From: Eric Stevens <>
Subject: Re: Now all I need is a 4x5 digital back.
Full headers:
From: Eric Stevens <>
Subject: Re: Now all I need is a 4x5 digital back.
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <p6s6dh$q09$>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 34
Organization: Forte -
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2018 10:45:33 +1300
X-Received-Bytes: 2246
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1857569555
Print Article
Forward Article
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 12:12:18 -0500, Ken Hart<>

>On 02/23/2018 07:12 PM, RichA wrote:
>> On Friday, 23 February 2018 16:04:47 UTC-5, Eric Stevens  wrote:
>>> Chroma camera
>>> Apologies for no TinyURL. That's a decision made by Firefox.  :-(
>>> -- 
>>> Regards,
>>> Eric Stevens
>> The weight is good, but with the planet awash in used 4x5 gear, buying a new one really isn't
needed, unless you just happen to need that particular one.  What I never figured out is why didn't
they ever invent a spring-back loaded multiple-shot 4x5 with a drop-box for finished shots just
below the back?  Would save a lot of tedium.  But maybe someone did develop something like that way
back when and I just didn't see it?
>It's been many, many years ago, but I recall using a six exposure 4x5 
>holder. You loaded six sheets of 4x5 film into six thin metal holders, 
>then loaded them into the pack. After shooting one exposure, you did a 
>push-pull routine that pushed the exposure holder onto the back of the 
>stack, and put a fresh holder in front.

I had one of those on my last Graflex. I eventually gave it up when I
became unable to stop light leaks in the leather bag on the side. 

Now I'm interested (seriously?) in digital backs.


Eric Stevens