The world of DSLR technology was confusing enough, but I managed through, only to find the depth and dimension it provides doesn't match my ambitions as a photographer. I didn't realize the huge gaps in digital technology, quality and potential from body to body, and, over a period of 2 years invested in at least six camera bodies and plenty of lens. It was a great, but steep learning path. I have no regrets, but want to move ahead.

I'm going to invest in Medium format equipment, and realize doing this will require (some) rethinking / retooling of my studio equipment.

After some consideration I am considering a H3D11-31 or 39. A big step for a beginner.

I want to start on solid ground - ground upon which I can continue building not only my studio, but moreover, my photographic skills.

I'm looking for anyone willing to offer basic, overall guidelines / suggestions / advice that I can follow, from camera to print.

In advance,
Thanks,
DS

What are your ambitions as a photographer exactly? Pardon my thinking, but having been serious about photography since the age of 11. I sold my first photograph aged 14 and having spent two years working professionally before opting for another career path 7 years ago, I have never needed anything more than 35mm film. (6mp equiv - for the sake of argument). This would provide for enlargement up to 12x16 using careful technique and good glass. There were many times when I would rather have used MF but couldn't afford it.

Last week, I was printing some shots for my portfolio. They were shot with a 30D, 85mm 1.8 @ ISO 800. They printed at 13x19 quite happily and if I had a 17" printer, I'm sure I could have gone 17x24 without problem.

What is it that you think 30-40mp is going to give you that the 25mp of a Sony A900 will not? How big are you printing? Can you post examples of w photo where you think the equipment is the limiting factor?

Try the MFDB forum up a couple from this one. Can I ask why you feel the need to go MFDB?

If you are doing personal/art type work and not anything commercial or that requires speed and large numbers of shots, then you might also consider ignoring the whole thing and just straight to large format.

Enormous difference. Words can't really describe how much quality you can get for the money versus MF digital if you are willing to put up with the slower pace and bigger equipment. A typical piece of 4x5 negative film costs... well, you'd need thousands and thousands of shots to get to the price of a good DB.

The work is all personal. I have no intentions of working commercially, with the exception of specific commissions that interest me from an aesthetic point of view.
Print size in square formats is best, for what I'm doing, at a minimum of 36" square, and up to 72". Horizontal and vertical should only be limited by current, studio size technology.

My goals are simple - to exploit digital photographic technology as a tool, and only a tool, to express the soul of subject matter. I am resisting the temptation to become hypnotized by the technology itself - not an easy task.

Photography, for me, is all about mining the depth of emotion available in the world around me, and communicating it back to the world through photographic images.

For me, dslr cmos technology is incapable of capturing, and communicating the details I see, and feel. This is a purely personal experience.

I am aware of, and have deep respect for incredibly beautiful, skillfully composed and crafted dslr based images. Many are so beautiful I would never attempt to produce them myself - it's a different world - my genius/interests lies elsewhere, as it does for each of us.

Large Format may hold interest one day. However, there's another twist - I am a long-distance adventure-touring motorcyclist. My equipment has to be fitted to carry on two wheels.

I'm only a beginner, but I move fast! www.davidshatzman.com

It is pretty clear from your first post, you've given this more than cursory thought, and the expenditure itself is not a major concern to you.

That said, MF digital is a good way to go for making large prints from direct capture. The pitfall is going to be learning a good digital workflow -- without that, you will be dead in the water before starting...

So you have two main things and a sub-item to consider when choosing an MF digital system: the camera system, and the digital back system, and then software(s) required to utilize said digital back. Also, you'll need a good processing computer since the files are large, and you'll probably want a good desktop with big monitors for editing in your studio, and a good laptop to quick-edit and/or tether to while on the road or on location.

Cameras: Any of the current major brands are capable of generating stunning images. Some have a broader selection of lenses to choose from, others have more sophisticated body controls, some are leaf-shutter systems, others are focal plane shutters, some excel inside a studio environment and some excel in outdoor environments --- and essentially none of them do it all best, so it is an exercise in choosing a set of tradeoffs that best integrates to YOUR shooting style and subject matter

Backs: again, any of the current popular brands are capable of generating stunning images -- the best in each brand, say 30MP and up, nearly equal 4x5 film in detail captured and exceed it in color accuracy and dynamic range. (And you'll want at least 30MP to regularly enlarge to 36"...) The biggest differences in the backs are the control button UI's and the software(s) used to convert the raw file to your final working image. (Software is pluralized because some manufacturers require multiple pieces of software be employed to fully convert a raw file into a standard working file format.) After that, the differences between backs are more subtle, such as color palette or smoothness or noise renderings, and not really significant to the final product, but clearly personal preferences may dictate preference for one over the other.

Dealer: With MF digital, having a quality dealer support is very beneficial, so I'd keep that one on your short list of choice decisions too.

Good luck, and keep us posted on your progress,

http://www.fotomancamera.com/product_list.asp?id=335
If you don't need tilt/shift capabilities, you can get large format models that are quite light. $800/2.4 lbs. The only issue would be a bag or case to cushion it from the myriad of vibrations a motorcycle would create. But any camera would suffer a bit here I think... Their 6x9 camera is also interesting as it's basically a large format camera that uses medium format film.

http://www.fotomancamera.com/product_list.asp?id=338
That's actually almost tiny. A small metal 1.37lb "brick".

But, IMO, you really need the ability to move the image around on the film.
http://www.toyoview.com/LargeFrmtTech/lgformat.html
They kind of explain it here - it seems cumbersome at first to move the lens in all 6 axis, but you can get perfect results almost every time. If you have enough time to compose the shot, that is. 5+ minutes per shot isn't uncommon unpacking/setup/compose/take down time. Scenery fans, though, often spend this much time anyways getting a shot "right", so it's not a huge deal to many people. Then again, 95% of people don't need a system with massive movement. There are some interesting folding and ultra-compact designs out there. Large format is experiencing a small resurgence lately.

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/toho.htm
This is one of the smaller monorail systems made. What's nice is that it comes apart. This means that vibration in transit isn't as huge of a concern, since the moving parts and the main body are separated in transit. Good review, IMO - he uses it for backpacking and fits it all in one padded backpack.

http://www.toyoview.com/Products/45CF/45CF.html
Other manufacturers also do this or their cameras fold up into a small brick.

http://www.shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews...t/1102sb_first/
A quick review on it.

One last thing - film is great for backpacking or long trips like you plan to do because there are no batteries or other issues.

Jack,

Over the weekend I met with a Hassablad rep and spent time exploring a H3D11-50. Also, looking at various images printed at tremendous sizes. Both the H3 and images were impressive. I used the camera in and out of his office, then processed the images in Hasselblads Phocus software and subsequently in CS4. We used a MAC desktop with, average sized dual monitors ( Lacie for image / HP for tools ). I didn't ask about the computing capacity of the machine. Most of the equipment looked up to date, but not necessarily fresh from the box. I'd say his set-up was average.

The camera operation was straightforward and although different in body design technically familiar. The biggest challenge handling the camera are the overall dimensions and weight. Although, I'm not sure that it's much heavier than my Nikon with 14-24, just a different "shape" / mass. A small consideration considering I rarely shoot handheld. Image production was impressive. I think I can "get-along" with this camera system.

The rep is just that, in addition to being an accomplished shooter and owning a print operation. I can purchase Hasselblad through him, however I'm not sure of his capacity to assist me in case of service needs.
Competent, patient, and compassionate dealers are hard to find where I live (South Florida). Even with Nikon I found myself buying most of my equipment from California dealers, who were informed, and in the case of service requirements, very helpful. With the step to MF technology, the serious investment, and "brave-new-world" of MF shooting having solid support may be very important.

In general: Although proven wrong at time, I tend to think manufactures of sophisticated technical, mechanical or other design intensive products, who invest heavily in R&D, know what their doing, and how their products preform. In this regard I tend to isolate the products I believe will preform the desired task, and commit to the brand. I rarely introduce aftermarket products unless their design specific to the core product, and have a proven reliability record. While it is a concern to some that Hasselblad is becoming a closed system, it has appeal, since it appears they calibrate each component, including post capture processing, to work together symbiotically. ( That's the best way I can put it}. After All, my prime concern is the image.

The cost is no joke. With sums of this size other manufactures are in the running. ALPA contends, but seems a bit complicated for my beginners blood. The new system has to be easy.

Thanks for your post. It was very helpful.

Plekto,

Thanks for the great information. I reviewed the sites and found much it helpful.

LF is something I'd like to consider in the future. Perhaps in studio, when I'm older. For now it's beyond my needs and, probably patience level.

Film, in my mind ( something I change from time to time) requires a meditative approach and although I can be calm, and thoughtful, I tend to think fast and desire spontaneous gratification. Honestly,
if advanced digital hadn't come along I would not have been as enthusiastic about photography. The same can be said for how I worked before, and after PC technology. PC technology was like a breath of fresh air to a suffocating mind - Digital is the same. Yes, I'm actually old enough to have straddled pre & post PC Technology worlds! You can't imagine how grateful I am that technology has begun to catch up with our capacity to think. Only begun.

I've bookmarked the pages you sent, and will refer to them from time to time.

THanks again,
DS

Hi David:

For sure the Hassy is a good system and capable of generating excellent images. However, it is relatively heavier than the Mamiya for example primarily the lenses due to the leaf shutters.

I shoot Phase/Mamiya and ironically I live in California but my preferred Phase/Mamiya dealer is located in South Florida! Capture Integration in Miami and they are pretty visible in the MF forum on this site. Might be worth contacting them for a demo before you make your final decision.

Cheers,

Hasselblad makes a good systems. If you haven't looked at Phase One I would strongly (though with a great deal of stated bias) suggest you evaluate a Phase One system in person as well. We have a test studio in South Beach. We would be honored to have you there to evaluate the many options (backs/bodies/lenses) you have as well as do a real world shoot so you can evaluate the total workflow (capture, editing, processing, printing).

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up

Thanks. There's no problem with it, really. Large format is very much an artist's technology, and well, you want to do things faster, that's OK. So do I, as well.

That said, there are tons of options for MF film as well that are as quick and "spontaneous" as digital. Or you can cheat and get a 24-25mp DSLR and be matching the best 645 cameras out there. Not too bad for $2500-$3000.

Me? I have an old Rollei that works great. It's small, quick, and does gorgeous things with black and white film. Some of the newer more pricey models are DB compatible and a couple even have auto-focus for those of us with aging eyes. (though to be honest, with a huge viewfinder, glasses work fine - one advantage of a waist-level finder, IMO)

Having 3 analog Hasselblads and 3 Sinars, never having had a DSLR, I went straight to a H3D11-50 and a Sinar P3, and a set of Apo-digitars, and there is a great deal to learn... Where are you?
You can avoid comments like the above by posting questions in the Medium format/large sensor section.
If you are printing that big, then 60Mpx or a sliding stitching back would give you the res you need and squareish format.

Some decade soon someone might make a good, small, light, MFDVC with plenty of movements for shift, tilt and stitch. The attempts so far to address this market are not much lighter than a Sinar, with very limited movements. Sinar P3 lensboard compatibility would be great, so I could use the same lenses in the same lensboards on the Sinar.

The field widens.
Sinar, Cambo, Hasselblad, ALPA, and seemingly infinite combinations.
I’ve looked at everyone’s comments, sites, and, when possible, images.
Very good info and knowledge.
Pricing for any of the above is in the same general range to start, 25-30K.

Using motorcycling as an analogy, I believe my decision will come down to innate familiarity and comfort. Although I have not always ridden BMW, once I discovered the brand I didn’t stray. Even within the model range, after several ownerships, I return to the same model, and setup, for the same reasons – I can count on it to do what I want it to do, no matter where I go.

The same is likely true for most shooters with their camera gear. All of the above mentioned technology works beautifully, and although there may be some differences in design, I imagine there’s only marginal difference in performance & output. The real difference is most likely in seeing, and what you do after you capture the shot. In other words, there’s no perfect solution, only good ones – the ones that work for the shooter. Of course, every brand loyalist will want to share their enthusiasm, and good experiences – one of the finer qualities of human beings.

It’s becoming apparent moving forward with MF will be a greater challenge than I initially thought. The challenge, of course, is deciding on brand and set-up. Once there, the challenge will be getting out shooting – the fun stuff.

Perhaps I should follow the advise of an old friend, who getting advise from an older friend was told, “The best is enemy of the good”, and throw the dart, see where it lands, and take the plunge.

In any case, regardless of the direction I take, the challenge of aperture, exposure, and lens selection, etc, will be the same.

Gentlemen,
Thanks for your comments and suggestions. I derived enough info to find my way to the rabbit hole, and stepped deep enough in to know there’s no end in sight – just what I look for in any adventure!

DS

My system is complicated and heavy, but if you can stick with one manufacturer and supplier, if it does not work, you know who to blame. The Sinar P3 is versatile and heavy, and the Sinar F3 is lighter, and more compact, and takes the same lensboards... so you could have a P3, and F3 and a box of lenses.

I really suggest you start with film and something that can later accept a DB before deciding to jump in with this much cost attached. Me, I have an old Rollei SL66. Really old-school. Bought to replace my last MF camera, a Rollei TLR, for a little under $1000 about a year ago. Since I shoot black and white scenery and trust a real light meter more than the one built into any camera, this was a good decision that saved me a lot of money. 25-30K is just a horrendous amount to spend on anything unless it's something you need for your work/you need it as a professional photographer.

It's compact, quiet, and a true artist's tool. I find it to be a lot like the "big daddy" of a rangefinder. Of course, the modern version of this would be um.. a 6003, IIRC?... because you want the DB maybe in the future. A lot of photographers also like that they can ditch the DB and use film on a trip or just walking about town. They might not say so online, though...


True in theory, but all of the reviews and discussions about what one is better aside, most of us really use the least expensive tool for the job that we can. The reason I suggest film to start is because a DB is a lot of cost - thousands and thousands of shots to break even. Everything in digital costs about the same as film other than processing, when you do a serious cost analysis. 25K in developing plus a computer and software would take me a decade or two to recover at my casual pace.

I'm an original techno-worshiper who's been using computers and electronics since the 70s. Yet there's no cost benefit to me going purely digital. And despite the views of the review sites and a lot of people online, a scanner works pretty well most of the time. A scanner and a computer is still "technology" - heh. It satisfies the geek in me just fine, because it's identical once the file is in the computer. Scan or plug in a CF card... whatever. The real magic happens when I throw the myriad of programs and tools that I have at the thing.(slightly evil grin)

That said, there are three main choices. Hasselblad, Rollei, and Mamiya. I like Rollei because they are still making old-school cameras and there are a LOT of them around. You can also get used Rollei gear probably for the least money as a result, though you have to really be careful what you buy and that it will work 100% with a DB. Mamiya is probably the least expensive "system" to buy as a whole kit all at once. Hassselblad is fantastic as well - I think a better system, but used gear is a bit pricey/holds its value a bit too well.

He has stated that he wants digital. For landscapes I could have stuck to Sheet/roll film, but I want the immediate feedback of digital (for difficult subjects like glass) and the compactness, and image quality, and the lab-independence...

...The weight is not because of having leaf shutters. The HC/HCD lenses use metal, not plastic, wherever possible and don't skimp out on their optics.

Don't forget, Hasselblad has their HCD 35-90 aspherical lens. If you compared with their HC 50-110mm lens, you get a wider view, it's thinner and about a 1/3rd lighter without sacrificing any flexibility or optical quality. Having that apsherical lens means they can use less lens elements to lighten things up.

True. Then he should be looking at something that can accept a DB without the horrendous cost. I bet he can get 16MP or so DBs for really cheap. Of course, if he can wait until this fall, things will get interesting, since the new Canon and a few other DLSRs are coming out which might put a huge dent in the DB market.

As far as I see what you are up to... why not buy a used camera in mint condition and a refurbished back? The Contax' are really great cameras with nice lenses and you'll find everything you need within short time. Or a Mamiya... or any MF camera you like and that is an "open" platform.
Take a refurbished Phase, Sinar or Leaf back ... done.

The Mamiya Zooms, longer focals and D primes are metal bodies too -- only the original 45, 55 and 80 AF's had composite bodies. And I'll stack my lenses -- especially the newer D lenses -- next to anything from Hassy on optical quality too... For whatever reason you want to choose, the equivalent Hassy H focal lengths are generally both larger and heavier than the comparable Mamiya focal.

Although I'm reluctant to take on other peoples practices, via used gear, this might make sense.

The real test is going to be hands on experience, exploring what MF can do.

I've read all sorts of reviews and comments, as well as looked at hundreds, even thousands of images. It comes down to practice - websites, small flash files, subjective, sometime nontechnical appraisals are helpful, but are no substitute for doing the work myself.

I need a camera for a few days to know if the move is right for what I want to achieve.

Perhaps rental?

Hummm?

I wasn't dogging any other system. I was just stating some facts about Hasselblad lenses so there is no need to get all defensive about your Mamiyas.

As far as weight differences there isn't much between the Hassy and Mamiya D ones... If you can physically feel the difference of a couple ounces or a pound then WOW! That is quite the skill you have yourself there.

For example:
Mamiya 28mm D = 1.9 lbs // Hasselblad 28mm 1.87 lbs.
Mamiya 120mm D lens which is manual focus (says their website) = 1.8lbs // Hasselblad AF 120mm lens 3.1lbs
Mamiya 75-150mm D = 2.5lbs // Hasselblad 150mm = 2.13lbs

Hasselblad's 35-90mm aspherical lens is only 3.1lbs as well.

The heaviest lens in the arsenal is their 300mm which is 4.7lbs

The H3DII-31 weighs in at around 5 lbs as a complete camera (with battery, cf card and 80mm lens) where the Mamiya body only, no battery is stated on their site as being 3.lbs right there.

If the difference of a pound or two is the deal breaker for someone l then I think they should get a gym membership before getting their next piece of gear.

Optical quality is one thing if you want to start at charts all day. All in all, it's the final result that counts.

For example, have fun correcting your lens distortion, APO, moire and vignetting on your own while I have Phocus take care of it all for me with the click of a check box.

So how good is that optical quality now???? They also have totally different designs with the central leaf shutter compared to Mamiya's focal plane shutter (i.e. their 645AFD III).
That difference of 1/125" on the Mamiya sync speed compared to Hassy's 1/800" sync speed can be a deal breaker for many...

Long story short, we are not comparing apples to apples. A Holga weighs ounces but I wouldn't compare it to a digital camera in quality, specs, features or lens optics... As you can see my friend, there is a lot more to camera's then just its weight.

As I mentioned before, I was just stating the facts about the Hasselblad lenses and their weight is NOT JUST because of central shutters.

yes. Probably you get back the charge of the rental if you decide to buy.
... well it depends on where you are located... I did "rent" without any option to buy or not to buy without any charge for some days.
But that was Phase One directly, not a dealer of Phase One...

In any case: as you are not running a studio or work for paying clients and therefore don't need the gear backed up and 24/7 service I'd definitely go for a refurbished back. Refurbished Phase backs come with 1 year warranty, I'd assume it's the same with the other companies.
Sinar recently droped prices.

If you are not and established professional photographer, it might be difficult to get a retailer to lend you a demo unit.

Where are you?

You could offer your services as an assistant to someone on the forum local to you... or are you local to a retailer on the forum?

Well while we are stating facts let's be complete.

Hassy 150mm 2.2 lbs - Mamiya 150mmD 1.7 lbs
Hassy 120mm 3.1 lbs - Mamiya 120mmD 1.8 lbs
Hassy 80mm 1.0 lbs - Mamiya 80mmD 0.7 lbs
Hassy 50mm 2.1 lbs - Mamiya 45mmD 1.1 lbs (55mm @ 1.0 lbs)
Hassy 35mm 2.2 lbs - Mamiya 35mm 1.1 lbs
Hassy 55-110 3.6 lbs - Mamiya 75-150mmD 2.5 lbs

In addition the Hassy mid-zoom, 35mm, 50mm, and 120mm are all significantly longer/larger than the Mamiya equivalent which moves the weight forward and off-balance of your hand (the 28, 80, 150 are all similar lengths).

Lens design is multi-faceted. Focal length, number of elements, maximum aperture, lens circle, and construction material size, and whether you include a shutter all contribute to the size and weight. Between Hassy and Mamiya one of the most significant differences in the size/weight is due to the inclusion of the shutter and it's impact on the design of the lens which is most notable on the 35 and 50mm lens where including the shutter greatly impacts the location of the rear elements of the lens which are preferably placed very close to the mirror box to avoid needing a higher power retro-focus element.



Did a Hasselblad sales guy tell you that Hasselblad has lens corrections and Capture One doesn't?

In fact Capture One includes lens correction (distortion, APO, vignetting, purple fringing etc) for the Mamiya/Phase lens line, Hasselblad HC and Hasselblad classic lenses, as well as several Contax lenses as well as customizing the corrections for generic lenses (e.g. for dSLRs). The anti-purple fringing has won us many Leica users since certain lens/M8 combinations result in a lot of purple fringing. The only difference is that in Phocus you click a box, in Capture One you select your lens from a small pull-down. Once selected you can copy-paste that adjustment to some or all of the images in the folder in literally a few seconds.



We are located close by and would be happy to have you come to our studio with a model or still lives etc to test the system in a real-world situation for free. After if you're pleased with what you see we can rent you the system for a longer period and credit 100% of the rental to your purchase if you end up buying.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up

For reasonnably static subjects, stitching is still cheaper than 4x5 with better quality. I find it to be also faster all things considered.

Cheers,
Bernard

Touché on the Capture One comment. It completely slipped my mind that Capture One did that. I used Capture one 3.7 before they added that. I assumed the DxO plugin for photoshop for some reason. Thanks for that correction. The batch processing and hot folder stuff sounds to be about the same between Phocus and C1. All in all, its just batch processing.

I did a comparison only between the Mamiya D lenses only because of your previous comment about them. Once again, though, you are looking at an average difference of a pound. The lens length hasn't ever been an issue with me and this is the first time I have heard someone complaining about it. Plus, MF users are most likely doing critical photography work. i.e. Fine art landscapes, commercial, stock, historic reproduction or whatever. In those cases, these cameras are mounted on a tripod so in the grand scheme of things, is it really an issue or are you just pointing out the nuances? I will gladly take that extra pound for the leaf shutters...
You get the benefit of having a faster sync speed and you also get a quieter shot with less vibration. Plus if the shutter goes then it isn't a big deal because you can still use your system with your other lenses. It won't put the body out of commission. For me, I could be in the studio one day, outdoors with my strobes the next and then I could be doing landscape work after that. Hasselblad systems give me the most flexibility to get the most out of them.

We could have the proverbial pi$$ing contest all day long but in the end, it is all about the photos, the user experience and their personal needs.

We seem to have "lost" the OP in this thread

Anyway, thank you Doug for clearing all the weight and size issues up with MichaelAlan. To clarify, the OP stated size and weight were concerns, and why I mentioned the Mamiya as an option to consider over Hassy to begin with.

Re Plekto's comments on film: Yes an LF or MF film camera would cheaper on a total system initial cash outlay basis than MF digital, but the per-frame processing and scanning costs will kill you, let alone it's tough finding a *good* lab to do it any more, let alone the paraphernalia you need to carry around on a long trip -- film and/or holders take up as much or more room than batteries, chargers and memory cards. (On a side-note, I still shoot film occasionally on my MF camera using a film back -- and I am amazed at how quickly I forgot about the hassles of running out of film at a critical moment or even just changing a roll out every 15 frames, to comparatively how much more convenient it is to swap in a fresh memory card or battery after a few hundred frames )

Re Bernard's comments on stitching: Couldn't agree more. Even when done for landscapes with a basic DSLR, the results are impressive -- and definitely the time spent assembling the pano is going to be far less than the usual time spent cleaning the junk off a film scan Moreover, if he's shooting MF digital to begin with, it is unlikely he'd need to stitch for added detail, but pano yes.

Cheers,

David,

After over 55 years experience shooting as a pro in South Florida (short tenure), selling camras (also short tenure) and many years as a serious hobbiest, I can tell you that only you can make this decision. Get one of each to try and give them a go. I have used Rolleiflex Twin Lens ( I still get heart palpatations whenever I see one, I love that camera) Hasselblads (500C a great camera that did not work for me), various 35mm cameras and Mamiya 645s. The Mamiyas have been the ones that word best for me, ymmv.

Most important, if you are not in contact with Capture Integration then you are missing an essential step in your journey. Living in north Florida now, I have found they have two locations that serve me well, Miami Beach and Atlanta.

Regards,

Jack