10 cm x 15 cm film

[mtlc]

Hello,

I've been contemplating giving large format photography a try. I've been looking around and have come across some cameras on Ebay that take 10 cm x 15 cm film/4" x 6" film if I'm doing the math correctly. I see that 4" x 5" sheet film seems fairly common. Would that work? Or would I need to cut down 5" x 7" film to fit?

One more question are the plates that hold the film specific to the camera brand?

Thanks

 

[OrientPoint]

You can still get actual 10x15cm film from Foma, but I've only seen it available for sale in Europe. You can also cut down film, of course, but 4x5 will be too small. 5x7 would work but it seems a shame to sacrifice sheets of that.

Before you jump into this I'd also keep in mind that 10x15cm sheet film holders for those old cameras are difficult to come by. Many of the ones listed on Ebay are actually 4x5 or 9x12cm backs - a lot of sellers can't seem to tell the difference. And it's a significant difference.

 

[mtlc]

You can still get actual 10x15cm film from Foma, but I've only seen it available for sale in Europe. You can also cut down film, of course, but 4x5 will be too small. 5x7 would work but it seems a shame to sacrifice sheets of that.

Before you jump into this I'd also keep in mind that 10x15cm sheet film holders for those old cameras are difficult to come by. Many of the ones listed on Ebay are actually 4x5 or 9x12cm backs - a lot of sellers can't seem to tell the difference. And it's a significant difference.

Good to know!

 

[koraks]

By all means the sensible way forward would be to step into the common 4x5" ecosystem instead of something fairly arcane. 9x12cm was fairly common in Europe, but supply of holders and film still pales compared to the omnipresence of 4x5"-oriented products. 10x15cm is really an oddball film format.

 

[mtlc]

By all means the sensible way forward would be to step into the common 4x5" ecosystem instead of something fairly arcane. 9x12cm was fairly common in Europe, but supply of holders and film still pales compared to the omnipresence of 4x5"-oriented products. 10x15cm is really an oddball film format.

Thanks!

 

[Donald Qualls]

One likely method of telling is by the focal length of the original lens (assuming that's present). If it's 13.5 or 15 cm, it's probably 9x12 or 4x5; for a true 10x15 a normal lens would be closer to 18 cm.

 

[abruzzi]

I tried cutting down 5x7 to 6.5x9 and found it way too cumbersome, so if you're new to LF, I'd start with something you can easily buy the film you want, in the right size, off the shelf. That means 4x5, 8x10, 5x7 (in descending order of film types available.)

 

[Donald Qualls]

That means 4x5, 8x10, 5x7 (in descending order of film types available.)

Well, 2x3 can be had in two Foma speeds and two Ilford, 9x12 is available in Fomapan, and a couple other metric and "plate" sizes are available in Europe or UK. Check what you can get locally before you shop.

That said, we still don't know for sure that the camera you have is 10x15 vs. say 9x12 (with the seller having measured the outside dimensions of a plate holder).

 

[abruzzi]

yeah, odd sizes are still available, but even 5x7 limits you to just B&W unless you get in on a cutom group buy (I'm on a list, but I've been waiting 2 years for 5x7 E100.) So yeah, you can odd sizes from Foma, Adox, and some others, and you can even get 6.5x9, but pretty much only from certain European selllers. Honestly, not many people take to view cameras, so I'd really reccomend someone new to LF choosing a camera that doesn't make aquiring usable film an additional challenge.

 

[OrientPoint]

I actually shoot 10x15, because I'm cuckoo for odd/extinct formats and have a Plaubel 10x15 that's fun to use. I also cut my own film, which gives me more options. While I really like the wide size of 10x15 (it's basically a wide version of 4x5), in the end it's not that distinctive. Definitely not worth the effort when the hassle with regard to holders, film choices and development is factored in.

If one wants to get into LF in 2024, 4x5 is absolutely the way to go. Holders are cheap and plentiful, and you can still find film of all types. 5x7 is great, but it's getting challenging – film is hard to find and getting more expensive all the time. I have some E100 in 5x7 that still works well, and feel a little twinge of regret every time I use a sheet. I doubt I'll ever see an in-date box of it again.

 

[mtlc]

Thanks everyone!

 

[abruzzi]

I have some E100 in 5x7 that still works well, and feel a little twinge of regret every time I use a sheet. I doubt I'll ever see an in-date box of it again.

Keith Canham was putting together a order for 5x7 E100. The last email I got from him was in September he was close to the number of interested people he needed to place an order with Kodak. When he checked with Kodak, they told him they didn't have an E100 master roll available, and wouldn't until the spring. Hopefully there will still be enough people when spring rolls around. Its not cheap though--he anticipates $500 for a 50 sheet box.

 

[abruzzi]

I'll also add that if it had the same film availability as 4x5, then 5x7 would be my favorite format. Its enough bigger than 4x5 that contact prints are more usable, but its size isn't enough to make things harder, much heavier, or much more expensive (which I find is a limitation of 8x10), it has a wider aspect (1.4:1 almost as wide as 35mm and 6x9 which are 1.5:1).

 

[Donald Qualls]

4x5 is absolutely the way to go. Holders are cheap and plentiful,

Not to mention if you have a Graflok (compatible) mount on your camera, Grafmatics are quite reasonably priced as well -- and for the press camera crowd, a Grafmatic is the bee's knees. Six sheets of 4x5, quick-quick. Focus with rangefinder, please...

They'll work with some spring backs, too...

 

[lobitar]

One likely method of telling is by the focal length of the original lens (assuming that's present). If it's 13.5 or 15 cm, it's probably 9x12 or 4x5; for a true 10x15 a normal lens would be closer to 18 cm.

The accepted normal focal length for european 10x15 cameras was 16,5 cm. 18 cm was for half plate and 21 cm for 13x18.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Yeah, that's like the "normal" on 4x5 press cameras is 135 mm, when the film diagonal is 165 mm -- but the "normal" on 35 mm cameras is 50 mm while the film diagonal is only 43 mm.

 

[JPD]

18 cm was used on some fixed lens 10x15 cameras because some preferred a little longer normal, just like with the 15 cm on some 9x12 and 12 cm on some 6,5x9 cameras. And a few were available with slightly shorter lenses (with larger image circle like a double-Gauss or a Dagor type).