Did you not see this page on the KBC website, Chuck?
http://www.canhamcameras.com/kodakfilm.html
All sizes are 'available' in TriX, 400NC, Ektar and TMax emulsions. No
Kodachrome, dammit.
I will leave you to find the awful details - price, minimum order, lead
times....
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 08 September 2010 11:25
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] Feeding the rumor mill
I'd never heard of KB Canham cameras before your post. So I looked and was
surprised to see some unusual and very large sizes such as: 4x10, 7x17, 8x20
and 12x20. Those are inches and not centimeters. Where does one buy film
for such things?
Chuck Norcutt
Jeff Keller wrote:
> Hi Chuck,
> Yes Keith Canham has a really spiffy looking 6x17 back for the MQC57
> http://www.canhamcameras.com/Roll%20film%20back.html
>
> The back and the extra bellows length were the main reasons to prefer
> the
> 5x7 to the 4x5. I bought the back used but I haven't used it myself yet.
>
> Jeff Keller
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 3:03 PM
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OM] Feeding the rumor mill
>
> Is your 5x7 also used as a 6x17 with roll film?
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> Jeff Keller wrote:
>> Everyone has their own rough limit for what they expect from a
>> camera. For me the four thirds limit is roughly 8x10 for landscape.
>> The Canon 5D
> should
>> be good to about 16x20 but I haven't printed anything from it that
>> large yet. Film for me: 35mm +> 8x12 and 6x7 => 16x20. The four
>> thirds bag feels bigger and heavier than an OM bag, the 5Dii bag
>> feels bigger and heavier than a Mamiya 7ii bag. Therefore digital is
bigger and heavier.
>>
>> A monster that passed in the dark was when I said 20x28 from my
>> Canham
>> (MQC57) in response to Chuck's monster I was referring to an
>> enlargement from 5x7 Velvia. (a slightly larger version of
>> http://www.largeformatphotography.info/canham/canhamdlc.html )
>>
>> Jeff Keller
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 10:16 AM
>> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
>> Subject: Re: [OM] Feeding the rumor mill
>>
>> I have no difficulty calling it the "monster" since the Canon
>> backpack with 5D, 3 lenses, flash and bracket, chargers, batteries,
>> cables, light meter, manuals, etc, etc weighs 17 pounds. 21 if you
>> add the 80-200 and its case. The A1 is a whole lot less but still a
>> bit bulky at times. I really do need a pocket camera. I haven't had
>> one since I stopped using the Stylus Epic. Even that's a bit large for a
pocket camera of today.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> Joel Wilcox wrote:
>>> My mistake. I had thought when you were referring to the "monster"
>>> you meant the E-3, whereas it is clear you meant the 5D. Wrong
>>> monster! Sorry.
>>>
>>> Joel W.
>>>
>>>>> <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> Well, use the E410 for the joy of holding. But get the monster
>>>>>> out
>> when
>>>>>> you want those 16x20s.
>>>>> Chuck,
>>>>> On the basis of what do you say this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Joel W.
>>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|