Beginners thread

[Alan Gales]

As palewin says a 150mm to 180mm on a 4x5 is similar to a "normal" focal length on a 35mm camera. Some prefer the slightly wider 135mm. A 210mm lens is the most common focal length that you will find on a monorail. It is considered a long normal lens. The 210mm f/5.6 lenses had a large amount of coverage and worked well for table top product photography. A 210 is arguably overall your most versatile focal length and they go dirt cheap since there is such a glut of them on the market.

The 4x5 format is more square than the 35mm format so focal lengths look a bit different. You really need to just buy a camera and and a lens of a normalish focal length (135 to 210mm) and start shooting. It's the only way that you will learn what you like. Don't fret over buying the perfect lens or camera. Most people including myself don't keep their first camera. The stuff is so cheap now that if you buy right and sell later you will get most or all of your money back if you sell to buy something else.

For a first lens I would recommend a later model in a Copal shutter. A modern Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor, Fujinon, and Caltar will all be sharp and contrasty and give a very similar look. Let price and condition be your guide as to which to buy.

palewin also mentioned a tripod. This is one area not to skimp with. Make sure you get a quality tripod that will well support your camera. A good tripod is a photographer's best friend.

I know large format seems daunting at first. Just stick your toes in the water and pretty soon you will be swimming!


I'm both a member of APUG and Large Format Photography Forum. Quite a few of us APUG members are. After you are a member for 30 days you can buy and sell in their for sale section. You may find a monorail here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/ I see good deals occasionally on Ebay too.

 

[LMNOP]

Let's eliminate some confusion. Film holders are easy: there are a lot of used plastic Lisco and Fidelity 4x5 holders out there, they work fine. Toyo holders are a little bit more precisely made, but hard to find used, and much more expensive; functionally there is no difference. You probably want a minimum of three, which since they are double-sided allow six exposures before you need to re-load. Many of us make a point of exposing both sheets in a holder on a single set-up shot if we think it is a good one, so that if something goes wrong during development we have a duplicate negative to work with. I normally take six loaded holders with me when I go out.

As for lenses, the standard recommendation for a first lens is something in the 150-180mm range, which is somewhat similar to 45-50mm on a 35mm camera. They will usually be mounted on a Copal 0 or 1 shutter (the number defines the diameter of the shutter mount) and you will need a lens board for your camera with the appropriate 0 or 1 hole. I would recommend any of the relatively modern (say 1960s on up) multi-coated lenses, most of the better-known brands (Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, or Fuji) will be more or less the same. (I own 80, 120, 150, 180, 210, and 300mm lenses, and would guesstimate that I use the 150 about 75% of the time. I don't even take the 120 or 180 out of the house any more, but I don't sell them because view camera lenses are basically out-of-production, even the major manufacturers are only manufacturing new lenses with the coverage for digital backs on view cameras, which don't have the image circles one really wants for 4x5 film.)

As Alan Gales posted earlier, you will also need a black t-shirt or cloth, some way to determine exposure (a hand-held light meter is the most common, but a digital camera or smartphone app may suffice), and unless you are hand-holding (which is quite limiting since most LF exposures are at small apertures, thus longer exposures), a tripod.

GREAT INFO! Thank you! I have a manfrotto for my RZ kit, but I assume that is not heavy duty enough, though I have seen LF on pretty normal tripods. I want a simple monorail kit with a basic lens to get started, something cheap to test the waters. Are there any models to avoid? I am not interested in hand held stuff, but collapsable models would be handy.

 

[Alan Gales]

GREAT INFO! I want a simple monorail kit with a basic lens to get started, something cheap to test the waters. Are there any models to avoid? I am not interested in hand held stuff, but collapsable models would be handy.

Avoid anything uncommon. Look for Cambo, Calumet or Toyo. Sinar if you can afford it. There are tons of stuff (lens boards, bag bellows, etc.) available on ebay in the U.S. for these cameras.

 

[BrianShaw]

Avoid anything uncommon. Look for Cambo, Calumet or Toyo. Sinar if you can afford it. There are tons of stuff (lens boards, bag bellows, etc.) available on ebay in the U.S. for these cameras.

... and avoid anything that has "all it needs is a little fixing" associated with its description.

 

[palewin]

I have a manfrotto for my RZ kit, but I assume that is not heavy duty enough, though I have seen LF on pretty normal tripods.

An RZ is a pretty heavy camera; I would try whatever camera you end up with on your current tripod before spending more money. One trick many of us use on occasion is to hang something heavy (like your camera bag) from the tripod to give it more mass. But I find I rarely need to do this. Folding field cameras are usually lighter than your RZ, so there should be no problem. With a heavier monorail, just pay attention to the center of gravity - you can usually slide the rail along the mounting block to keep the CG over the tripod head.

 

[LMNOP]

This seemed like a decent deal, I like the 120 back included and the film holders, offer is at $399


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cambo-4x5-L.../301628428724?ssPageName=ADME:X:BOCOR:US:1123

 

[Alan Gales]

This seemed like a decent deal, I like the 120 back included and the film holders, offer is at $399


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cambo-4x5-L.../301628428724?ssPageName=ADME:X:BOCOR:US:1123

I've sold later model all black Cambo/Calumets for $150.00 to $200.00. I sold a lens just like that with an accurate shutter for $125.00 recently. I did give a friend a deal, $150.00 would have been more appropriate. You need to watch a few auctions. There are deals out there if you are patient.

 

[Jim Jones]

I haven't compared the asking price with the price that similar outfits have actually sold for, but the kit sounds like a great way to get started in LF without the hassle of assembling everything from many sources at perhaps more money. The lens has plenty of coverage to permit the use of front movements. This is often overlooked when someone is starting out in LF. Unless you are quite good at guessing exposure as many photographers became long ago, an exposure meter is almost a necessity. It doesn't have to be expensive. I still use old selenium cell meters.

Pete Lewin is right about scanning negatives. Spotting and editing on a computer is a delight when compared to retouching some images directly on negative or print. Also, when you get a big digital file done right, multiple prints become effortless.

 

[LMNOP]

I haven't compared the asking price with the price that similar outfits have actually sold for, but the kit sounds like a great way to get started in LF without the hassle of assembling everything from many sources at perhaps more money. The lens has plenty of coverage to permit the use of front movements. This is often overlooked when someone is starting out in LF. Unless you are quite good at guessing exposure as many photographers became long ago, an exposure meter is almost a necessity. It doesn't have to be expensive. I still use old selenium cell meters.

Pete Lewin is right about scanning negatives. Spotting and editing on a computer is a delight when compared to retouching some images directly on negative or print. Also, when you get a big digital file done right, multiple prints become effortless.

Sounds like I would have to upgrade my scanner... I can see the logic in that.

 

[Alan Gales]

Sounds like I would have to upgrade my scanner... I can see the logic in that.

These will scan up to 8x10. http://www.amazon.com/Epson-Perfect...TF8&qid=1431403862&sr=8-1&keywords=Epson+V800

You could also look for a used V700 or V750 that will probably work just as well. I own a V750.


If you go the scanning route just scan for the web or small prints. For the occasional large print (16x20 or larger) have your negative professionally drum scanned.

 

[Jim Jones]

An old Epson 2450 scanned 4x5 negatives for prints up to 16x20 that suited my needs. Others may demand the modest improvement in later flatbed scanners.

 

[Jim Jones]

A Weston 4x5 contact print would be valuable, because I don't know if any exist (other than perhaps proofs to see what's on a negative.) I was at the AIPAD show, where quite a few of Edward Weston's prints were for sale (some vintage, many printed by Cole) and none were smaller than 8x10. Here is an excerpt from a discussion of EW's technique:

"Weston's printing outfit was a contact frame lit by a bare light bulb in the darkroom. That's about as basic as you can get.

8x10 camera & negatives, contact prints, dry mounted — that's it. (Even the Graflex shots, 3.25 x 4.25, were enlarged using the 8x10 so he could contact-print those.) (Contrast control in the enlargements must have been a bitch, but no doubt he worked out rules of thumb, and the Graflex was used primarily for portraits, where lighting could be largely controlled.) . . .

While Weston sometimes enlarged small images as you described, he also exhibited small contact prints. In the mock-up for the book Nudes that he and Nancy Newhall collaborated on but never published, 16 of the 39 photographs were 4x5 contact print size. The reconstruction of this book is Edward Weston's Book of Nudes, edited by Brett Abbott, well printed by the Studley Press, Dalton, Massachusetts, published by Getty Publications in 2007, and available from Amazon and elsewhere.

 

[palewin]

While Weston sometimes enlarged small images as you described, he also exhibited small contact prints. In the mock-up for the book Nudes that he and Nancy Newhall collaborated on but never published, 16 of the 39 photographs were 4x5 contact print size. The reconstruction of this book is Edward Weston's Book of Nudes, edited by Brett Abbott, well printed by the Studley Press, Dalton, Massachusetts, published by Getty Publications in 2007, and available from Amazon and elsewhere.

Jim: Thanks, it is always fun to learn something new!

 

[LMNOP]

Well I am keeping an eye on eBay and my local craiglist. I would love to find a dirt cheap kit so I can play with the format and see how I like it. Let me know if you find anything!

 

[welly]

For my 2 cents, moving to a 4x5 is about a lot more than just a big negative. Unless you are enlarging much past 11x14 prints, you can get about the same image quality from a good DSLR, even though that is blasphemy. Using a view camera is just an entirely different process, involving decisions about planes of focus, depth of field, and more careful composition, all of which involve view camera movements. This is my long-winded way of saying that if you really want to shoot with a view camera, you want movements, not a press camera like the various Graphics. The lower-end Sinars (typically the F, F1 and F2) are not the cheapest monorails out there, but the Sinar is a system camera, meaning that you can expand upwards from the F-series by buying higher-end standards, the Sinar shutter, etc., so you have to decide whether the absolute lowest starting cost is more important than having a basis for future upgrades. And recognize that all view cameras are compromises, be it for weight and portability, or precision of use, or ease of backpacking. My own path started with a Sinar F, added a Wista/ZoneVI field camera, and then ended with a Canham DLC which combines some of the features of both (but it still, of course, a compromise).

I'm not sure I entirely agree with this. I do use movements on my camera but not all the time. Just because they're there, it doesn't mean I have to use them. I use camera movements when necessary. And I don't think shooting with a large format camera is all about big negatives and bit prints either. I think what a large format camera brings to the table is versatility that anything smaller simply doesn't offer.

By this I mean the media that you are able to shoot on: wet plate, daguerreotype, dry plate, cellulose, paper negatives, liquid emulsion. And then when you're making a print, the multitude of processes you can use to make your print (obviously at this point smaller format cameras can compete). I've only recently re-started wet printing after many years out of the darkroom - previously I was shooting large format and then scanning and printing digitally.

For me, I enjoy the process of shooting with a large format camera. It really suits me. Working with those big negatives is a bonus. And now I'm wet printing, I'll start looking into alternate processes. I do think using a press camera is as legitimate as a camera with lots of movements though. Perhaps to start out time might be better spent learning what you can do with a large format camera with movements though so you're able to fully appreciate what these cameras can do and then make a decision on the route you choose.

 

[C Henry]

When I started with 5x4, 10 years ago, I bought a cambo sc and a 135/225 plasmat. Served me for a few years as I learned the trade of large format. From there, I understood what suited my style. i rarely use the format now, preferring larger negatives, but still use once in a while to contact print flowers and portraits. view cameras are very different from other forms of photography and don't suit everyone. Try (cheaply), and then make a decision...