film holders and they hold 12 pieces of film, which means a typical outing with my 8x10 costs me roughly $175 for film-and-processing when you include the cost of the gas to run the film to and from the lab (Yes, my Audi S4 is a bit of a hog in that respect).  So, when I learned about the L1 and its "live view" feature last year, I thought to myself "Here's a way for me to shoot 'practice' images at no cost. I can set up my Toyo with the L1 on the back, compose and shoot an image, examine it more in more detail on my Epson P-2000, and if I like what I see, I can then swap the 4x5 standard with the L1 attached for the 8x10 rear standard, and expose a piece of film. This should allow me to shoot more freely and experiment a bit without breaking the bank."  Well, one thing lead to another and it wasn't long before I found myself spoiled by being able to review, process, and print my images within a few hours of shooting them, and at no additional cost. No more 30-minute drives to and from the lab, no $60 drumscans and the two-week turnaround because I have to mail them off to another state to avoid paying $90/scan locally, etc. Although I've been scanning film and printing digitally for a decade, shooting digital was a liberation for me and as a result, I decided that in order to get the best possible quality out of my L1 images, I needed to be using higher-resolution lenses than the ones I was using on my view camera, since the enlargement factor with the L1 is so much greater than it is with an 8x10, hence my purchase of the Contax zoom lenses, which were the highest quality lenses I could find with a flange-to-focal plane distance that would leave enough for them to be used with my view camera setup.  The only problem is their apertures are electronically controlled but there's a guy in Canada who has cracked the code, so to speak, and is able to adapt them to work on Canon dSLRs. I was able to convince him to work with me to create an external control box that would make it possible for me to control the aperture of the Contax lenses separate and apart from them being mounted on a camera, but -- of course -- due to differences in firmware among the lenses, one box wouldn't work with all three, which will just further increase the cost and hassle of working with them. Add to that the widest angle lens I have available is the 17mm end of the 17-35 zoom -- 34mm in 35mm terms -- whereas my favorite on the 8x10 is 210mm, which works out to ~30mm, and noticeably wider than 34mm. Also, the fact that the Contax lenses, although very, very good compared to other 35mm-format lenses in similar focal lengths, naturally have much more geometric distortion than do non-retrofocus lenses in the 159 to 300mm focal lengths I normally use with my 8x10, is problematic when you're shooting buildings in the sort of straight-on style I prefer.  And this is when I began to realize my original goal of "free" practice images has been lost over the past few months. As much as I like the quality of the L1's images, coming from 600MB drumscans from 8x10 pieces of film, the 7.5MP images are a bit lacking in detail for my tastes. Also, the largest I can print them and still be happy with their quality seems to be 12x12, which is enough smaller than the 16x16s and 20x20s that used to be my "small" prints to be somewhat disappointing to me.  So, I've been looking around at digital backs, but the one-shot backs with the degree of quality and file size I need (want) cost more than I want to spend, even used. I'm not so serious about photography that I'm prepared to spend $12k and up for a digital back that will be outdated in a few years and continue depreciating the whole time. I wouldn't flinch at spending $25k on a back if I knew I could sell it for $20k three years down the road, but I'm not willing to take the $5k/year (or more!) depreciation hit that's the norm right now. I raced cars for a few years way back when and I'm no longer interested in hobbies that require siginificant capital investment with minimal returns, thank you (and I've also done the gallery thing with my images and found it's more trouble than it's worth, at least for my less than universally adored choice of subject matter.)  The less expensive option to the one-shot digital backs are scanning backs and since I don't shoot images of things that move, I think I can get away with 90-second exposures in return for 129MB images and a signifcant cost savings compared to a one-shot back. Because they also use a larger format (72mm x 96mm), I can also go back to using the view camera lenses I already own, which is a further savings...  Anyway, that's my thinking at this point. The L1 has been fun but I'm feeling frustrated at not being to shoot the way I've grown used to doing over the years. And since a hobby is supposed to be all about fun, I think it's time to think about getting back on track here ... make sense?  (In case you're curious, I've attached a photo of the view camera setup I've been using ... the L1 isn't attached in this photo, but you can see where it goes. As you can see, the rear of the lensboard on the front standard can actually pass through the plane of the rear standard -- there are very, very few view cameras on which this is possible and even with the Toyo, it's only possible by mixing and matching bits in ways Toyo never intended -- and this what made it possible for me to use 35-mm format lenses on this camera with the L1 back. I've also attached a photo of the mini-gallery in my office to give you an idea of what I like to shoot ... none of these images could be duplicated with a camera in which the image and film planes are fixed.) Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/24581-i-think-i-may-sell-my-l1/?do=findComment&comment=260483'>More sharing options...
dugby Posted May 21, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted May 21, 2007 Interesting dilemma...... Is the S4 a turbo-4 or the 4.2L V8 ? Â My Celica GT4 Rallye (2L Turbo AWD) uses more fuel than my Lexus V8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
audidudi Posted May 21, 2007 Author Share #7  Posted May 21, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Interesting dilemma...... Is the S4 a turbo-4 or the 4.2L V8 ? Neither ... it's the twin-turbo 2.7L V6 and mine is one of the last 20 or so that Audi made before it moved on to the new chassis style with the 4.2L V8. It's been chipped, of course, and naturally, it uses more fuel than even my (modified, 240hp) A4 1.8L turbo play/track car. I do have a 3.6L Audi V8 engine that I'm in the process of swapping into my '85 Audi UrQ and plan to eventually install a pair of turbos it, so I'm not too concerned about fuel mileage with that particular setup. Here in Arizona, if you like to tinker with cars, AWD and turbos are the secret to having fun and still passing emissions inspections since full-time AWD cars can only be tested at idle and pretty much any car with modern fuel injection that's tuned properly will pass an idle test... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/24581-i-think-i-may-sell-my-l1/?do=findComment&comment=260774'>More sharing options...
dugby Posted May 21, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted May 21, 2007 Very nice..... Â I have my eye on a RS6 TT 4.2L v8 , but in Australia they are still selling too high, for a 2004 model......But what a sleeper it is........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
audidudi Posted May 21, 2007 Author Share #9 Â Posted May 21, 2007 I have my eye on a RS6 TT 4.2L v8 , but in Australia they are still selling too high, for a 2004 model......But what a sleeper it is........ I saw one on my way to work this past Friday (in silver ... ugh) but they're holding their value too well for my budget and besides, I won't own or drive a car with an automatic transmission, which is the only way they were sold here in the US. Ditto for the S8, which I'd otherwise consider as well. My next car will probably be a newer S4 or possibly an A6 4.2L, but I'm in no hurry to replace my present one and if I buy myself a scanning back, it might be a while longer still... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.