good opportunity to get into LF?

[destroya]

I promised myself no more money on photo gear on July 1st.

thru a friend, I came across a toyo 45a body, no lens board and detached bellows as they had many pinholes as well as leaks in almost every fold. the camera had not been used in over 15 years or so. that being said, its in pretty good shape. he offered it to me at a price to good to pass up, as he knew it would need to be fixed. so, I broke my promise I made to myself ( last year I almost made it 3 months!).

anyway seeing as money is tight now with my youngest away to college, making 2 away from home, i come across a dilemma. as always, its all about the money. I have, myself, been very happy with my MF gear. great scanner, great enlargers, 2 besesler 23ciii, 1 color 1 variable contrast along with the standard head. Film, B&W, color neg and slide, to last many years. I also have 35mm, but for fine prints, I stick to 6x6 and larger. I dont/havent yet printed larger than 16x20, so Im not sure if there would be a huge difference between 4x5 and 6x7 and up.

so to go forward with this LF idea, one that I have always wanted to do but have shown, for me, great self control, i figure I need the following things. while alone they are not tha much $, together it all starts to add up.

1) new bellows. I can go the ebay route and self install. $100 or so. I can buy the bellows and have the repair man install them, figure another $80 or so. MAC will install genuine Toyo bellows, install them and do a minor CLA to bring the camera back into shape. $350 or so. based on the price I paid for the body, I'm leaning towards the MAC bellow install and CLA. could be in a condition after to last me 30+ years.

2) lenses. I figure 2 to start, 150 to 135 range and a 90mm. figure $300 each, so say $600. I could spend less, but I always try to get it right the first time rather than buying and selling all the time. I could spend more, but trying to keep it affordable. also need lens boards to go with them, figure $30 each.

3) film holders. the camera came with 4 riteway which seem to be in good shape, but figure I'll need more. ballpark $10 each as thats seems to be an average price. so 6 more would make me happy. $60

4) how to print? either a new enlarger, would go with a beseler 45 to match my 23 as I could use the same neg carriers, but if a good deal comes up im not really brand loyal. average price locally in the bay area seems to be $300. also need an enlarger lens, figure $100-150.
Scanner. I do scan my color film as I love shooting slide film and scanning seems to be the only way to print. if I get 1 that is really great, I'll send it out to drum scan. but with my nikon CS9000, I get great scans and prints upto 16x20 from velvia, provia and ektar. so figure I need to go the flat bed way. Guess an epson 800, so there is $800 or so.

side question, maybe for another forum. what would be better a scan on the nikon 9000 with a 6x7 to 6x9 scan or a 4x5 on a flatbed? again not gonna print larger than 16x20. tonality is most important to me.

5) film. with a chest freezer full of 120 and 35mm film, Im set. bt now Im gonna need more film for the 4x5. more than likely I'll just shoot what I shoot in 120, but kodak seems to have a wacked pricing strategy for 4x5, almost more than twice theprice of ilford and color is the same or more expensive than provia and velvia 100. go figure. so for trial I go hp5 or foma route till I get it hammered down. the costs here are up in the air as when Im settled in, Id more than likely buy 1000 or so sheets to get settled in, but this would be over a year, so spread out, but still in the 1500-3000 range as color is 3x the brice of ilford B&W.

I'm sure there are other things I'm missing and those sometimes can be the killers, just like when I did a major house remodel. its the cosmetic stuff that breaks bank. I have hand held meters as thats how I meter now. I have filters, a more than adequate tripod. maybe another backpack to carry the body, lenses, film holders.

anyway, just wondering what you guys did when you decided to cross to the next level. normally money was never and issue, but life happens and forces many changes. I guess my main question should be, will I notice enough difference in my end prints to justify the cost? I can buy a lot of 120 film with the cost of going all in to 4x4.

thanks!

john

 

[juan]

Money has always been tight with me, so I’ve just had to do the best I could. If I could scrape up the dough. I’d go the MAC route, too. You might be able to do better on lenses if you look around. I seldom take out more than 6-holders. My Beseler 4x5 enlarger did not take the same carriers as the Beseler 23 I had, so you’d better check on that. A few weeks ago Photo warehouse had some cold-stored out dated Ilford HP5+ film on sale. Maybe they still do.
Good luck.

 

[Sirius Glass]

With the digital revolution any time is a good time to get into LF if you have the money.

 

[MattKing]

You could get yourself a roll film back. That would mean all/most of your scanning and darkroom equipment would still be usable, and you would add the benefits of movements.
Will your scanner do 6x12?

 

[jim10219]

You can find a good 150mm lens for pretty cheap. They're probably the cheapest of all of the modern large format lenses, and probably the most versatile. Fuji is my preferred brand because they tend to be cheaper than Nikon, Schneider, and Rodenstock, but just as good. Though if you find a good price on one of the other three, go for it. After more money frees up, you can get a 90mm.

For bellows, look on eBay. If the bellows aren't too bad, you can try to repair them, but if they're pretty shot, you might as well buy another.

As for enlarger, maybe consider a flatbed film scanner and digital printing for now. Keep an eye out for whatever 4x5 enlargers pop up locally. They're heavy and expensive to ship, so buying local is your best option. It may take several months, but one at a fair price will eventually happen. If it doesn't come with a lens, 135mm enlarging lenses aren't too expensive. It may come with negative carrier. If not, you can usually DIY one out of black cardstock.

It's possible to use the LF camera and lens as an enlarger, but that will likely require some DIY skills to get a negative holder, a light source, and a way to mount it all. But people used to do that all of the time.

Large format isn't cheap. Everything about it is expensive. If you don't already, I'd figure out a way to develop your own film. Sending it out is not cheap. And practice before you take it out. Practice loading film into the holder. Practice all of the steps necessary when shooting. You'll likely ruin a fair amount of film in the beginning, so getting your processes down like second nature first will save you a lot of money.

 

[laser]

The Toyo 45a is a wonderful camera. However, you are embarking on an expensive venture. if you are happy with medium format I am not sure why you would switch. 4x5 is more expensive and far less convenient that medium format roll film. Shooting roll film with the Toyo 45a is not an improvement in convenience or cost over your medium format camera. It is doubtful that your pictures will be better. More expensive and far more things to go wrong. I'd stick with medium format and put my efforts into composition and other aspects of picture taking that will improve the pictures rather than changing to 4x5.

Just my opinion.

 

[Dan Fromm]

If you want to shoot roll film to avoid wasting costly 4x5 film while learning how to use your 4x5 camera, 2x3 (6x9 in metric) roll holders that fit 4x5 cameras are common and not too expensive.

I have no idea whether your Toyo 45a has a spring or a Graflok, also called international, back. If it has a spring back, there are insertion type roll holders that slip in like sheet film holders. The least expensive of these is probably the 4x5 size Adapt-A-Roll 620. These have two drawbacks. Although they'll feed film on a 120 spool perfectly well, they have to take up on a 620 spool. And the AAR's gate is offset ~ 7 mm to the right of the back's center.

I like Matt King's suggestion of 6x12, but 6x12 roll holders are much more expensive than 2x3ers.

 

[Paul Howell]

Other option is a 2X3 press or view camera with a roll back and spring back for film holders. You can still get 2X3 sheet film if you want to learn the zone system.

 

[jamesaz]

You may want to consider keeping your promise to yourself untill you feel more comfortable financially. If its going to cause anxiety monetarily, it won't be much fun. That said, there's nothing else like it. Best to you, whatever you decide.

 

[John51]

If you have more time than money, you could have a go at making a bellows. Some form of bag bellows could be cheap and easy.

Use it as a pinhole camera until an affordable lens turns up?

Paper negatives to get you started?

 

[bernard_L]

Wake up and see how this "opportunity"

he offered it to me at a price to good to pass up

led you to contemplate literally thousands of $ (do the sums), while you say yourself:

anyway seeing as money is tight now

Considering myself to maybe jump into 4x5, I have spent so far, as the opportunities came up over several years:
20€ for 6 holders at a garage sale
40€ for a Componon 150mm at a photo swap (not $100-150)
15€ for a Krokus enlarger for which I'd hack an extension to 4x5 (not $300)
50€ for 25 sheets of HP5 (not $1500-3000)
10€ for expired X-ray film

In the meantime i still struggle to do proper wet prints of my backlog of MF and 35mm negs.

 

[minh0204]

50€ for 25 sheets of HP5 (not $1500-3000)

OP wants to buy 1,000 sheets so $1500-3000 is correct. The rest of your prices came from lucky finds that can't be reasonably replicated, only indicative of absolute low-ends. I think OP already did his homework.

 

[bdial]

I'm a little in-between Laser's position, and the rest of the suggestions. I enjoy working with LF, but of all my gear, my LF cameras get the least use. I've come to the conclusion that fewer choices are better for creativity than too many choices.

If money is tight, fix the camera, work with the 4 holders you have, buy 1 lens, 100 sheets of assorted film, a flatbed scanner, and contact print your negatives, if you need a bigger print, scan the neg. That will get you stared into the LF world, and you can figure out whether it suits you not without diving in to someplace you may not want to be.
For outings where you are learning the camera, learning the mechanics of working with LF, and all the rest, 8 shots in a session will be plenty. More holders are easy to buy 1 or a possibly few at a time should you feel constrained.

 

[bernard_L]

OP wants to buy 1,000 sheets so $1500-3000 is correct. I think OP already did his homework.

My point re:film was not about the unit price, but the quantity. Diving into a new format with no way to predict whether one will "bind" with it, and a format where every shutter actuation should be a hopeful keeper, is it reasonable to buy 1000 sheets?

The rest of your prices came from lucky finds that can't be reasonably replicated

You may characterize it like this, but often "luck" is the fruit of patience. At the other extreme, not waiting for an opportunity, one can bring up the e**y page and click on "Buy Now".

 

[jeffreyg]

Here's a thought. Buy an Ilford Titan pinhole camera ($230) and the 4 film holders plus 50 sheets of 4x5 film or make your own pinhole camera. You can use your existing tripod since the camera is so light. The negatives scan very nicely on a decent flat bed scanner. Buy a platinum/palladium starter kit (Bostick and Sullivan) and contact print. Starting out you can use the sun as the light source.. Pinhole is fun to use and the pt/pd prints have beautiful tonality and you print in the light. I also have a Toyo 4x5A with 4 lenses and other formats.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[jim10219]

And most people don't really notice the difference in prints between a medium and large format camera. It's not like the jump from 135 to 120 film. It does offer you things like movements, individual processing, and the ability to carry multiple kinds of film at once (though some medium format cameras also do this). But mostly, the difference is the process. It's a lot slower, and as a result, many people find it more methodical. I enjoy it. But it's really more about the process than the results.

 

[destroya]

thanks for all the info. its a tough decision, i look at it as a good problem to have .

I have used LF before. I took 3 dark room film photo classes many years ago at my local community college and the last class half the term we used their LF cameras for the rest of the projects. soI have a good idea of what im getting into. Its not that money is taht tight, Im just trying to regain some self control. I know that if I go down this road and LF is not for me, that I can sell the gear for very close to what I paid for it. im not worried about losing or spending the money.

now, when I do shoot my MF gear on a tripod, I shoot very much like a LF shooter. hand held metering, taking my time setting up, taking my time composing, shooting much fewer shots thatn the spray and pray digital shooters. take shooting at yosemite. they get to a great location, walk as little as possible from the car, set up their small light tripod if they have one and shoot 100 shots in 5 seconds, only because they can, then leave and move on. I like to spend minutes or hours at a location, wait for the right light or maybe for the clouds to get into a better formation, you know the drill. so the difference between, for me, MF or LF will be not a huge change. maybe shooting fewer shots per location, but if I by my car, more than likely I would bring both set-ups. MF of r color or B&W and then 4x5 for the other.

its just another tool in the chest so to speak. another way to get the best end result I can. its funny. the total cost for a good LF system is still less than the current flavor of the month digital camera.

Im not sure why Im wasting your time. in the end, I know im gonna be weak and move forward

john

 

[MattKing]

Im not sure why Im wasting your time. in the end, I know im gonna be weak and move forward

I think this would be a good time to end our session today. Please attend to payment of our invoice on the way out.

 

[markbau]

"Spray and pray digital shooters" I LOVE this description!

 

[jacaquarie]

To state the obvious, Keep the large format.
Large format, black and white and you are the man!
Women will pay you money to be in front of your camera, the digital people will ask if you know Ansel Adams.
You will stand taller, loose weight, and your hair will grow back.
Worth it at twice the price.
Trust me!

 

[Alan Gales]

You will stand taller, loose weight, and your hair will grow back.
Worth it at twice the price.
Trust me!

Uhhhhh, the hair only grows back in places you don't want it to.

 

[winger]

4) how to print? either a new enlarger, would go with a beseler 45 to match my 23 as I could use the same neg carriers, but if a good deal comes up im not really brand loyal. average price locally in the bay area seems to be $300. also need an enlarger lens, figure $100-150.

Sorry, the 45 and 23CIII do not take the same neg carriers. Maybe some Beseler 45*** ones would, but I have the 45MX and the carriers are much larger (and I have the 23CIII on the XL chassis).

That said, LF is too much fun to not do it if you can find a way to make it work. Since you say you've used one before, you have an idea what you're getting into. If you think that particular camera will work for you, then why not?

Yes, enablers 'r' us, right here.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I choose to post in this thread because I went to LF once and left it. But it still fascinates me as the meditation almost process.
What I learned; just like with MF and 135, gear is not this important:
I did it with Calumet Cadet and three Graflex.
What I found be extremely difficult is to get same decent photography I sometimes able to get with MF and 135.
I looked at LF and 4x5 groups at Flickr for two evenings. 40+K photos and none of them was motivating.
Collodion makes all photos looks the same, same special effect and limitations makes all of the portraits looks the same. I was not even able to find decent regular print of the landscape among thousands of LF photos.
It is not the Flickr; I follow several good film photogs with interesting prints:
But none of them are with LF:

 

[Bob S]

...so the difference between, for me, MF or LF will be not a huge change. maybe shooting fewer shots per location, but if I by my car, more than likely I would bring both set-ups...l

john

Not really, unless you are using a MF with the same control as a Rollei SL66 there is a big difference!

With the Toyo you can control the plane of sharp focus with the camera’s movements and depth of field with len’s aperture. If your Toyo is advanced enough to have back tilts and swings then it also would allow you to control subject shape. So, these are big differences besides a larger film size that requires much less magnification to make that 16x20 print.

 

[Bob S]

"Spray and pray digital shooters" I LOVE this description!

Why? It’s no different then when it was used to describe 35mm motorized sports, news and amateur photography!