Digital BW, The Print

qdfb writes:
 > I have used Betterlight's immediate ancestor, the Dicomed Field Pro, 
 > in the field.  These units are still supported by Mike Collette and 
 > colleagues at Betterlight.  The Field Pro's Betterlight equivalent is 
 > the 6000.
 > [...]

Stephen Johnson (www.sjphoto.com) uses the Better Light Digital backs
for all of his landscape work (and the Dicomed before that).  He's a
friend of mine, and I've assisted while he's been shooting, so I have
some first-and-a-half hand experience with them.  What are your
questions?

<begin shameless plug for a friend w/ whom I have no financial connection>

If you're considering buying a back, you might look into buying it
through Steve, he provides a great deal more user support and hand
holding than you get directly from Mike et al.  He also has a couple
of field workshops coming up where you'd get a lot of first hand
attention.  Tell him that I sent you and that he owes me a beer....

</begin shameless plug for a friend w/ whom I have no financial connection>

 > Cons are
 > 
 > - heavy unit to lug around, with battery pack and laptop

The newer Better Light processor units are about half the size, and
Mike has a source for a smaller, lighter battery that lasts longer.
Costs more though....

 > - the slightest movement of the subject during the longish exposures 
 > ruins the shot

Depends on your definition of "ruins".  The way that Steve feels about
some of the camera artifacts mirrors the way that many people feel
about the fog that moving water becomes on a longer film exposure
(just another type of artifact, after all).  I'm not always convinced,
but sometimes it does make for a nice image.

 > - not many shots from one battery charge, long exposures

True enough.  Steve has some photocells that he spreads out in the sun
when he's shooting to slow the drain.

g.