A new step in my journey - 4x5"

[Donald Qualls]

I will say that based on the images I've made with the 105 mm lens on my Speed Graphic, a wide on 4x5 can be good. I wouldn't use any wide for photographing people unless I was specifically looking for perspective distortion, but our visual brains don't emphasize that when it's a fallen log (though if it's a bush the leaves getting bigger at the bottom or edge of frame can trigger it).

 

[Vieri Bottazzini]

I will say that based on the images I've made with the 105 mm lens on my Speed Graphic, a wide on 4x5 can be good. I wouldn't use any wide for photographing people unless I was specifically looking for perspective distortion, but our visual brains don't emphasize that when it's a fallen log (though if it's a bush the leaves getting bigger at the bottom or edge of frame can trigger it).

Hey Donald,

agreed, I would never use a wide or ultra-wide for portrait, unless I was going for effect. Since I do only landscape, on the other hand, I do enjoy wides and ultra-wides very much, and use them all the time for my work. I never use them to "get everything in", so to speak, nor would I ever use a wide-angle to do the (dreadful to my eyes) kind of "huge daisies in front of dwarf mountain" shots and the like, which there are too much of already around these days.

Careful arranging elements in a composition with a wide-angle is not as easy task, but I find it both extremely challenging and extremely rewarding when done well.

Best regards,

Vieri

 

[xkaes]

Shooting ultrawide landscapes on 4x5 takes a level of dedication to the craft that most, including me, don’t have.

The amount of hiking I’ve had to do to get the camera in position for a wide shot is no joke. I don’t think I could do all that while lugging a bunch of LF gear if I tried, and I’ve been hiking and climbing my entire life.

Superwide lens don't have to create much apparent distortion, but they need to be used with attention to detail -- but that's true for any lens I use. Here's a shot (unmanipulated except for a PL) of a small (15') waterfall in Zion. It is a tight canyon, and a 65mm was the only lens that could capture it all -- or at least this much of it. Taken with a 65mm Fujinon lens, it looks exactly as I remember it.

 

[SodaAnt]

I am Vieri and I just got back into analog photography after too long a hiatus. I used to shoot medium format and 135, but this time over - after decades of digital - I decided to go bigger and went for 4x5".

I got back into film photography a little over a year ago and eventually settled on two cameras, a Sinar F2 and a Toyo VX125 and three lenses.

I do landscape/cityscapes and generally don't go more than a few hundred yards from the car. The camera, tripod, lenses, and 16 film holders weigh perhaps 35 pounds. Too much for extended hikes.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Hmm. That makes even my Graphic View II not seem so bad. I can carry three lenses (105, 135, and a 150/265 convertible) and four Grafmatics (24 sheets total), plus my carbon fiber tripod, and be lighter than that. Probably still lighter after I get my 90 mm Angulon into a board.

 

[Jonathan-sv]

Hmm. That makes even my Graphic View II not seem so bad. I can carry three lenses (105, 135, and a 150/265 convertible) and four Grafmatics (24 sheets total), plus my carbon fiber tripod, and be lighter than that. Probably still lighter after I get my 90 mm Angulon into a board.

I couldn't focus at infinity with my Graphic View I with a 90 mm super angulon mounted on a flat lens board.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I couldn't focus at infinity with my Graphic View I with a 90 mm super angulon mounted on a flat lens board.

That would certainly be the case with the GVII, then, as its original bellows is a little longer than the GVI. I have used my GVI with a 105 mm, and had a little retraction left, but I don't recall if it was 15 mm worth. Fortunately, if I'm making/3D printing my own lens board, it's fairly trivial to include 10-15 mm of recess, which isn't enough to cause problems with operating the shutter (worst case, I'll have to get an angled cable release extension to mount permanently).

 

[Vieri Bottazzini]

I got back into film photography a little over a year ago and eventually settled on two cameras, a Sinar F2 and a Toyo VX125 and three lenses.

I do landscape/cityscapes and generally don't go more than a few hundred yards from the car. The camera, tripod, lenses, and 16 film holders weigh perhaps 35 pounds. Too much for extended hikes.

Hmm. That makes even my Graphic View II not seem so bad. I can carry three lenses (105, 135, and a 150/265 convertible) and four Grafmatics (24 sheets total), plus my carbon fiber tripod, and be lighter than that. Probably still lighter after I get my 90 mm Angulon into a board.

My full kit weighs 6.6 Kg, and it includes:

- Arca-Swiss F-line custom camera;
- 4 lenses (55mm Rodie, 80mm Super-Symmar, 150mm Apo-Symmar, 300mm Nikkor-M)
- Lightmeter (Pentax Spotmeter Digital)
- Loupe (Chamonix Jobo)
- 6 film holders (Chamonix)
- F64 holder bag
- Kase KW Revolution filter kit, magnetic, 77mm, with: pola, 3 / 6 / 10 stop ND, 1 grad ND
- Colour filter kit, B+W, Yellow, Orange, Red, and a Tiffen Green filter, 77mm
- SPOT security GPS
- Headlamp, Nitecore
- Garmin Fenix 6
- Raincover

Plus, of course, the camera bag (NYA-EVO Fjord 50-C, 1.9 kg) and the the insert (Shimoda, Large, 1 kg).

The total kit is 9.6 kg, or about 21 pounds, which is not bad for hiking. My digital kit, Phase One IQ4 Achro with 4 lenses, batteries, square filter kit, bits and pieces, weighs about the same.

I am currently on the Dolomites and I hiked the Tre Cime, 3h return, half of it in the snow, with no problem. I always carry my FLM 38 tripod with Arca-Swiss P0 head (a genius head!), total a little over 2.2 kg, in my hands.

Best regards,

Vieri

 

[maruti660]

Hi, you have a great fleet! I was also impressed with your digital background. I was happy to hear that you liked the Nikkor SW 75mm, which I also had in the past. And I remember how great the Pyrocat HD and FP4 combination was. I was always enchanted by the results I got from the CCP2. However, the short shelf life of the Pyrocat made me nervous. Sometimes I would get blank negatives from the Jobo 3010 and I would despair. Perhaps you won't make the same mistake as me!

 

[Vieri Bottazzini]

Hi, you have a great fleet! I was also impressed with your digital background. I was happy to hear that you liked the Nikkor SW 75mm, which I also had in the past. And I remember how great the Pyrocat HD and FP4 combination was. I was always enchanted by the results I got from the CCP2. However, the short shelf life of the Pyrocat made me nervous. Sometimes I would get blank negatives from the Jobo 3010 and I would despair. Perhaps you won't make the same mistake as me!

Hey Maruti, thank you! About Pyrocat-HD, I mix Part A in glycol, and that makes it last a very long time, have you tried that? Part B lasts indefinitely, so that should not be an issue. Hope this helps!

Best regards,

Vieri

 

[maruti660]

Hey Maruti, thank you! About Pyrocat-HD, I mix Part A in glycol, and that makes it last a very long time, have you tried that? Part B lasts indefinitely, so that should not be an issue. Hope this helps!

Best regards,

Vieri

Hi Vieri,

Thanks for the advice. I always bought the B&S Pyrocat HD, so I couldn't mix it in.

Pyro creates an attractive stain on the film, which worked very well for platinum prints. But of course, I found that the effect was gone after a few months. So every two months I was pale-faced when I saw the results ;,,/

 

[Vieri Bottazzini]

Hi Vieri,

Thanks for the advice. I always bought the B&S Pyrocat HD, so I couldn't mix it in.

Pyro creates an attractive stain on the film, which worked very well for platinum prints. But of course, I found that the effect was gone after a few months. So every two months I was pale-faced when I saw the results ;,,/

Hey there,

you are very welcome! Sorry about that, of course I didn't mention that I buy Pyrocat-HD in powder kits (Photographer's Formulary, from B&H), and that allows me to mix it with glycol rather than water.

About the printing process, I do scan my negatives right after developing them and proceed to print digitally, which should help me avoiding the problem you mention. I know I should wet print, but that it's something I last did ages ago and currently don't have the time (and probably not the skills anymore, either!) to do... who knows, maybe in the future!

Best regards,

Vieri