is there any advantage to large format aside from resolution?

Alan Gales · Sep 5, 2016

middleWave said:
yeah i got in over my head quickly there. made the silly mistake of thinking the mamiya 6 was large format. so the real question is actually whether it's worthy to go from 35mm to MF. i can tell from all these replies that LF is way beyond my interest at the moment, but thanks for all the info.

Every format has it's place. For weddings and portraiture MF is the way to go over 35mm. The shallow depth of field is an advantage. The larger negative is nice for 8x10 and larger prints. Rangefinders and TLR's are nice for portraits because you can see your subject the whole time without a mirror flipping out of the way.

Mamiya 6's and 7's are great but as you know, expensive. They really excel as travel cameras. Mamiya C330's and C220's were used for weddings and portraiture for years. They are 6x6 interchangeable lens TLR's that are inexpensive today. You might want to take a look at them. They would be a cheap way to try medium format and if you later decide to sell you will at least get most of your money back.

Sirius Glass · Sep 5, 2016

With LF the contact prints are sharp, so one can make prints without an enlarger.

Press cameras are designed for moving in close and quickly capturing the photograph.

mshchem · Sep 5, 2016

Poisson Du Jour said:
Que?
From this comment it appears you have not heard of, nor observed the use of, perspective control lenses in 35mm. Examples are Canon's 24, 45 and 90mm TS-E lenses and latterly, Nikon's — among other third-party manufacturers. These lenses work excellently on film or digital and either means is not better than the other — just different. All of these specialist lenses provide rise, fall (alternatively, 'shift' up, down) and swing (or 'tilt') and rotational tilt, in movements in isolated or parallel application that have a greater effect in smaller increments than the equivalent bigger movements of large format. Note that PC lenses also provide for the adjustment of focus 'pegs' and the extension or limitation of depth of field at any aperture. Their use and application is limited only to the photographer's imagination really. They are an extremely useful introduction for photographers moving up to large format. That's all a bit more useful than a bog standard 85mm portrait lens...

I've got PC Nikkors, the only point I'm trying to make is with APS sized sensors and slow short fcoal length lenses. You end up with portraits where you can see the family cat coughing up a hairball in the background. I love big film but for portraits I never fiddle with movements. No argument with anything you've said.
I love to look at the ground glass on my 8x10 Deardorff, with the 12 inch Wollensak at f 4.5. It's mesmerizing.
Best Regards Mike

mshchem · Sep 5, 2016

mshchem said:
I've got PC Nikkors, the only point I'm trying to make is with APS sized sensors and slow short fcoal length lenses. You end up with portraits where you can see the family cat coughing up a hairball in the background. I love big film but for portraits I never fiddle with movements. No argument with anything you've said.
I love to look at the ground glass on my 8x10 Deardorff, with the 12 inch Wollensak at f 4.5. It's mesmerizing.
Best Regards Mike

Having said what I just said Re: medium format it's almost all I shoot anymore 6x6 Bronica SQ-AI love it
Best Regards Mike

ic-racer · Sep 6, 2016

PeterB said:
Can somebody help me understand if the improvement in tonal scale means more exposure latitude, or instead smoother transitions between the grey scales with the same absolute tonal range.

Yes, more exposure latitude when contact printing large negatives vs enlarging small negatives.

Diapositivo · Sep 7, 2016

middleWave said:
thanks a lot. the mamiya 6/7 is probably more suited for my needs, which includes wedding photography. i will look into the resources you shared, thanks.

If wedding is your main interest I would focus on medium format. Considering that you are buying into a system now, I would suggest a system like the Hasseblad 500, for the central shutter (which can be synchronized with all shutter times, useful for marriages, where fill-in flashing is common practice) and the interchangeable backs, useful to load a new film very fast, that assumes you have several backs preloaded with film and when one roll ends you can change back in a fast and easy way, which is especially useful during the ceremony.

Any medium format system with interchangeable backs and central shutters would fit your needs quite well. A TTL-flash exposure system might be of help, but I wouldn't consider that very important, TTL-flash automatisms are prone to their own class of mistakes.

I would also seriously advice you to learn to use a flash light meter and an incident light meter. Relying on another camera for exposure is less practical and less effective (no incident light reading, bigger weight, clumsy operation, more prone to problems such as battery problems, risks inherent to the use of "matrix" metering etc.). Incident light meter is very useful for that kind of photography.

There are several ceremony photographers here, I do believe, if you open a new discussion on specifically which system should you buy for marriage work you will find a lot of useful insight.

munz6869 · Sep 7, 2016

Large format is friendlier, and you get into more interesting conversations with people whilst hiking or wandering. People are rarely so interested in what you're up to with an SLR. I often miss the light because of this, but c'est la vie! It makes the process so relaxing and pleasant.

Marc!

PeterB · Sep 7, 2016

ic-racer said:
Yes, more exposure latitude when contact printing large negatives vs enlarging small negatives.

Conceptually why is that so?
Does this phenomenon also mean you get more exposure latitude when enlarging MF cf 35mm negs?

pdeeh · Sep 7, 2016

also, a folded 10x8 can double as a nice picnic table.

DREW WILEY · Sep 7, 2016

I enjoy all kinds of formats, but consider 4x5 the most versatile in terms of a compromise between portability, image control, cost, and potential
degree of enlargement. But for sheer enjoyment, my favorite format is 8x10. The extra effort seems to slow you down, while the bigger groundglass
really draws you in to enjoy the composition, and allow very precise focus. After one has learned view camera composition, even their quicker small
camera compositons tend to dramatically improve. You lean to slow down and look, and pay attention, rather than just machine-gun your shots.

Ko.Fe. · Sep 7, 2016

Doug Thomson said:
Hmmm ... 8x10 is much larger than 4x5 and much slower, but you will be able to contact print on your paper with your paper negative. Paper negatives are an interesting medium. However, you do do 4x5 a disservice I think. All LF cameras are fairly slow, but there have been boat loads of action shots taken with 4x5 press cameras like the venerable Speed Graphic. I have two 4x5 cameras, a Horseman monorail and an Ebony SV45U2. Neither is "cheap" and both are precision instruments and a good 4x5 negative can certainly turn out a very large print whether printed in an enlarger or digitized. Personally, I like the fact that my large format camera slows me down and makes me contemplate every aspect of the image.

Well for my kind of photography 4x5 was only fast enough if handheld, focused by RF and framed by VF. Every time I have it on the tripod and ground glass it was just little bit too slow for day with winds and clouds or at sunset.

My "huge, slow and cheap" "statement" was given from Leica RF user perspective. Graflex press cameras and Calumet monorail I used were huge comparing to Leica M, very slow comparing to Leica M and very cheap comparing to M-mount cameras and lenses. Yes, I went cheap with 4x5. But even if I paid premium price for nice folding, wood made 4x5 with decent lens on it, the 4x5 is too small for contact prints and enlarger is huge. It just staying now on the floor, collecting dust, so huge and heavy it is. Also, most of 4x5 current users I meet are digitizing and printing from computers. And this something I'm not interested at all.
I prefer to print and scan the print for on-line presentation of my little achievements, not into marketing of myself and LF film photographer while cheating with scans and digi-prints

JPD · Sep 7, 2016

I love my 6x6 Rollei's, but sometimes they are too fast and simple to use. With a large format camera it feels like you are doing more productive work.

MattKing said:
If you have a beard and grey hair, you need a large format camera to complete the ensemble.

I've said the same many times. And don't forget the grey photographer's vest covered with pockets.

pdeeh · Sep 7, 2016

pdeeh said:
also, a folded 10x8 can double as a nice picnic table.

and, you can use that sheet you hide under, as a tablecloth

LAG · Sep 7, 2016

Excuse me middlewave

One Advantage: Give one step forward on film, and another one but larger, to stay far away from d.g.t.l, to me reason enough!

LAG · Sep 7, 2016

pdeeh said:
also, a folded 10x8 can double as a nice picnic table.

pdeeh said:
and, you can use that sheet you hide under, as a tablecloth

There should be more people like you in this inner world of forums. Thanks for putting a healthy smile on my face

dpurdy · Sep 7, 2016

Whenever I see LF images (on line) that aren't sharp, I wonder why bother with large format. It is something of a romantic idea of the old days shooting with large camera and the dark cloth that draws some people. What they want in return is another romantic idea of buttery glowing soft images. You can achieve that same buttery softness with roll film. The corrected perspective or selective focus is the difference if that is important. However I think that is almost never important. Otherwise disregarding perspective control or buttery softness, it is very difficult to exceed with 4x5 what you can do with 120.

Poisson Du Jour · Sep 7, 2016

^^ +2

Marttiko · Sep 8, 2016

Camera is a tool to record something of the world. Different cameras have different properties which can be used to capture things of the world.

That's not everything camera is for. It's also a tool for altering the way photographer is in his surroundings. It's not only photographer using his camera, but also camera "using" the photographer. What I mean is that cameras properties alter the way which photographer works and feels. That's what many calls "slowing down". One could say that this isn't related to camera but to photographer. But then one would be wrong, because after all photographer is someone with camera. They can't be completely separated. Camera is also a object which people react to. That also can bring new possibilities and ideas for photography or personal life outside of it.

Last evening I was shooting outside my grandparents house. I've been here a lot since my childhood. Still I found couple of things I don't remember seeing before. I was looking for those certain things because I have been photographing old things. That's because I have almost a hundred years old lf camera. Next year is 100th year of Finland's independence, and I had an idea to record history of Finland with camera roughly the same age.

I use LF camera for this project not because of sharpness or movements. Some pictures are even unsharp though I usually prefer sharpness. To be honest some pictures turn out to be unsharp because my lack of skill. But all in all this LF camera has altered my view of the world. I have found new things and got to know many people because of it. I understand some things in history better than before. I have learned new things about photography. I'm better photographer than before.

You may wonder why I bother when I post unsharp picture, but I know what I'm doing and enjoy it. It's not the case of "bothering", it's about photographing with gear which I enjoy and which I think are best for my shooting habits. And which I can afford. That doesn't mean I don't try to achieve best results I can both in aesthetics and technically, but there's very much more to it than those things. And sharpness isn't always the best option aesthetically, I think.

DREW WILEY · Sep 8, 2016

Trying to evaluate large format prints online is about as intelligent as trying to cut down an oak tree with a fingernail file. You need to look at samples
of real, competently-made prints, not mini web smudges. And yes, size matters. For my trip over the last two weeks I chose 6x9 roll film holders for
my little 4x5 folder. With great care, I can produce some very nice 16X20-ish prints, or maybe even 20x24, given the fact I was employing superb
lenses and very acute film (ACROS and Ektar), along with view camera tilts and swings, which ordinary MF camera don't provide. The reason was simple. Lots of long days of high altitude hiking, much of it off trail, and no room left over in my big pack for traditional 4x5 filmholders. I ran out 4x5 Quickload sleeves last summer. But in the darkroom, if it were actual 4x5 film, I could squeeze respectable 30x40 inch prints out of the same shots,
instead of merely 16X20. Of course, for something that big, I'd far rather use 8x10 originals instead. And yeah, yeah, there are going to be those who
go around bragging that they can make a print a mile wide from Minox film if they want, and can "prove" it over the web...

Alan Gales · Sep 8, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
And yeah, yeah, there are going to be those who go around bragging that they can make a print a mile wide from Minox film if they want, and can "prove" it over the web...

But Drew, you know that you have to look at the Minox print from a "normal viewing distance".

is there any advantage to large format aside from resolution?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency