Reducing backs?

[Robert]

How common are 5x7 and 4x5 backs for older 8x10 cameras? Did most 8x10s have this sort of thing or is it something rare that few cameras had? I'm guessing it's too much to hope that some sort of standard existed.

 

[SteveGangi]

I see them all the time on EBay but have to wonder, how to be sure it will fit *your* camera. They don't always say what make/model/year camera they are for. For $10US I might take a chance. When it is $80 or more, not worth it.

 

[lee]

I have a homemade 4x5 back for my 8x10. I have a Deardorff 4x5 Special that comes with a 5x7 back. When I had an Elwood 5x7 enlarger I shot a lot of 5x7 as I had a 5x7 Kodak 2d that I bought from the Fort Worth Police Dept. They used it for mug shots back before that Polaroid thing. I have use of a Deardorff V8 that has a 4x5 and a 5x7 back. I think the reducing backs are pretty common as least around here.


lee\c

 

[LFGuy]

I guess my question would be how commonly are they used?

I can see using a 4x5 back on an 8x10 to Polaroid proof it, but I've got enough to carry with a bigger camera that I don't want to add more stuff! (Might be less of an issue for a 5x7 with a 4x5 back).

For the record, I've never used a reducing back, nor plan to use one, but that's just me.

 

[Robert]

For me a back is alot lighter then a second camera. I'd love to get an 8x10. The prices for used ones doesn't seem too excessive if I avoid the big name models. I also wouldn't mind a 5x7. The problem is I doubt I'll use either enough to really justify it. A camera with a few backs would let me have one camera but two or three formats. Sort of like using a rollfilm holder.

Wiith a 4x5 back I would be able to take advantage of the longer bellows and bigger lensboard if I need them. Or I could put the 8x10 back on for that special picture.

It just seems like the best thing possible. One camera to carry. A bunch of 4x5 holders. A few 8x10 holders. One set of lens.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

For studio cameras, I would assume they were used often. You could set up one camera and change the back depending on intended usage. Deardorffs also had sliding baffles to get multiple images on one sheet.

In the field one attraction of a reducing back is that by using a smaller format on a bigger camera, you reduce the problem of bellows flare (which can also be reduced by use of a compendium shade). It also lets you use all your lensboards on the same camera or go to a smaller format when you don't have a long enough lens. You might also want to use a larger format for B&W to contact print and a smaller (and less expensive) format for color to be enlarged or scanned.

 

[lee]

I rarely carry the extra backs. If I want to shoot 8x10, I load and carry the 8x10 and the holders. There are certain items that are common to all the formats and they get carried and stored in a separate bag. This would include the light meter and cable releases and filters, that sort of thing. Generally that is how I have been working for the last several years anyway.

lee/c

 

[LFGuy]

I guess because I do a lot of backpacking and hiking, I'd rather carry an extra 8x10 holder or two than a 4x5 reducing back and associated film holders.

Also, I have higher quality long lenses for 4x5 around the same focal length of my wide lens for 8x10, so I'd rather use the ones for 4x5. And, I'm not typically doing much long focal length work, so being able to use a long 8x10 lens on 4x5 isn't that much of an issue for me.

As to bellows flare, however, I assume a larger, wider covering lens used with a reducing back will put a whole lot of extra unnecessary light for the smaller format. (Then again, the same light would be in the bellows for the larger film format, too, so I'm not sure).