Recommendations for first 4x5 system

[Locutus of Borg]

I have been shooting primarily Medium Format for the last 6 yrs or so using the Hasselblad V series. I did some 35 mm processing briefly back in the 1970s. I got back into analog photography after I retired 7 or 8 yrs ago. I have a very nice and dedicated Darkroom at our farm in Southern Missouri.

I love what the 6cm x 6cm brings to the image compared to the 35 mm. Now I would like to experience what the 4x4 brings compared to the medium format.

I always liked the press cameras I saw in the old B&W movies I grew up with and my 88 yr young Aunt still uses a (I think) Speed Graphic. She has a friend who processes the film for her. Unfortunately she live 1200 miles from here

I had the opportunity to buy a complete Horseman system (was contained in 3 Pelican Cases) from the estate of a Professional in Syracuse but was outbid. I did manage to get a large freezer full of Paper and film for $200.

! know next to nothing about large format cameras so I am looking forward to what you fine folks have to offer.

Thanks, Doug

 

[gone]

I'm not a LF shooter, but I once had a Graflex 4x5 w/ a Graflok back. It was very versatile for a press camera, and w/ an inexpensive but sharp 203 Ektar took nice photos. Not heavy at all, the Speed Graphics are quite a bit heavier, but you can use a barrel lens. Great for portraits.

The 4x5 negs were a disappoint to me going from 6x6 though. They have smooth tonality, but they don't "pop" like you would get w/ a 35mm Leica lens or a 6x6 Rolleiflex Xenotar. I'd want a 4x5 strictly for portraits and the like. For what I do, printing in the darkroom is better w/ 35mm and MF.

One thing I enjoyed was looking at a 4x5 color slide on a light table. Wow!

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'll second the recommendation to get a Speed or Crown Graphic (or Busch Pressman or other similar press camera), either with a Graflok back or at a price that will support buying a 3D printed Graflok conversion (neighborhood of $125, doesn't include a compatible focusing panel, sets back film plane a millimeter or so). Most Pacemaker generation cameras were built with Graflok, and some older cameras were converted in the day, so it's worth checking.

Graflok means almost nothing for use with standard film holders, but for any sort of film accessory -- roll film holders, Grafmatics, extension backs to larger format, Polaroid/LomoGraflok instant backs -- a Graflok is virtually required, and it's generally better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it (though if you were an experienced 4x5 user and had decided you need nothing by standard double dark slides, there'd be no reason to seek one; this is more likely to be the case with field or view cameras than with press cameras, in my experience).

Lens boards for the Anniversary are easy to make, a little less so for Pacemaker generation (though both are amenable to 3D printing).

Lack of "pop" in the negatives compared to the lenses referenced above is often due to a combination of single coated lenses from the 1950s (or no coating at all on older lenses), with "less black" interior on the bellows (70-80 year old fabric with no baffles vs. carefully selected paint and good baffling inside rigid camera bodies). This is largely countered by developing to slightly higher contrast to offset the flare effect. IMO, it's more than offset by the increased level of detail and lower magnification required for printing. One thing large format does well that smaller formats are challenged with -- or even find impossible -- is the quest for "grainless images." Some photographic styles embrace the grain, but some kinds of portraiture are enhanced by the level of image smoothness that is a bigger challenge the smaller your film.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

What's your budget?

 

[juan]

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/sears-busch-pressman-4-by-5-225.190542/

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Before you spring for anything, educate yourself about the different types of 4x5 cameras, their features and their intended uses. There are cameras that do better in the studio but are not all that portable. There are cameras that are extremely lightweight and portable but that don't have a lot of movements (educate yourself about those too) and won't take very long or short focal-length lenses. There are cameras designed to be handheld with viewfinders, etc., etc.

The camera you choose will depend on the type of photography you want to do and the compromises you are willing/forced to make. There is a lot of information on the web and elsewhere just for the searching. Ansel Adams' "The Camera" is a good place to start; easy reading, full of authoritative information.

Have fun,

Doremus

 

[Donald Qualls]

Contrary to Doremus, I'm going to suggest buying whatever's affordable to start. Your first 4x5 will always be the wrong camera. You won't know what kind of 4x5 photography you want to do until you've had your first camera long enough to at least learn its operation, find its limitations, and notice what you wish you had that that first camera doesn't offer.

I started large format with a 1930s vintage plate camera (my first eBay purchase after stumbling on a mislisting for next to nothing). After using that one for a while, I got some different plate cameras that were a better fit for what I wanted in large format; those led me to what I'd known I wanted for decades (a Speed Graphic) and it was only after owning and using the Speed Graphic for a couple years that I concluded I did in fact need a view camera (and got a Graphic View, which I've recently upgraded to a Graphic View II).

There is no way that first one (a Patent Etui -- cool little camera but very limited) could have given me what I want from large format, but for fifteen bucks including ground glass and three plate holders (only took me a year to find film sheaths for it) -- but I've kept the later acquired plate cameras (their own breed of cool, and more capable than the Patent Etui), the Speed Graphic is mine forever, and the only reason I'll be selling the Graphic View is that the Graphic View II is an improved redesign -- same interface, better features, some bugs squashed, to pull metaphors from the software world.

And unlike where I was with plate holders (made to hold glass plates, which were almost unobtainable at the time I bought those cameras, requiring film sheaths to be able to use the cameras), any 4x5 film holders you buy will continue to work with any 4x5 camera you ever own. Lenses transfer (worst case, you'll need to buy or fabricate new lens boards to fit a different front standard) as well. But whether you'll want a press camera, a field camera, a monorail, or something that tries to fill more than one of those roles, you won't really know until you've gone through a box or two of film -- and to do that, you need to have some kind of camera, with a lens that covers 4x5, and one or more film holders.

That Busch linked above is a pretty good choice, given the price includes shipping and a couple film holders. It's got a revolving back (increases versatility on a tripod), more movements than an Anniversary Speed (apparently some front tilt and shift as well as rise), parallax compensating wire frame viewfinder -- doesn't look like a Kalart, so I can't say if the RF can be recalibrated for other lenses, but the ground glass always works. No focal plane shutter, so lenses must have a shutter -- but unless you're into antique lenses, that won't matter.

 

[GLS]

Your first 4x5 will always be the wrong camera.

I've seen many people express this same view, but it isn't a truism.

My first, and thus far only, 4x5 camera is a Linhof Technikardan S45 I bought second hand. I did my research and made the correct choice according to my needs and priorities. I regret nothing about the purchase, nor is there anything I think the camera lacks; at least not anything which could realistically be incorporated without sacrificing something else which I value more (weight vs rigidity and precision, for example).

 

[grat]

I've seen many people express this same view, but it isn't a truism.

I agree. I went a bit upscale on my first 4x5, but I have zero regrets on my Chamonix 45N-1 (Classic). It's still my favorite large format camera. However, I did a lot of research on the various types, and I knew what I wanted the camera for-- a lightweight camera for landscape photography. I eliminated cameras that didn't have the range of movements, or cameras that were too big or bulky, and settled on the "Field" style. From there, it was a short trip to the build quality, and modern vintage of the Chamonix.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have been shooting primarily Medium Format for the last 6 yrs or so using the Hasselblad V series. I did some 35 mm processing briefly back in the 1970s. I got back into analog photography after I retired 7 or 8 yrs ago. I have a very nice and dedicated Darkroom at our farm in Southern Missouri.

I love what the 6cm x 6cm brings to the image compared to the 35 mm. Now I would like to experience what the 4x4 brings compared to the medium format.

I always liked the press cameras I saw in the old B&W movies I grew up with and my 88 yr young Aunt still uses a (I think) Speed Graphic. She has a friend who processes the film for her. Unfortunately she live 1200 miles from here

I had the opportunity to buy a complete Horseman system (was contained in 3 Pelican Cases) from the estate of a Professional in Syracuse but was outbid. I did manage to get a large freezer full of Paper and film for $200.

! know next to nothing about large format cameras so I am looking forward to what you fine folks have to offer.

Thanks, Doug

it's a good idea to dabble in LF;it's 'real' photography but don't expect to get the same quality increase going from MF to LF as you've got when going to MF from 35mm. It won't happen. IMO, MF is the best compromise between flexibility and quality. Nevertheless, I'd get started with a low-cost LF system and one or two lenses.You also need a few film holders and a way to develop the film. 7x7 trays will do for a start.

 

[Photomultiplier]

IMO, MF is the best compromise between flexibility and quality

I totally agree! To me it also looks like the "sweet spot". Without any doubt, 4x5" (LF in general) is fun, but 6x6 yields high quality results without being too much of a headache regarding DoF and diffraction.
Unless one uses something slightly exotic like a Hasselblad Flexbody, the movements available in LF are a huge advantage in some situations.

I got a Chamonix C45F-2 (to replace my far too bulky Sinar) and use 210mm and 90mm lenses (both Rodenstock).

The C45F-2 is light, compact, very fast to set up, has a bright fresnel screen and it is of very high craftsmanship and absolutely beautiful. I was comfortable with it immediately and it was a lot of fun to use from the first frame on.
If one does not need the extreme movements of a Sinar (i wonder how many lenses even have sufficient image circle), i think that a Chamonix is never a bad decision.

6x6 (Hasselblad) remains my workhorse system while the 4x5" is used on special occasions. My problem is that i sometimes do not know what's ahead of me on certain trips and then the agony of choice hits very hard

 

[Paul Howell]

With modern films a 4X5 is somewhat overkill in terms of grain, although the larger the negative the more detail, still at some point how much detail is enough. I shoot 4X5 when I want to shoot zone, or when I need or want movements. I have Speed and Crown, the Crown has a newer MC Zeiss that by happenstance works with the focusing arm. The Speed which I bought in 1966 and over the decades broke the rangefinder, I use as a field camera with limited movements. I also have Brand, is the make, New View is the model. New Views were made right after WWII in L.A. It's a double rail with good movements, with my 150mm Commercial Ektar or Fuji 210 it produces very sharp and contrasted negative. Using the older version of the Zone with correction for low contrast single or uncoated lens getting negatives to pop has not been an issue for me. For hiking I like the Crown as with fast film I can use the rangefinder and external view finder with a monopod. When I can easily use a strong tripod I use the Brand. Also entry level is the Graphic View, Cambo, and Burk and James, monorail viewfinder priced about the same as Speed or Crown. If you are going to be using a tripod, then a basic view camera with a modern 150 to 210 and if within your budget a 90mm. Next is dozen or so film holders, a good meter, sturdy tripod. If you think you might to learn the zone a spot meter, if you decide on the Beyond the Zone a good incident meter and the software. A dark cloth, filters, lens shade. Then developing equipment, trays, and a scanner that is 4X5 capable and printer, or a 4X5 enlarger with corresponding lens, negative holder. If you plan on sending your negatives out, find a good custom lab close by as possible.
After sitting at home for past 2 years this summer I will be shooting 4X5, getting my kit back together in larger coolers that will fit my SUV remind me of how many parts I need to made sure I have on hand.
Do some research and make a list of everything your going to need, what you have on hand and what you need to buy, the price out the system.

 

[btaylor]

Maybe visit the Large Format Photography Form. The opening page has a treasury of links to information that will help you decide. Large format gets you into a whole lot of issues that smaller formats don’t deal with, like perspective correction, plane of focus adjustments, slow lenses optimized for f/22, groundglass focusing with a dark cloth and loupe, etc, etc. It can be a lot more than bigger negative. You have a choice of press cameras, field cameras, technical cameras, monorails - your choice will depend on your subjects and your technical requirements. The thing about press cameras is that about the only thing you get is a bigger negative than roll film- but that also means you can work handheld and quickly.

 

[GLS]

One thing I enjoyed was looking at a 4x5 color slide on a light table. Wow!

Yes, there's nothing quite like large format slides.

I agree with @btaylor that the LFPF is really the place to visit for advice on large format. You will get a ton of suggestions there.

If you wanted to buy new but still have something relatively light weight, the field camera offerings from Chamonix seem to be well regarded. There is always Intrepid as well if you want something super cheap and cheerful to learn on, although from what I've read they are a bit shaky when it comes to stability, and ease/precision of movements, which may just prove a source of frustration. You get what you pay for. Personally any slop would drive me crazy. I like using precision instruments, and my Linhof is bomb proof in that regard.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

You get what you pay for. Personally any slop would drive me crazy. I like using precision instruments, and my Linhof is bomb proof in that regard.

Not as upmarket as Linhof, but my Walker Titan SF has been a good buy. I bought mine new, I'm not sure how many there are in the used market.

 

[Don_ih]

It depends what you want to photograph and where you want to photography.
If you are photographing outside, landscape or portraits or even architecture photos, a Speed or Crown Graphic (or similar) is fine. It's easy to carry, easy to set up, has enough tilt to fix a lot of architecture shots.
If you are photographing still-lifes or more-controlled close-up portraits, The movements of a view camera can do magical things with the focal plane. The full movements of a view camera are what sets it apart and makes it possible to do things that can't be done with smaller formats. The larger negative is great but it's the photographic capability of a large format camera that really sets it apart.

 

[Craig]

Your first 4x5 will always be the wrong camera. You won't know what kind of 4x5 photography you want to do until you've had your first camera long enough to at least learn its operation, find its limitations, and notice what you wish you had that that first camera doesn't offer.

I wouldn't necessarily agree. For example, if I know my primary interest is landscapes and I'll be backpacking the camera, I know that a large, heavy, metal studio camera is the wrong camera. I've never done a studio type portrait on LF and I probably never will, so something optimized for that type of shooting wouldn't work for me.

 

[mgb74]

There was a Super Graphic listed here, but it looks like the listing was deleted. A Super Graphic is an excellent place to start if you don't need quite the front movements of a true field camera. Monorail cameras, which seem currently out of favor, can be found relatively inexpensive. But you lose some portability.

 

[abruzzi]

Monorail cameras, which seem currently out of favor, can be found relatively inexpensive. But you lose some portability.

With most monorails you are going to lose a LOT of portability, and I'm not going to reccomend a Technikardan 45 as a first camera for someone starting cheap (much as I love mine), but I've actually found the Sinar F both cheap, light, and moderately portable if you disconnect the bellows from one standard, move them to the far end of the base rail then use tilt to lean them down against the rail. Its not as compact as a wood folder, a technical camera, or a graphic, but its pretty darn packable (I use a Domke F2, which can hold everything I need including the camera, extension rail, 3 lenses, accessories and 6 film holders), not that heavy, and quick to setup. I also point it out because after a few years of futzing with folders, I found I just really prefer the flexibility of operating monorails. I got my F for an obscenely low price, but you can usually get a working F for around $200-$250.

Between the F and the TK45, I'm set for 4x5 and will eventually get around to selling my Master Technika and Shen Hao (both fine cameras, but I just prefer the monorail approach.)

 

[Paul Howell]

Relative inexpensive is the Graphic View, no frills, takes standard Graphic lens boards, has good movement, somewhat portable, but unlike the Speed or Crown not handholdable.

 

[mgb74]

Relative inexpensive is the Graphic View, no frills, takes standard Graphic lens boards, has good movement, somewhat portable, but unlike the Speed or Crown not handholdable.

But make sure you get that tripod attachment with it. Though I vaguely remember someone offering an alternative.

 

[Photomultiplier]

... but I've actually found the Sinar F both cheap, light, and moderately portable if you disconnect the bellows from one standard, move them to the far end of the base rail then use tilt to lean them down against the rail.

I tried the same with my Sinar F2, but the larger backpack that i got (Lowepro Whistler 450) was able to accomodate it with the bellows in place. Still too cumbersome to use for my taste. It was just too bulky with the rail, the big lens boards, tripod clamp and so on. The weight also was a major issue as the camera alone
weighing in at over 3.5kg. I ended up nearly breaking my back and did not want to take this monster out of the backpack for shooting when i came along a scene. So i just got the wrong camera for my style of photography which is mainly going out into the nature and in the mountains. My 6x6 gear can be also quite heavy depending on
what i take with me, but the F2 was just too much for me. But that's not the cameras fault.
The only thing i was technically disappointed with, was the focusing screen. Almost impossible for me to focus reliably.

With the Chamonix i am happy now. Suits my working style and is light, quick and fun to work with. If i really want to, i can fit the 4x5" gear in my smallest Lowepro Photo Active BP 200 by just removing one separator, altough it can only take 2 film holders. So i would need some small additional pocket for them, but it was
impressive that i now can hike that light and compact even with 4x5". If i remember correctly, the 4x5" system is approx. as heavy as the smallest Hasselblad gear that i usually take with me.

So if one wants to have a compact and lightweight LF system suitable for hiking and mountaineering, the Chamonix is a clear winner for me.

 

[Paul Howell]

But make sure you get that tripod attachment with it. Though I vaguely remember someone offering an alternative.

Should have added that, need the linkage from the camera to the rail, I've seen a few on Ebay without one.

 

[abruzzi]

So if one wants to have a compact and lightweight LF system suitable for hiking and mountaineering, the Chamonix is a clear winner for me.

sure every one has different preferences, but I found folding LF cameras frustrating, and a Chamonix 4x5 is probably 6-8x the price of a Sinar F. If you need ultra light and compact the Sinar may not be the best, but it is far more flexible. I shoot 100% in the field, so I wouldn't look at monorails as studio only cameras. I started thinking I needed a small compact folding camera, and wasted $2k on the ShenHao (didn't like at all) and the Master Technika (not horrible, but fiddly) before I was lucky enough to try a Technikardan, and the use of it made me realise how much I didn't like using box cameras, and how much I prefered monorails. I got the Sinar later and quite like it as well (I got it to support a sinar shutter for barrel lenses.) Since I'm primarily a Linhof user, all my lenses are on Technika boards (4x5, 5x7, and 8x10) and I just permanantly mount a Technika adapter in the non-Linhof cameras.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Relative inexpensive is the Graphic View, no frills, takes standard Graphic lens boards, has good movement, somewhat portable, but unlike the Speed or Crown not handholdable.

The one shown is a Graphic View II (centered tilts vs. bottom pivot tilts on the first version). Many of that model also come with Graflok back, but the easy clip-on back can be switched if you have a camera without and can find the back for it. IIRC, the bellows are easily removed as well, though I don't know that I've seen a bag bellows for these.

I've got one of each; the original is very usable, but if you have the choice, I'd recommend the Graphic View II with the Graflok back for the additional ease of movement use and versatility.

FWIW, I recently paid under $200 for my GVII with Graflok, including a 270 mm tele lens in a shutter that needs CLA.