is there any advantage to large format aside from resolution?

[middleWave]

first, pardon my newbieness.

i have been wanting to get a mamiya 6 camera for a long time. my brother's wedding photographer used this camera (while using a nikon DSLR for metering), and the images (viewed online) were absolutely stunning. could have been his processing or...but it seems to be a highly reputed camera.

i've dabbled with film for the past 6 years (and worked as a photographer for 3 years) but i'm still no expert by any means. i'm wondering if it would make more sense to go deeper into 35mm or medium format, rather than splurging for a large format system? (which would cost at least $1,000 for camera and a 50mm equivalent lens)

what do you think? is there any advantage aside from higher resolution?

 

[mike c]

Yes, its ability to correct distortion, focus are a few .

 

[faberryman]

Not to mention being cool.

 

[Dan Fromm]

You're probably mistaken about the costs of entry. If you're patient, you should be able to find a complete 4x5 Cambo SC-2 or the equivalent Sinar and, separately, a modern 150/5.6 plasmat type lens for much less than $1k. Watch what's offered on eBay.com, be patient. When I moved up in format from 35 mm I got a Speed Graphic. Graphics (Speed, Crown) are less capable than the monorails I mentioned but are very usable.

But understand that you need more than a camera and the one lens. Film holders, tripod, tripod head, probably a dark cloth, ...

The advantages? Tonality, enlargeability, control of where the plane of best focus lies (tilts/swings), elimination of converging verticals (rise/fall), ...

Educate yourself before you make any decisions or buy any equipment. You asked an apparently short simple question that wants a book length answer. The two books most often recommended on http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/ are Steve Simmons' Using the View Camera and Leslie Strobel's View Camera Technique. They can be bought used for reasonable prices from sellers on abebooks.com, alibris.com, amazon.com, ...

Thinking of http://www.largeformatphotography.info, go there and read the FAQs. And ask y'r question on the forum.

 

[middleWave]

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.

 

[Paul Howell]

I think you need to decide what you want to shoot. I use 35, MF and LF as each has it's strengths and weakness. LF is my go to format for land and cityscapes. I usually shoot with a 4X5 press camera only occasion do I lug my view camera around. My press cameras a crown and a speed grapfic have limited front movements but useful. I can also customize development of each 4X5 negative. Some medium formats technical cameras have much more tilt, swing, and rise than my press cameras and with a 6X9 negative a decent size. Other issue is how do intent to print? Scan and inkjet or wet darkroom. A 4X5 darkroom is an additional expense. If you don't have a darkroom what does it cost to have a 4X5 negative developed in Taiwan?

 

[Bob Carnie]

Not to mention being cool.

Also there is nothing like looking at a 4 x5 or 8x10 negative on light box and being able to look at it real close.

I love 8 x10 for that tactile feel.

 

[removed-user-1]

You can probably get a decent monorail 4x5 with a normal lens and film holders for far less than the price of a single tilt-shift lens for any current DSLR system. I generally shoot 35mm now, but I had a Cambo SCX for a while and was only a few hundred in. Furthermore, when I sold it, I lost exactly one dollar.

 

[jeffreyg]

Adding to the above. If you develop an interest in alternative processes such as platinum/palladium printing the larger negatives (although not necessary since you could enlarge smaller ones) are great to work with.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[wiltw]

1. Lower magnification to make same size prints means: less visible grain
2. 'Resolution' advantage can be debated by the quality of the lens used...certainly the fundamental optical performance of the lens is taxed much less by the lower magnfications.
   For example, 64 line-pairs/millimeter on 135 enlarged to 16x20 = approx. 64/17 line pairs vs.
   30 line-pairs/millimeter on 4x5 enlarged to 16x20 = approx 30/4 line pairs
3. More grains/color clouds per subject area mean better 'tonal gradations'
4. Tilt and shift movements afford controls not possible with rigid lens barrels.

 

[Jim Jones]

Don't judge the quality of a camera by online images or by how new it is. Like Dan, my first LF camera was a Speed Graphic. Now, despite having monorail and field LF cameras, the SG is still best for some uses. As for old equipment, if you have the time, download Timothy O'Sullivan's photo of the Canyon deChelly taken in 1872: https://www.loc.gov/item/96507688/ in the 150mb TIFF version. Compare it with Ansel Adam's photo from almost exactly the same place in about 1940. I like the old one better.

 

[Vaughn]

Cameras are tools -- what job do you want to achomplish?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

A larger negative is can be retouched, not possible for 35mm and difficult for smaller MF..

 

[wiltw]

A larger negative is can be retouched, not possible for 35mm and difficult for smaller MF..

Very true, but today I wonder about where you can even find the necessary expertise where retouching the neg is even offered commercially, sadly. That's why I didn't mention that benefit.
Two decades ago it was a service readily offered, and I used it for elimination of some distracting elements upon request of clients.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Very true, but today I wonder about where you can even find the necessary expertise where retouching the neg is even offered commercially, sadly. That's why I didn't mention that benefit.
Two decades ago it was a service readily offered, and I used it for elimination of some distracting elements upon request of clients.

Rose Scheler Toronto still does bleach retouching on prints.

 

[wiltw]

Rose Scheler Toronto still does bleach retouching on prints.

Yes, thx, but what about directly retouching NEGS? I would think it might not even be possible to purchase the spotting/retouching materials any longer, just as Spotone for spotting prints disappeared from the market.

 

[removed account4]

hi middleWave

it all depends what your plan is.
if you want to shoot weddings, product work
editorial " stuff in color "it might be easier and much
more efficient to keep using what you have
getting color flms and chromes purchased and processed is getting harder if you
use a lab to process it.

there are lots of different types of LF cameras, some are cheap as dirt
and from like 1900, somes rickety, sometimes solid, sometimes a tired box camera
lenses can range from harvested off of a clunker folder or box camera or a magnifying glass
to exquisite german or japanese glass made recently ... some LF cameras have lots of
movements to control perspective, force things out and in focus, and some are just about the same as
a big 35mm camera movement wise, and some are a mix of lots of movements and not so many.
resolution and clarity are kind of loaded terms with a LF camera. it all depends on your technique
and what you are after.
you can certainly get a bunch of film holders, LF camera ( 4x5 or even 5x7 or 8x10 ) and lens equiv to a
50 on a 35mm make a dark cloth out of of dark fabric from a fabric store or an over sized sweatshirt,
and a tripod for less than 1000$ and still have $$ left over for film.
==
with the quality of lenses and films these days being top-shelf for small and medium format cameras,
the main difference between large and smaller fomats some would argue
is that LF is more fun, and when you get the stars aligned
and the kinks out of your "system" ( set up, exposure, break down, get the negative processed )
there is a sense of accomplishment with LF that might exceed using a smaller format camera ...
AND if you go the alternative process route making prints from materials you concoct yourself
is a lot of fun too ...
not to say there aren't ways ( old and new ) to enlarge a 35mm negative to do alternative process images
but it is sometimes less complicated using a large negative to begin with.

have fun!
john

 

[ic-racer]

Perspective and focal plane control are characteristic of view cameras and tilt/shift lenses. These features are independent film size.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Yes, thx, but what about directly retouching NEGS? I would think it might not even be possible to purchase the spotting/retouching materials any longer, just as Spotone for spotting prints disappeared from the market.

Helen Tang works at Custom Colour Lab - she has the skills, this retouching negative thing is not as hard as one would think, lots of those old vibrationg lightboxes out there. Helen and others just picked up the skills by working on prints, I hope we have not evolved to a point that we cannot learn any more. I buy pigments for spotting at Deseeres, enough in one store to retouch thousands of millions of prints and negs.

 

[narsuitus]

is there any advantage to large format aside from resolution?

Yes, if a customer needs a large format color transparency, it is easier using a large format camera rather than a small or medium format camera.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Yes, thx, but what about directly retouching NEGS? I would think it might not even be possible to purchase the spotting/retouching materials any longer, just as Spotone for spotting prints disappeared from the market.

Is there anything preventing one from learning how to do it themselves. Brushes, pencils, and neococcine are available as well as many HOW-TO sites. In the past retouching was considered a necessary skill for professional photographers.

 

[silveror0]

Is there anything preventing one from learning how to do it themselves. Brushes, pencils, and neococcine are available as well as many HOW-TO sites. In the past retouching was considered a necessary skill for professional photographers.

Yes, it can be self-taught or learned online. There are tools, but there's also a thing called technique which I think is best learned from an expert. Here's one learning source that has just recently appeared:

http://www.katherinegillis.com/?utm...ign=Special+Print+Newsletter&utm_medium=email

Katherine is highly recommended by Alan Ross (http://www.alanrossphotography.com/), who is printing AA's Yosemite Special Edition negatives; she's been doing the retouching of those prints, so I'd have to say she's gotta be very good.

 

[Alan Gales]

When using the Zone System for exposure you can then develop each negative separately with sheet film. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_System

Your lens choice is enormous from old brass lenses to modern glass. I own Kodak, Wollensak, Fuji, and Schneider. I'm not stuck with one brand. For portraiture I use a 14" Kodak Commerce Ektar. If I could afford it I would also own a 14" Dagor and 14" Heliar. Each has a different signature. Others like the swirly background a Petzval can give or one or more of the soft focus lenses available.


I've seen old Cambo 4x5 monorail cameras in working condition sell for as low as $50.00 on Ebay. You can buy a clean working Crown Graphic with lens for $300 to $400. I've seen nice 210mm lenses in modern Copal shutters sell for $150.00. If you have to have a modern wooden folder then you can pick up a used Shen Hao for $700.

There are 8x10 cameras out there that sell for $500 and less if you don't mind an old wooden tailboard camera or heavy metal Cambo C1. I've seen Fuji 250mm F/6.7 lenses go for $250 and less lately.

Like most, I started with 35mm and have shot plenty of medium format cameras but large format is the most fun in my opinion. As you have found out, medium format is like 35mm only with a larger negative and a little less depth of field. You are also a little more limited on lens focal length choices. Large Format is a completely different animal.

 

[John Koehrer]

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.

Mamiya 6 or 7 are both medium format cameras. Neither one have perspective control..Guess that was missed a bit earlier

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

If you are genuinely happy with the quality of the work you are producing in medium format, and I do mean aiming for a quality that is distinctive in its style and execution, as well as the quality inherent in the medium format size, then there is no real justification on grounds of perception and commentary to move up to 4x5 or bigger. The resolution gain is at best very small (or retrograde: where are your skills in advanced LF technique at this point?), and in many cases where there is a lack of finesse and lack of mastery of the technique, the expense and time required to carry-over skills from MF and incorporate the technical aspects of LF will grossly outweigh practical considerations such as perceived vs actual resolution gains. You could well end up with years of disappointing results.