Most cost effective (bang for buck) 5x7 view camera....

[harlequin]

Hello Team,

Several of us share a small spartan studio in Texas, when the group decided the next possible acquisition is a 5x7 view camera, we came to the conclusion because we have a high quality Fuji 210 plasmat, and were relishing at the thought of contact printing direct onto high quality fiber based enlarging paper....

Anybody do this out there?
5x7 film availability?
Are 57 film holders available/expensive?
Not sure what brands would be worth considering, did Calumet or Omega make an entry level 57 camera?
Lastly, this format seems a better for landscapes.....
Any feedback or 5x7 photo images greatly appreciated, I assume a 210 is the “normal” lens?

Many Thanks for your input....!


Harlequin

 

[Vaughn]

Hello! I use 5x7 quite a bit. Landscape, though. Will you be doing mostly studio work? Looking for new or used equipment?

Examples I have seen of 5x7 portraits seem to show that it works quite well. Having that little bit of extra height (in 'portrait mode') lends itself to the eye sweeping up and down, or down and up for that matter. The 210mm will be a 'normal' lens...perhaps not optimal for head shots, but certainly it can be worked with. Fuji plasmats come in two types -- one has Fuji written around the lens on the outside of the barrel, and an older model where it is written around the lens inside the barrel. Both excellent lenses for 5x7...the latter will also cover 8x10. Solid lenses either way.

Film -- B&W readily available
Holders -- on the used market only these day...price depends on age and condition...$20 and up perhaps?

There are new cameras being made...and maybe new holders...in China. Many fine old wood cameras out there, also. I use a 110 year old Kodak Eastman View No.2 (newer bellows), and there are quite a few others. A lot will depend on what type of camera you want to work with. Several rail-types (Sinar, etc) out there.

Edited to add: It is easy enough to get the feel of a 5x7 print by holding a print that size in one's hands...perhaps an 5x7 inkjet on 11x14 paper and judge if it is an approbiate size. Personally, I feel there is no finer hand-held size for a print, intimate, yet it can occupy a modest wall space where the viewer can feel comfortable approaching within a couple feet.

If an used 8x10 can be found, a 5x7 reducing back can usually also be found for it...that would give you the easy option of moving to 8x10...it is a disease!

This is a 5x7 contact print (carbon transfer process instead of silver gelatin) If you size it to 5x7 on your screen you'll get an idea:

 

[ic-racer]

we have a high quality Fuji 210 plasmat

I think 5x7 contact print photography is not that popular because 8x10 will cost about the same, it is easier to find 8x10 cameras, film and film holders (vs 5x7), and the contact print is bigger.

If you are enlarging, then 5x7 enlargers are easier to transport and install than 8x10 enlargers, so that shifts the value toward 5x7.

I started 8x10 with a 5-dollar Century view camera and a $50 210mm lens someone had dropped (Symmar-S) It 'just' covered and was fine for everything I did.
This image is a contact print of an 8x10 negative from the Century camera with home-made bellows and the damaged 210mm Symmar S.

 

[CreationBear]

I'm spending the summer getting to know my Sinar Norma 5x7, but I'm becoming more and more enthusiastic about what it brings to the table. To be honest, I think a lot depends on your work flow: if it's contact printing only, I doubt I would want to be locked into any format smaller than WP. For a hybrid workflow, however, I think 5x7 excels in its versatility: basically any aspect ratio--from square to 3:5 to full-blown 1:2.8 pano--you hack out of the 5x7 negative will approach the overall size of a 4x5. (When I start having delusions of grandeur, I also entertain the prospect of going the DNG/alternative process route as well.)

 

[foveon_m]

I think 5x7 contact print photography is not that popular because 8x10 will cost about the same, it is easier to find 8x10 cameras, film and film holders (vs 5x7), and the contact print is bigger.

+1
5x7 is kinda abandoned format, most films are just available in 4x5 and 8x10.

 

[Bob S]

Hello Team,

Several of us share a small spartan studio in Texas, when the group decided the next possible acquisition is a 5x7 view camera, we came to the conclusion because we have a high quality Fuji 210 plasmat, and were relishing at the thought of contact printing direct onto high quality fiber based enlarging paper....

Anybody do this out there?
5x7 film availability?
Are 57 film holders available/expensive?
Not sure what brands would be worth considering, did Calumet or Omega make an entry level 57 camera?
Lastly, this format seems a better for landscapes.....
Any feedback or 5x7 photo images greatly appreciated, I assume a 210 is the “normal” lens?

Many Thanks for your input....!


Harlequin

The difference between a 57 contact print vs a 57 enlargement from 45 is hardly worth the investment in the added bulk and weight of 57.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

As someone who shoots a LOT of 5x7, and has several 5x7 cameras (not to mention multiple cameras much bigger), I'd say 5x7 is a great format and a great size. The 210 is a little on the wide side of normal for doing studio portraits with a 5x7 - something on the 240-300 range would be better. But film is still easily available in the emulsions and speeds you might want to use. 5x7 film holders are readily available on the used market at reasonable prices. Depending on what camera you get, a 5x7 is not that much heavier or larger than a 4x5. I have a Canham wood-field which is a terrific camera for what I use it for, but if you're going to be an occasional shooter, in the studio, then it's probably not a good value-for-dollar for you. As someone else already mentioned a Sinar Norma, if you can find one for a good price, they're a great value for the dollar because it's a system camera that can grow with you as your needs and uses grow. And it doesn't hurt that they look super sexy in all their mid-century machine-age design. If you just want to get your feet wet without being overly invested, an Agfa/Ansco tailboard 5x7 is often a good deal. Plenty of bellows extension, rugged, and just enough movements to be usable in the studio, especially as a portrait camera.

Contact prints from 5x7 are a little on the small size, but not the little jewel-like prints from a 4x5. They are quite readable at arms' length. They're also a gateway drug to alternative process printing.

 

[5x7shooter]

Although I have several 4x5 and one 11x14 large format cameras around and use them, I prefer 5x7 BW film negatives then scanned to digital printing. If you want to make wet processcontact prints, then 8x10 and 11x14 make more sense.

5x7 seems like the large format sweet spot as 5x7 cameras are not much larger and heavier than same-type 4x5 models but 5x7 has a 75% larger film negative area. A high proportion of modern 4x5 lenses work just as well with 5x7. I do have the same Fujinon 210 W lens and it is a very nice lens, one of the sharpest ones that I've used.

Of the 5x7 large format monorail cameras that I've personally used, the modular Toyo D and G monorail models are affordable and quite decent, although used large format cameras out of humid Japan often require bellows replacement. Modern, functional 5x7 cameras are occasionally available on eBay, but less frequently than 4x5. Many knowledgeable people speak very highly of the Sinar Norma 5x7, although I have not used one personally.

The Rittreck 5x7 is a metal folding field camera, but at 9 pounds 6 ounces, rather heavy. It can infinity-focus 12" (300mm) to 14" (360mm) lenses. It's one of the more rigid folding 5x7 cameras. Functional copies are available on eBay for less than $500. I had a machinist friend help me clean up my copy. It's common for Rittreck kits to include a 4x5 back. Be sure that any Rittreck 5x7 includes a modern 5x7 back that takes standard film holders. Many do not, the back being limited to old-style plate and book-style holders.

There are lots of 5x7 folding wooden cameras and they're often quite nice, especially for backpackers, and I have one. I probably would not attach a 210 Fujinon W lens to one as modern Plasmat-style lenses of this size can be a bit too heavy for the front-standard of older wooden cameras and over-stress the front standard. That's hard on the camera and also may set up vibration or other problems that affect image quality.

Overall, in the studio, one of the Toyo or Sinar 5x7 metal monorail cameras is probably the most convenient and rigid, although the Rittrecks are very workable.

 

[Rick A]

Having own(ed) several 5x7's 4x5's and up to 11x14 cameras, the 5x7 remains my favorite. I enjoy making contact prints from them, carbon transfers and cyanotypes as well as salt prints. I currently own three 5x7's, (and a couple of 4x5's) talk to me I may be tempted to part with one and a couple of film and/or dry plate holders.

 

[Alan9940]

I believe Intrepid is releasing their 5x7 very soon...maybe July 1? That would certainly be a low cost alternative. The primary reason why I never went with the 5x7 format is finding an enlarger. Yes, I could just contact print 'em, but I've shot 8x10 for about 40 years and very satisfied with those contact prints. I have 4x5 cameras and all the darkroom stuff to support that format. I'm sure 5x7 is a lovely format...it just never made it into my lexicon.

 

[CreationBear]

All great points above, but one I didn't see mentioned was the GG--no doubt it doesn't provide the immersive experience you get from 8x10 and ULF, but for me the 5x7 GG really was a quantum leap beyond what I get from my 4x5 options and changed the whole photographic process for me.

 

[Jim Jones]

In 1972, when 5x7 equipment was being discarded in favor of 4x5 and 8x10, I bought a Burke & James flat bed 5x7. Over the next several decades it was my favorite LF camera, supplemented by a monorail B&J. These did everything the more elegant and expensive cameras could.

 

[Ian Grant]

Technically not 7x5 camera I bought a Kodak Specialist 2 HAlf plate camera last year with 6 DDS film holders for £100 ($125) with its two original lenses a 203mm f7.7 Ektar and a 4¼" Dallmeyer WA,all in the original Kodak case. In practice it's an upmarrket 2D and while a Half plate camera the International back takes modern 7x5 DDS film holders (or European 13x18). 7x5 cameras were never made or sold here in the UK until very recently as we had Half plate and Whole plate formats so DDS are rare and expensive but they are cheap in the US and Ialready had quite a few as I have 3 Seneca 7x5 cameras, two need restoring and new bellows.

Ian

 

[ic-racer]

I hope my post above does not make it seem like I don't personally admire 5x7. If an inexpensive 5x7 field camera with film holders comes my way I'd pick it up. I have plenty of lenses that will cover, and a 5x7 mixing box, 5x7 negative carrier and 210mm Componon-S that could get some use.

 

[removedacct1]

5x7 is worth investing in, if only for its aspect ratio.
I love working in 5x7. I have a battered Burke & James Watson I got very cheap a couple years ago. Its a homely thing, but it does an excellent job.

 

[mshchem]

5x7 contact prints are amazing. Try some Azo type (Lupex?) sometime. However Ilford and Foma (VC) fiber papers, contact printed, use any old enlarger and multi grade filters as a light source, you are in business!

 

[voceumana]

I personally like the 5x7 format and aspect ratio. One thing to note that isn't that obvious till you try to load film, a 5x7 sheet can be held by the narrow width with a single hand; you can't do that with 8x10--makes loading the holders easier than 8x10.

Different films are limited, but enough to satisfy me.

I bought an Osaka and it is well built. Might still be available, see http://www.bromwellmarketing.com/osaka.htm

Mine is in natural cherry with chrome or nickel finished metal parts.

 

[chris77]

Toyo field view (6 1/2 x 4 3/4) with 5x7 back (not easy to find) or with another 5x7 back custom fitted (easy to do).
Perfect in my opinion. Light, sturdy, all metal, long bellows, easy to transport in any backpack.
I love the 5x7 format and can only recommend it.

 

[removed account4]

if it doesn't have to be a view camera look for a rhembrant camera they sometimes are affordable. they are a portrait camera so you won't have moments but still fun. also keep an eye in the classifieds here, B.S. Kumar sells affordable 5x7 cameras and he is a wonderful person to work with.

 

[mark]

I am emotionally attached to my 5x7 Kodak 2d. I don’t shoot color with it as I don’t roll in the cash. Arista EDU Ultra is not super expensive yet.

my 2d is beat up, ugly, and I would not trade it.

 

[mrosenlof]

5x7 contact printed on 8x10 paper makes a very nice presentation. I mask with rubylith to get a wide white border. It's a great format for prints held in your hand.

Film, b/w only is available from the online retailers. holders are a bit of a problem. chamonix makes new ones that are not cheep. used holder exist, just a bit hard to find. especially newer ones

 

[Ian Grant]

5x7 seems like the large format sweet spot as 5x7 cameras are not much larger and heavier than same-type 4x5 models but 5x7 has a 75% larger film negative area. A high proportion of modern 4x5 lenses work just as well with 5x7. I do have the same Fujinon 210 W lens and it is a very nice lens, one of the sharpest ones that I've used.

Here in the UK you could have said the same about Half Plate, 6¾" x 4¾" they were once extremely popular however LF field cameras began to fall out of use amongst amateurs between WW1 and WWII. This was probably becaause with few exceptions all our cameras used cumbersome book form plate holders, needing film inserts to take sheet film. These book form holders needed to be matched to individual back, there were no standards. Only Kodak used the current standard sized plate/film holders which had become the de facto standard in the US from the early 1900's. Here in the UK Kodak sold Half Plate, Whole Plate and 10"x8" after WWI manufactured in the UK. A British made Half Plate Kodak 2D is near identical to an Eastman Kodak 2D except for the size of the GG screen.

Here in Europe the metal bodied Avus style German cameras shooting 9x12cm or larger took over, this happened as there were improvements in films and plates making hand held use more practical.

Ian

 

[xya]

I'd also recommend the rittreck, not expensive, very sturdy. 4x5 adapters are cheap. I even have an 8x10 back for landscapes, no movements, but for very little money you can shoot 8x10 in case of. at 360mm close 8x10 portraits could also have their charm.

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd also recommend the rittreck, not expensive, very sturdy. 4x5 adapters are cheap. I even have an 8x10 back for landscapes, no movements, but for very little money you can shoot 8x10 in case of. at 360mm close 8x10 portraits could also have their charm.

Having handled a Rittreck they are mazingly small and light weight 7x5 cameras, with a 5x4 reducing back tehy are still close in size and weight to many 5x4 field cameras.

Ian

 

[xya]

Having handled a Rittreck they are mazingly small and light weight 7x5 cameras, with a 5x4 reducing back tehy are still close in size and weight to many 5x4 field cameras.

Ian

yes, that's why I sold most of my 4x5 stuff, except the graflexes...