Roger Hicks said:Dear Brad,
Every 5x7 user I have met (and that includes 13x18cm and half-plate users) does indeed see it as the ideal format: big enough to contact print (4x5 really isn't) but small enough to enlarge (5x7 enlargers aren't THAT much bigger than 4x5, and a LOT smaller and easier to find than 8x10). Once you try it, you're hooked.
For years I suspected it was the ideal format, purely on theoretical grounds, but coukdn't find a camera at the right price -- and then, by chance, about six or seven years ago I got two and a half in one year, a Gandolfi Variant, a Linhof Technika V and a 5x7 back (the half) for my De Vere 8x10 monorail. I was delighted to learn that I was right: it is ideal.
I've had two or three articles published where I plug it as such (one in Shutterbug), and I'll be pushing it again in the next Shutterbug buyer's guide. I also commend it highly in the free module in the Photo School at www.rogerandfrances.com where I run through the large formats that are currently available, and why you'd choose one over another.
I don't shoot a vast amount of LF, even though I have cameras from 6x7cm (Linhof) to 12x15 inch (Gandolfi) because it's a hassle -- but with 5x7, for most subjects, the hassle is at the minimum and the rewards are at the maximum.
Film choice? Still plenty from Ilford -- and remember that you can always switch to 13x18 or half-plate, because the holders have the same external dimensions and differ only internally.
Cheers,
Roger
David A. Goldfarb said:The 5x7" Press Graflex and Graflex Home Portrait cameras are the largest practical SLR's around that aren't extreme rarities, so that's another attraction.
David A. Goldfarb said:The 5x7" Press Graflex and Graflex Home Portrait cameras are the largest practical SLR's around that aren't extreme rarities, so that's another attraction.
The Canham 5x7"-->6x17cm back probably has done something to boost the popularity of the format as well.
jnanian said:there is a 5x7 press graflex right now on FLEABay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Graflex-Press-G...621601051QQcategoryZ15247QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
wish i had the umph to get another camera, but seems that i am all camera'd out these days ...
jnanian said:wish i had the umph to get another camera, but seems that i am all camera'd out these days ...
David A. Goldfarb said:Looks like a good one, and has a hard-to-find bag mag, but note that it's a plate mag, so it will need film sheaths if it doesn't already have them. I have a plate mag like this one with film sheaths and a later film mag. The film mag is smaller and lighter.
jnanian said:and the seller is igor's, he is a good-egg (bought a lens from him a while back) ..
BradS said:Like Q.T. Luong and several others here, I'm starting to think that the Canham Traditional or a (new?) Deardorff with both 5x7 and 4x5 backs is about as good as it gets.
timothyhyde said:Well, not so fast. My Ebony SV57U is about as good as any camera I have ever owned, and it comes with a 4x5 back included.
I do love the format and have learned film workarounds (buying in Japan and/or cutting 8x10 sheets) for both b&w and color, so I think it will continue to be my most-used format.
raizans said:i was thinking about 5x7, but with nobody to develop color film (aside from the larger, more expensive jobos), no polaroid films, and difficulty of finding 5x7 enlargers (on ebay and the internet in general), i think it's more of a bw+contact printing thing.
raizans said:i was thinking about 5x7, but with nobody to develop color film (aside from the larger, more expensive jobos), no polaroid films, and difficulty of finding 5x7 enlargers (on ebay and the internet in general), i think it's more of a bw+contact printing thing.
I converted the omega from 4x5 color by removing the color head and building a box out of wood about 5" deep and slightly larger than the aristo head - I believe the aristo head is actually a 7x9" light source. This box mounts where the old color head once was. The reason for the box was to move the light source and negative farther away from the lens and to allow the 5x7 projection to pass through the smaller opening where the 4x5 image once passed from the color head - think of this as sort of a fixed bellows. On top of this box I built a hinged frame to hold the head and the negative carrier is homemade as well. Nothing more than a frosted piece of glass which has a clear piece of glass hinged to it with photographic tape the carrier is masked off to 5x7 with the same black photographic tape - the boxe has a rabbeted channel under the hinged section that this carrier slides into. The column on the enlarge is slated away from the wall so there are no clearance issues. It's a very simple setup which has served me for over 20 years.Len Robertson said:Climbabout - There have been many posts regarding the Beseler 4X5 to 8X10 conversion. Yours is the first I recall on converting a 4X5 enlarger to 5X7. Could you give details? Negative carrier? Does the Aristo cold light clear the column on your Omega okay? Does the Aristo give even illumination across 5X7?
Len Robertson said:Climbabout - There have been many posts regarding the Beseler 4X5 to 8X10 conversion. Yours is the first I recall on converting a 4X5 enlarger to 5X7. Could you give details? Negative carrier? Does the Aristo cold light clear the column on your Omega okay? Does the Aristo give even illumination across 5X7?
climbabout said:As a follow up - if you folks are interested I can post some pics tommorow I'll check back on this thread or you can pm me.
Climbabout
Tim Jones
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?