LF is drawing me in, and I'm fighting it!

[timbo10ca]

Disclaimer: This is a long post

I have a growing interest in LF photography, unfortunately I know little about it. I also don’t know anybody who even shoots film anymore, let alone LF for me to pick their brain. I have read The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, and find the concepts fairly straight forward and intuitive. Maybe I am missing something, because when reading posts from LFers, things sound more complicated than I’d initially thought. There is obviously a lot more to it. My general impression is that it’s much more difficult and involved than shooting MF, let alone 35mm. Is this (and the apparent price) why few people shoot LF??? I’ve read that “A User’s Guide to the View Camera” by Jim Stone is a good place to start, and I do plan on reading it, and likely a couple others that you may recommend as necessary. I don’t want to spend all my time reading, rather than doing, but obviously I need the basics. Also, I originally figured I’d just develop the film in trays, but I’m gathering it’s not as simple as that, potentially even more difficult than taking the picture in the first place. Now, I’m not against difficult, I just want to have an idea what I may be getting into before spending a lot of money (which never seems to end, apparently).

I want to get into LF for a number of reasons. I want to be able to produce a single negative at a time with the control this allows. I want to explore the Zone System more fully. I love using my 6X6 MF camera for the size of the negative, and for the slowing down of “process”. I want to go further, but I don’t know exactly how I should do it. I’ve read other posts recently on the same subject, but everyone’s situation is different.

Essentially, I shoot everything outdoors- no studio work, so I would be lugging my gear. I do mainly landscapes, but I also want the versatility to shoot subjects at short distances, maybe even some close-ups. I feel a full range in movements is important, as I don’t want to limit myself. I see the new and very expensive cameras have asymmetric rear movements to help maintain focus. Is this available on older/less expensive cameras? Is the price worth it to help a beginner learn? I guess if pressed to choose 3 lenses I’d use the most, it would be a wide-angle, a normal lens and a moderate telephoto. I would want a system that is not that old that requires me to be a camera repair technician. I’m not interested in “vintage”, I’m interested in “fully working” Would a rail camera be better for versatility movement-wise, or a lighter field camera? What is the weight difference anyway? I see a lot of Cambo rail cameras going relatively cheap on ebay- are they any good? What about cameras with drop beds vs without- why the difference? Does it affect the amount of movements?

How does the lens/shutter/lensboard system work? I know you need a lensboard to fit the camera, and the shutter is a part of that, which a lens is then mounted to. How do you change lenses? Do you have a different lensboard for each lens, and leave them as a unit? How do you decide on a shutter type/size?

I guess the biggest question is last- what size. I don’t have an enlarger for big negs, and would rather just start off with contact printing them- I assume this is the easiest way to make prints. Is the process any different than making a contact print of my roll negs, or doing a print from a projected image? Anyway, For this reason, I would want an 8X10, as I prefer that size of print, and get a 5X7 reducing back, as I like that format as well. Is this reasonable? Will lens coverage and bellows extension limit a single camera being used for different film sizes?

So what cameras should I be looking at? What costs (loaded question I know, but I think I’ve given enough info here to get a ballpark idea)? What are the prices of lenses? How important is a fast lens in LF photography anyway?

Well this isn’t the longest post I’ve seen at APUG, but it must be close. Hopefully many will take the time to read it and respond. If the answers to all these questions are in a single up-to-date book, give me the title. Thanks.

 

[Konical]

Good Evening, Timbo,

You're "fighting it"?? Why? It looks as you destined to lose anyway!

Most of the questions you pose have been addressed in previous Forum posts. There are, of course, books (Simmons, Stroebel, etc.), but a Forum search will cover a lot of the same territory at no cost.

Konical

 

[papagene]

Oh, you'll be joining the rest of us soon. Using LF is fun, frustrating and enjoyable, maddening and relaxing, a pain in the butt and rewarding.
You're gonna love it!

gene

 

[DBP]

Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

LF is not inherently more complex, it just gives so many opportunities to add complexity that some people can't resist. I'll leave most of your questions to people with a lot more experience and knowledge (Ole), but answer a few simple ones. The lenses are more or less permanently mounted to the boards, so you really need one board per lens. There are some work arounds, but that is the basic rule. Printing large format negatives is easier because they are bigger, but the basic techniques are the same. The only fundametally new skill you have to learn is handling sheet film, which is not difficult. I learned LF when I was 14, in a photography class that started with each of us loading one holder and taking one pic with a Crown Graphic (or maybe Speed - it's been 30 years). That was the sum total of my LF experience when I started using my Speed Graphic. It's a much more forgiving medium, which is why newshounds stuck with it so long.

The only other thing I have to say is that your choice of format will depend to some degree on how far you want to be able to carry the camera and over what kind of terrain. While the cameras aren't all that much heavier than MF or even some 35mm, you really need to use a serious tripod, and that can get heavy after a fair distance, as can the holders, especially for sizes above 4x5.

 

[JBrunner]

Disclaimer: This is a long post

I have a growing interest in LF photography, unfortunately I know little about it. I also don’t know anybody who even shoots film anymore, let alone LF for me to pick their brain. I have read The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, and find the concepts fairly straight forward and intuitive. Maybe I am missing something, because when reading posts from LFers, things sound more complicated than I’d initially thought. There is obviously a lot more to it. My general impression is that it’s much more difficult and involved than shooting MF, let alone 35mm. Is this (and the apparent price) why few people shoot LF???

There are more of us than you might think. It isn't that awful expensive, as you will shoot far fewer shots, with a higher percentage of success. If you can afford to shoot four or five rolls of 120 in an outing, you can entertain yourself with a view camera on an identical outing for about the same. LF is at once the simplest and most demanding type of photography. I know that sounds cryptic. Most of the "complicated" things we disscuss here are very fine points among accomplished LFr's talking shop. Most of it isn't that important while you are learning the basics.


I’ve read that “A User’s Guide to the View Camera” by Jim Stone is a good place to start, and I do plan on reading it, and likely a couple others that you may recommend as necessary.

Steve Simmons book is good as well.

I don’t want to spend all my time reading, rather than doing, but obviously I need the basics. Also, I originally figured I’d just develop the film in trays, but I’m gathering it’s not as simple as that, potentially even more difficult than taking the picture in the first place. Now, I’m not against difficult, I just want to have an idea what I may be getting into before spending a lot of money (which never seems to end, apparently).

Tray development works just fine, and as a beginner you will have less problems with it than some of the other methods, and any problems you may have will be easily regognized and corrected. I highly reccomend it as a starting place.
Get fancy later.

I want to get into LF for a number of reasons. I want to be able to produce a single negative at a time with the control this allows. I want to explore the Zone System more fully. I love using my 6X6 MF camera for the size of the negative, and for the slowing down of “process”. I want to go further, but I don’t know exactly how I should do it. I’ve read other posts recently on the same subject, but everyone’s situation is different.

Essentially, I shoot everything outdoors- no studio work, so I would be lugging my gear. I do mainly landscapes, but I also want the versatility to shoot subjects at short distances, maybe even some close-ups. I feel a full range in movements is important, as I don’t want to limit myself. I see the new and very expensive cameras have asymmetric rear movements to help maintain focus. Is this available on older/less expensive cameras? Is the price worth it to help a beginner learn?
I guess if pressed to choose 3 lenses I’d use the most, it would be a wide-angle, a normal lens and a moderate telephoto. I would want a system that is not that old that requires me to be a camera repair technician. I’m not interested in “vintage”, I’m interested in “fully working” Would a rail camera be better for versatility movement-wise, or a lighter field camera? What is the weight difference anyway? I see a lot of Cambo rail cameras going relatively cheap on ebay- are they any good? What about cameras with drop beds vs without- why the difference? Does it affect the amount of movements?

Most any field or monorail camera will have more than enough movements to get in to trouble with. You will run out of lens coverage before movements in most cases. Photos of cameras twisted into pretzels are largely marketing. For most landscapes I shoot, you would have to examine the camera a bit to see the movements in play. If your bend is architectural more movements becomes more useful. Drop bed cameras do so to A) get the front out of the way for wide lenses, and B) attempt make up for a lack of back tilt as in the case of some press type cameras.


How does the lens/shutter/lensboard system work? I know you need a lensboard to fit the camera, and the shutter is a part of that, which a lens is then mounted to. How do you change lenses? Do you have a different lensboard for each lens, and leave them as a unit? How do you decide on a shutter type/size?

The lens is placed in a shutter. The type of lens and aperture size determines the size/type of shutter. The lense/shutter combo is mounted to a lensboard, and each lens/shutter/lensboard unit is what is changed.


I guess the biggest question is last- what size. I don’t have an enlarger for big negs, and would rather just start off with contact printing them- I assume this is the easiest way to make prints. Is the process any different than making a contact print of my roll negs, or doing a print from a projected image? Anyway, For this reason, I would want an 8X10, as I prefer that size of print, and get a 5X7 reducing back, as I like that format as well. Is this reasonable? Will lens coverage and bellows extension limit a single camera being used for different film sizes?

The process of contact printing is very much like contact printing your roll negs. Most of us use spring backed frames for best paper to neg contact.
8x10 makes nice contact prints, but how far are you willing to carry the camera? 5x7 is not as heavy, and makes a nice little jewel of a contact print, but will you wish it was 8x10? 11x14? It's all trade offs.

So what cameras should I be looking at? What costs (loaded question I know, but I think I’ve given enough info here to get a ballpark idea)? What are the prices of lenses? How important is a fast lens in LF photography anyway?

You will be looking for a camera that fits your budget. An older camera in good shape is perfectly usable, and does not vary much in overall design and concept from a newer one. You can make astounding photographs with most any of them, so I would say look for used. You won't be in any danger of losing money if you do your homework and get a good deal. APUG classifieds is a superb place to find LF gear.

Well this isn’t the longest post I’ve seen at APUG, but it must be close. Hopefully many will take the time to read it and respond. If the answers to all these questions are in a single up-to-date book, give me the title. Thanks.

As the technology of LF is pretty traditional, from a camera basics point of view, a book written today isn't going to contain that much new than one that is twenty years old. Its the stocks, processes, lens designs/coatings and minor doodads that change the most.

Come to the darkslide.....

 

[Dave_B]

As a hobby it is less expensive than most.....

Go with your heart. Unlike cars or computers, used LF gear is wonderful, some say better than what you can buy new. It can be a less expensive hobby than chewing tobacco. While one can, and many of us do, spend a fortune on the gear, one can also take wonderous images with stuff being given away on ebay. The lenses, cameras, film holders, tripods, etc. are so much better than most of us can use that it is almost never the reason we miss an image. The range of interests in this field can range from the hyper technical aspects of lenses, film, processing, digital scanning, etc. to the artistic side of photography and how it should be compared to the other fine arts such as painting.
For me, the first large format chrome I shot was so captivating that I was hooked. Most of my images are crap but the one in ten "keepers" are so intoxicating that I keep trying for another one. Join the club, as a hobby it beats having a mistress, gambling, drugs, or raising yippy small dogs.
Cheers,
Dave B.

 

[Dave Parker]

Alls I can say is.........



WHY???????????



Dave

 

[John Koehrer]

If you're going to do mostly landscape etc. a monorail can be overkill. Really don't need a lot of movements unless you're doing architecture or studio work. You may want to try a field camera for the weight and size advantage.

 

[raucousimages]

The sickness claims another soul.

 

[P. Yee]

Welcome to the world of darkslide. Its like what the other posters have said. I started with a 4x5 camera. I got a use one with as many movement as possible, since I considered it as a camera to learn LF and also, I didn't know what I want in the way of movement. After a year, I knew what I would need and use in a LF camera and then made the jump to the 8x10 camera. I haven't use the 4x5 since.

 

[sattler123]

Take a look at the Wehman 8x10 camera. It offers a lot of movements (more than you will ever need for landscape or close-ups), has geared back movement (swing), is incredibly light and very, very robust. It is the perfect camera for people who want to be able to hike with it and not worry about breaking anything when they throw it in the back of the car. For a new camera it is very reasonably priced (don't know your budget!). As to lenses - well with 8x10 it gets more expensive than with , say 4x5. I would start with a 300mm (normal) lens before adding anything else. Fuji makes some really great small lenses, that have a lot of covering power. Talk to Jim at Midwest Photo Exchange, he can set you up with a nice lens for your camera (used or new). You'll need a good tripod, darkcloth, film holders and a loop. See you over at the darkside - it's a desease, so be careful!

 

[jzamor]

Muhahaha... Another convert...

I started down the path to the dark side with MF as well. The difficulty I have found with LF is in planning. LF requires you to have more planning than 35mm and MF. There is more gear (generally smaller bits, like film holders, loupe, leatherman, watch, bubble levels, etc...) to keep track of and understand, it's heavier so every little thing counts when you need to carry it anywhere, it takes a presence of mind to be able to use it in a timely fashion with fading light, etc...

But in the end, while there is some complexity introduced, it is manageable. I've also found, that the planning that LF forces me to do, is something that is present every time I make a decent photograph with any format.

As far as cameras go... I'd first look at what focal length lenses you use and roughly convert that to the right lens for the LF format(4x5, 5x7, 8x10, etc). That will determine your minimum and maximum (especially for closeup) bellows draw that you will need. I've found that shooting landscapes I use very few movements. Mostly rise, fall, shift, and a little tilt. Other then that, it's hard to go wrong with a LF camera.

 

[phaedrus]

Disclaimer: This is a long post
Essentially, I shoot everything outdoors- no studio work, so I would be lugging my gear. I do mainly landscapes, but I also want the versatility to shoot subjects at short distances, maybe even some close-ups. I feel a full range in movements is important, as I don’t want to limit myself. I see the new and very expensive cameras have asymmetric rear movements to help maintain focus. Is this available on older/less expensive cameras? Is the price worth it to help a beginner learn?

Hi!
JBrunner (identical taste in hats!) answered almost all your questions, leaving only this morsel for me to chime in with my 2 cts. worth of opinion.
I started off in large format with an Ebony with asymmetrical rear movements, and whenever I have to tilt/swing the front standard, I miss them. So, yes, it is a great help for a beginner, to the extent of pampering him ;-)
If you also consider an optical bench camera, you might get those asymmetrical movements in an older, used Sinar, I think their system is called "Orbis". Or was it Arca's? Anyway, I consider them unpractical for field use. Apart from being potentially heavier I believe they are much more delicate in transport and take up more room.

HTH!
Christoph

 

[Ole]

Not really much I can add to this, except...

Most lenses, regardless of vintage, are far better than you'll ever need. My oldest lens is a Steinheil Aplanat, probably made before 1870. It was state of the art at the time, and is still just as good as when it was new! Anything new enough to be coated and in a working shutter will get you started, there's no need to buy brand new until you know exactly what your requirements are.

I disagree with the idea of converting your most used focal lengths from other formats to LF. It just doesn't work that way! I've been using moderately long to long in smaller formats, but tend to use wide to superwide in LF. I'm only now beginning to use wide lenses in smaller formats, after "learning to see wide" with LF.

For closeups, I've found a 240mm lens is my first choise - regardless of format. That gives 1:1 at 96cm distance from subject to ground glass, enough to keep my knees off the muddy ground. It also gives a reasonable working distance, a bellows draw that all my cameras can handle, and besides: Most lenses in that focal length can be used on any format from 4x5" to 8x10". So I use the same lens (a 240mm Symmar convertible) on all the sizes!
As someone else has already said, movements are overrated. IMO, weight is not.

 

[jford]

The point about planning is absolutely it. I think LF requires a slightly warped personality that gets excited by organising all the little things. I have started down the path to LF and am making very slow progress, however I feel that this is a long term thing that I will master over many, many years. I think LF weeds out the bolters and those without patience fairly quickly. Good luck.

John.

 

[Jerevan]

I can't add much, either - most of it has already been said. But you've read a few books on LF, used other formats and you know how to find a good image - so dip your toes in the water!

Favor weight and ease of use. If you want to do contactprints, I think anything less than 5x7 may feel too small. If you still want to use 4x5, you could go the hybrid route, scanning and printing on OH and then contact print. Or do what I do, series of photos or panoramas, made of two or more photos.

Speaking from my own experience, two things are easily done, going overboard with movements and size. Movements are good to have, but many, many shots can be done without any (or very minimal) movements. Size - well, a 11x14 contactprint would be a wonder to see, but moving and setting up could be enough of an issue to not even bother taking the camera, and rather use something else. Which negates the whole point of a camera: it should be used.

 

[Jim Chinn]

It sounds like the 8x10 route is what you want to start with for contact prints. The biggest question you need to answer is what is your budget? You can spend anyhwere from $300-$400 on an older Calumet C1, $800-$1000 on a useable Deardorf, $1100-$1500 on a mint Kodak Masterview or older Toyo and up to $5000 on something brand new.

Budget determines the number of compromises you must except. Older monorails like C1s and Cambos are bulky to transport and can be heavy but less expensive. An older folding camera like a Deardorff is lighter but you then sacrifice some movements. Older cameras may require some repairs such as bellows work or replacement.

In you budget you need to consider a good tripod which when working with 8x10 is just as important as the camera itself.

As for lenses, the range of pricing is broad and bargains are out there on some pretty good glass. I would recommend you start out with a focal length that approximates what you use most often from your 6x6 kit.

Being realistic about a budget is the most important. Let us know what you can spend and the APUG braintrust will list all the options available to you to put together a kit within those parameters.

 

[philldresser]

The sickness claims another soul.

Sickness....no, Affliction ..yes

Still, it can be cured by specialized retail therapy

Phill

 

[Mark_S]

My path to the darkside:

I was a happy, innocent 35mm shooter. I processed my own film, I made nice little 8x10 prints - all was well. Then an evil person loaned me a Crown Graphic - I shot some film, processed it in trays, made contact prints, and I was hooked. I upgraded my darkroom to be able to handle 4x5 negs - I discovered that I could print 16x20s that were tack sharp, I started testing film and figuring my exposures based on the Zone system - then, once I was fully hooked, the Crown Graphic was reclaimed - Aaaagggghhhhh, what was there to do, I couldn't get the monkey off my back short of buying a field camera with a couple of lenses - did you know that with what a few film holders cost, you could buy a pretty decent 35mm camera? - No matter, I was totally hooked, and had to have them.

Now, I spend hours either in the darkroom or under a darkcloth - my skin has taken on a pasty white appearance - my former family and friends comment on how nice it was when I carried a camera around and produced those 8x10 prints - now it is the camera that carries me around!

Resistance is futile, just mortgage the house, upgrade the darkroom, buy the camera and make the e-bay large format listings your home page. If anyone asks, tell them to read 'The Negative' and then they will understand.

 

[jolefler]

Too funny! True (sadly), but still humorous!

 

[Stew Squires]

You mentioned the process, the deliberate seting up and taking of the picture. While certainly a part of the MF effort, it's much more pronounced with movements and film holders and dark cloth in LF. One of the things you might try is to locate a 4x5 or an 8x10 that allows for use of a 120 back in 6x7, 9 or 12. This would cut out a lot of the film holder issues and allow you to get used to the movements, etc. Of course then you would miss the 'wow' of the larger negatives.

I have a Toyo AX 4x5 and a Wehman 8x10. Both are wonderful field cameras and the Wehman is probably the same weight or nearly the same weight as the Toyo.

I do this because of the deliberateness of process. It's fun and you certainly realize that you have a lot of control over the results. Taking it to developing isn't for me though. I have a local lab do that and then scan negatives and print on inkjet. I shoot color though so a lot more difficult to apply Zone system. Works for me.

Stew

 

[John Kasaian]

More complicated? LF is IMHO less comlicated. In fact its about as basic as it gets---one sheet of film = one negative that you can make a contact prints from, just by following the diections on the yellow envelopes. Of course it can get as complicated (and as expensive) as you want from there on in, but essentially you are the one who calls the shots.

Fear not. You'll find it a heck of a lot of fun.

 

[kb244]

More complicated? LF is IMHO less comlicated. In fact its about as basic as it gets---one sheet of film = one negative that you can make a contact prints from, just by following the diections on the yellow envelopes. Of course it can get as complicated (and as expensive) as you want from there on in, but essentially you are the one who calls the shots.

Fear not. You'll find it a heck of a lot of fun.

Ditto, what makes large format so 'complex' is how damn simple most of the equipment is, since you are at a point to do all the thinking from the camera even down to film plane perspective, so much you can do with it, and so simple to do so too... it just doesnt always feel that way.

 

[SAShruby]

Candaian greets Canadian

Welcome, you should be a member of largeformatophotography.info.

I am new as well, three years in the flied, I personally consider it as new. I spent two years just reading posts, doing my own research. It was a good thing to do, you will save a tons of money. Make your decission very wisely, that would be my best advice.

It is quite expensive at the beginning, so be careful what you buy and for what purpose. I ended up spending just over 30 thousand dollars to get my dream gear. The thing is, Camera, lens and film is not only gear you need. Welcome in LF, but do not hurry!

Personally I did not waste too much money so far (around 500 USD or so), I have few things they are small and I needed them bigger. My mistake was I did not have enough knowledge to make my decission right.

 

[Ole]

... I ended up spending just over 30 thousand dollars to get my dream gear. The thing is, Camera, lens and film is not only gear you need. Welcome in LF, but do not hurry!

Whoa there!

I've done a quick count, and estimate my total expenditure on LF gear at between 9 and 10 thousand dollars. That's including everything made for plates or sheet films (current count = 15 cameras from 6.5x9cm to 30x40cm), a pletora of lenses to cover each and every format and spares (65mm to 840mm at last count), a 5x7" enlarger, sheet film holders, plate holders, processing machine, dark cloths, light meters, tripods, you name it. In addition most of my gear is old, rare, obscure, collectible, or all four.

There's one thing though - with the exception of two shutters, one barrel lens, three holders and a tripod I've bought nothing new.