Returning to Analog Large Format: The Big Shop

[Lam-Bartll]

My choice for a large, sturdy, and cheap tripod was a vintage aluminum Tiltall. It's much more stable than my compact Manfrotto travel tripod. I'm able to use a 300mm f/4 Canon FD lens on it with a teleconverter and gimbal. That would be about 5 pounds with the camera. They go for a little under $100. It doesn't have all the fancy features of a newer model.

View attachment 393803

I have this Tiltall as well and I'd definitely recommend it. It can handle my Horseman 45HF easily and I am normally do a decent distance hike with it on my back.

 

[Grafmatic]

When apples to oranges are compared it's no wonder people get dissatisfied with their tripod choice. I don't know how Tiltall became a star of this thread and I have no idea what they deliver with current design/manufacturing. Back in Tiltall's original days of stardom, I could not find a single reason to buy one over a Bogen. Today there are so many great tripod choices at all price points and sizes, it's impossible not to find the right one.

I suggested earlier the carbon Innorel which to me, especially with bowl head, is one of the best compromises on the market today. This especially so for heavy gear, LF etc. If anything beefier is needed, its larger cousin, the RT90C is the way to consider.

I dont understand bowl heads well except that they seem to be mainly intended for video (which I don't do). I don't want a fluid or ball head.
The Tiltall seems to have good balance between height, structural quality, and weight. They are also plentiful on the used market. It seems to be the Volkswagen Beetle of tripods.
There are many tripods indeed but the herd thins out quickly above about 60" as far as affordability. Plenty of choices at $600 and up. Hard to find specs on used or discontinued models. I started a thread on the topic that even I am tired of.

 

[DF]

Hello… Still a noob here… for anybody who hasn’t seen my posts, I am a former and soon to be returning large format, sheet film photographer.
I am in the process of figuring out what’s out there and how cheap I can get it for. I’ve got the camera on order: Intrepid 4x5. My first lens is here: 180mm Nikkor-W. (Future planned lenses are 120mm and 90mm Super Angulon clones by Fuji and Ilex respectively. .I will be developing in a Stearman Press 6-sheet daylight tank.

stuff like film processing supplies, focusing cloth, film holders, and most other odds and ends like cable releases, and so forth, I either have or can obtain easily. I was dreading finding out what light meters cost these days. Fortunately, I already have one: my iPhone. It turns out there are a number of spot meter apps, most supporting the zone system, I even found one that compensate for reciprocity effect, having the curves for a lot of popular films programmed into it. I haven’t given it the acid test of actual use, but assuming it works, it saves me both kit weight and money.

Where I am getting stuck is in several areas. First one would be tripods. Picking out a tripod is tricky for me. First off, I’m 6 foot two. Second I hate tripods that I have to pull or crank the center column up 2 feet from the tripod yoke. Third, I am not a spring chicken anymore and want it to be as light as possible. These requirements may seem to be mutually exclusive, but I did it way back when: when I was shooting large format before, I used a Linhof record giant tripod, which was amazingly light for its available height- on level terrain, I could get the camera high enough that I had to stand on something to see through it, without raising the center column at all. With a Bogen hex plate head, the whole thing weighed about 9 pounds and easily supported a monorail camera.

I have not been able to find one used nor even a picture of one, but that’s what I’m looking for or something like it. I welcome recommendations on tripods.

The other area where I am stuck is filters. I note that Wratten filters are still being made and sold. I haven’t been able to find filter holders. There also are, or were, other options like Cokin and Lee; still in the research phase on those. I could probably work with about six filters. I just don’t want to have to duplicate them across three lenses. Advice and recommendations welcomed here also.

I found a tripod with good height, although the legs are four section so it might take a while to put up. It also is inexpensive, enough so to make me wonder if it’s a piece of crap or not. Anyway, here it is:

https://www.amazon.com/Concept-Compact-Aluminum-K234A7-FH-03/dp/B0D2HPGJCZ?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1

Any advice or recommendations are welcome and thanks in advance.

"I was dreading finding out what light meters cost these days" -
I usually dread what everything costs these days....

 

[tykos]

I dont understand bowl heads well except that they seem to be mainly intended for video (which I don't do). I don't want a fluid or ball head.
The Tiltall seems to have good balance between height, structural quality, and weight. They are also plentiful on the used market. It seems to be the Volkswagen Beetle of tripods.
There are many tripods indeed but the herd thins out quickly above about 60" as far as affordability. Plenty of choices at $600 and up. Hard to find specs on used or discontinued models. I started a thread on the topic that even I am tired of.

bowl heads are handy: leveling the tripod only adjusting the legs is often a mess. With the bowl you can set the legs quickly and then level the base precisely moving only the bowl. Now you have a perfectly level base, and you can pan the camera keeping the horizon straight.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Leveling and aiming with legs only is easy as pie once you get accustomed to it. It's how surveyors - even my own father - did it for decades relative to far more demanding standards than anything in regular photography. And they did it that way in some pretty precarious places like remote mountain summits. I gave up tripod heads entirely for view camera work over 30 yrs ago; and I've been some distinctly precarious places myself.
I learned it with dad's old brass transit and maple wood set of legs. Modern survey equipment is largely self leveling plus or minus eight degrees or so; so setup is not as fussy as it once was.


But as a reasonable compromise, these new bowl heads are one of the smartest things I've seen come around in a long time. Not all tripods accept them. But for LF work you want a fairly large tripod top platform anyway, to minimize vibrations any direction.

 

[avandesande]

I've been using a Robus RC-5570. I am 6'4" and it goes taller than I can use and with no center column.

 

[tykos]

Leveling and aiming with legs only is easy as pie once you get accustomed to it. It's how surveyors - even my own father - did it for decades relative to far more demanding standards than anything in regular photography. And they did it that way in some pretty precarious places like remote mountain summits. I gave up tripod heads entirely for view camera work over 30 yrs ago; and I've been some distinctly precarious places myself.
I learned it with dad's old brass transit and maple wood set of legs. Modern survey equipment is largely self leveling plus or minus eight degrees or so; so setup is not as fussy as it once was.


But as a reasonable compromise, these new bowl heads are one of the smartest things I've seen come around in a long time. Not all tripods accept them. But for LF work you want a fairly large tripod top platform anyway, to minimize vibrations any direction.

i find surveyor's tripods way easier to level: the one i used are heavy so the lowest portion of the leg, when free, slides down easily, plus there's usually a foot rest to help the leg coming down. Photo tripods are usually lighter and less precise to position.
surveyor's tripod doesn't need to be 100% leveled, the "last mile" is accomplished by the three screws platform on the instrument: they usually have the pan rotation above this platform, giving a perfectly leveled movement.

All things considered a carbon fiber photo tripod with bowl head a good compromise for me: light (1,8/2kg), not bulky like a surveyor's or a Ries or a Berblebach, easy to level, unfortunately there are not a lot of models available but some options don't break the bank.

 

[Grafmatic]

Those are the ones I’m interested in (the ones that don”t break the bank). Unfortunately, that. last foot or so that I want (usually) seems to come at high cost.

It has been gently suggested that I might e overthinking, and maybe I am, but I am 68, buying a LF setup for the first time in 30+ years, and I only want to do it once.

 

[tykos]

Those are the ones I’m interested in (the ones that don”t break the bank). Unfortunately, that. last foot or so that I want (usually) seems to come at high cost.

i find that Aliexpress has lots of decent tripods with funknown brands. They all have very slight differences, but they all seem more than decent.
I've got an Intrepid 4x5 and never had a problem with my artcise as80c plus a 2 way head. it's sturdy enough for that camera.
Max height (it doesn't have the column) is 162cm, which is plenty: a normal head is 10-15cm, the ground glass is 2-4cm above the camera bed, so at max leg extension the ground glass goes from 175 to 187cm above ground. I'm 182, i have to keep the legs slightly closed or i cannot use the camera correctly.

But: don't count on the column, if your tripod has one. It's not a good thing with any camera, let alone a bulky camera like a 4x5. It may work well, but if you can avoid to use it it's better.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

I'm sure the OP has purchased a tripod already, but if not, I'd say that you absolutely cannot go wrong with an older Gitzo carbon fibre tripod from the early 2000's as long as it is in good shape.

They're absolutely solid enough for most LF shooting (if you are looking at a G12xx or larger, like the G13xx line) unless possibly you are intending to be shooting very long lenses.

Since the OP is tall, you may want to consider skipping the G12xx series and moving up to the G13xxx series because they get you more height without using a center column.
Specifically, the G1348 or G1349. These are the same legs (4-section, so they go pretty tall) and one came with the center column and the other only with a flat plate, but this is exchangeable, so if you buy the flat plate one and feel you need the center column, you can search out the center column.

I do think the legs with the flat plate would be high enough for you so it wouldn't be necessary to use the center column. I think it is 66" to the plate. Add 4-5" for a head and then 5-6" to the center of the camera and you are at 6-2" or so. Add a few more inches if you start with the center column and then go a lot higher if you extend the column. Check out the specs on them through a Google search.

I used my G1348/1349 tripod with 4x5, 8x10, 7x17, 10x12, and digital with nary a problem. Loved it so much I got rid of the larger Gitzo I had which was even more robust because it was overkill and the G1348 met my needs. Still love it so much I bought a second one a few years ago and intend to use them for the rest of my photo career unless I need to go super light (probably not shooting LF in that situation).

They are quite inexpensive on ebay and other places... be patient and wait for one in good condition. It's a lifetime purchase IMO.

 

[abruzzi]

Loved it so much I got rid of the larger Gitzo I had which was even more robust because it was overkill and the G1348 met my needs. Still love it so much I bought a second one a few years ago and intend to use them for the rest of my photo career unless I need to go super light (probably not shooting LF in that situation).

I had several aluminum 3-series Gitzos. One was setup with the Gitzo low profile 3-way head and the other with the sinar head. I just got a used carbon fiber 3-series, and it is still heave, but noticably less so than the aluminum it replaced. I do have an aluminum 5-series Gitzo, which is a monsterous beast, but it doesn't bat an eye carrying a Toyo 810MII (8-9kg before adding a lens), so I keep it around for that.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

I had several aluminum 3-series Gitzos. One was setup with the Gitzo low profile 3-way head and the other with the sinar head. I just got a used carbon fiber 3-series, and it is still heave, but noticably less so than the aluminum it replaced. I do have an aluminum 5-series Gitzo, which is a monsterous beast, but it doesn't bat an eye carrying a Toyo 810MII (8-9kg before adding a lens), so I keep it around for that.

Yes, my larger Gitzo was an aluminum one, a G410 or G411, I used it with the 12x20 and it held things up really well, but the CF tripod is much lighter and felt just as sturdy.

The Gitzos are all so well made (at least the older ones; I don't know about modern ones) I just don't see any point in buying anything newer.

My recommendation for a person buying an older Gitzo CF is to get the Mark II version or later of whatever you are looking at. They shouldn't be any more expensive and they are slightly better in a few ways, and I think I recall Gitzo having some difficulty with the glue they used on the first generation. I've not seen any that had problems personally, but I suppose they could be more prone to having the CF portions disconnect from the metal parts if the tripod takes a hit or something.

 

[abruzzi]

The Gitzos are all so well made (at least the older ones; I don't know about modern ones) I just don't see any point in buying anything newer.

Yeah, and they are easily fixed. I've bought a couple with issues, and the repar parts were cheap and easily installed. In addition to the 3-series CF that I just got, I also have two 2-series. One is a 1227 Mk2 whic has a 3-way head that I use on most of my 4x5s, and another one with a weird offset center column that can be rotated for unusual positions. It has an offset ball head, and I use that mostly for my MF cameras.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

I like Feisol CF tripods. (See BHPhotoVideo.COM.) You might think about the CT3371 for $435. (Available on special order.) A center post becomes an accessory for this tripod purchase.

This tripod has a maximum height of 61". But, including the center column and a tripod head adds about 8-10 inches without extending the center column. And, $435 is quite a reasonable price for carbon fiber.

A better, but more expensive option, would be the CT3372L, which is priced at $790. The "L" is for longer, up to 77" without center column. (One can be added as an accessory.)

I have a CT3372 (non L) tripod, which gives me something that's a little taller than myself.

For height, I have a Gitzo Giant that goes up something like 13ft. Very, very heavy. Much was made of Ansel Adams platform on his Ford station wagon. But to me, it makes more sense to have a tall tripod with a step ladder.

 

[Grafmatic]

I haven’t been here (my own thread!) in a bit, but I will carefully read the posts about the Gitzo tripods.

The Linhof I had was tall enough that I was able to use it in most circumstances with little to no center column extension. This made it about a foot to a foot and a half taller than most ‘standard’ tripods, and that extra foot or so tends to come at a high price.

getting reliable information has also proven difficult. For instance, one Gitzo that recently turned up on my radar is the 320 Studex Performance. According to KEH, this tripod has a maximum height of 90 inches (presumably with center column extended). That is more than enough. Other listings though state that the tripod maximum height is 72 inches (too small if taking center post extension into account). The weight of the tripod is listed in one place as 6 pounds (excellent) to 12 pounds (too much). Who to believe. Most ads on eBay don’t give you any information at all about these critical specifications.

it was suggested to me on another thread that I started that I’m overthinking and that is quite possible. But I have wasted a fair amount of money on unsatisfactory tripods and only want to do this once. I actually found what I think is the old Linhof that I liked so much But the asking price was way out of line with its condition.

I will check out everything mentioned in the previous posts and thanks to everyone.

 

[Grafmatic]

I'm sure the OP has purchased a tripod already, but if not, I'd say that you absolutely cannot go wrong with an older Gitzo carbon fibre tripod from the early 2000's as long as it is in good shape.

Believe it or not, no, I haven’t…

They're absolutely solid enough for most LF shooting (if you are looking at a G12xx or larger, like the G13xx line) unless possibly you are intending to be shooting very long lenses.



They are quite inexpensive on ebay and other places... be patient and wait for one in good condition. It's a lifetime purchase IMO.

That is exactly how I’m looking at it. I’m 68 and do not expect to be shopping for another tripod in 10 years.

Maybe it’s going to take hopping on a train and going up to the big box stores in New York with my payload (camera) and actually getting some hands on.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

Just to reinforce...

Gitzo 1348 with the flat plate.

Gitzo G1348 Inter-Pro Studex Carbon Fibre Tripod | eBay

Gitzo G1348 Inter-Pro Studex Carbon Fibre Tripod. Condition is Used. Shipped with USPS Priority Mail.

www.ebay.com

another one (may have been sold, it doesn't say)

Buy & Sell - Photography - FM Forums

Explore Buy & Sell photography discussions. Share your photos, discuss gear and techniques, and buy or sell equipment in our marketplace.

www.fredmiranda.com

Here are the specs for this (Page 5 at the bottom):

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/03553/03553.pdf

And for the granddaddy resource of them all from 1998 (Page 425):

https://static.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWork/Product_Resources/SourceBookProPhoto/Pro-Photo-SourceBook.pdf

There are several center columns that will fit it, but the one that was sold with the tripod to make it a G1349 was made with CF as well (called the G1318), whereas many of the other ones weren't (the geared ones weren't, and some of the rapid ones weren't as well.

With the 4-segment legs of the G1348/1349 legset, I basically only use the bottom leg sections when I'm on uneven ground (and I'm 5'-9" or so) because the head you choose adds at least a few inches and possibly up to about 6" to the height. Plus the camera.

Since this is a balancing act between size/weight and cost there never really is a perfect tripod, but I'd be shocked if there is a modern tripod you could get that will be as stable as one of these for anywhere close to the price of a used legset, and as long as they haven't been mistreated, you'll get a lifetime out of the Gitzo ones. That's exactly why I bought a second about 5 years ago... they are relatively cheap now and soo great. I'm nearly 55 and have owned the one for about 20 years and I don't expect to ever buy another tripod of the capability.

If weight isn't a concern, you could get a G15xx series or similar aluminum tripod. Much bigger and taller, much heavier, still totally great, but for a 4x5 field shooting tripod, that is pretty serious overkill, even for your height.

 

[Grafmatic]

Weight is a concern, but unfortunately, so is height, making it a balancing act as noted. Thanks for the information on the Gitzos. That might be a good way to go because they seem plentiful in the used market. I have come up with a doughnut, searching for my old Linhof.

Another Gitzo that has popped up on my radar is the 320 Studex (not the Compact version). It has a center column but supposedly has a 90 inch height max, presumably with the tripod center extended. I would never have to use that for more than a little fine adjustment if those specs are accurate.

Also looking for recommendations for a focusing cloth. Light weight is important. I’m amused by the fact that most of the focusing cloths I see in ads and listings are shown being used inside out. Repeating myself to save scrolling, the camera is a 4 x 5 Intrepid.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

Wanderer focus cloths... they make a very lightweight and compact one but it isn't 100% black-out, so you have to decide on absolute black-out function or size/weight.

"Ultra Light" Regular - Dark Cloth | wanderer

Custom Dark Cloth "Ultralight"

www.wandererphotogear.com

Other ones are available from them as well, but they will be bulkier and heavier, about 1 pound, 6 ounces for normal ones, the waterproof one is about 1lb, 3oz, and the lightweight one is about 4oz. It's far less bulky, too.

Here's a YT video discussing the lightweight version in 8x10 format, so you can see how compact the thing is...

 

[Vaughn]

Camera's weight is one thing, it's overall size another, it is still a 4x5 and a sail in a wind.

Sorry for joining late.

Going back to this excellent point. My 4x5 rail camera weighs 2.5 pounds with the 150mm/5.6 lens on it...add a cable release, film holder, and darkcloth on top, it is still under 4 pounds. In my younger years, it has been on many backpack trips, a 5 month bicycle tour, and a few international travels. It has been a couple years since I backpacked with it, but considering it for a month-long visit to Japan this winter (the 5x7 just seems a bit much).

Most of these adventures were done using a Gitzo 300 (Studex series) tripod and No.2 ballhead, bought new in 1982 (about 6 pounds). Very solid support for a light camera...and in my opinion, very important for long time use. I also used it for wood field 5x7. The next size down, the Reporter series, would have been as good of a choice for me with a little savings in weight.

Traveling back East (US) I tried a carbon fiber tripod the same weight as the camera (2.5 lb)...besides being too %#^& short, (I'm 6'3") the slightest mis-movement, a light tug on the darkcloth, etc, could move the whole set up...I had gotten use to weights of 8x10 and 11x14. It slowed up the way I worked with the camera. One cure for this is to have a bag to fill with dirt or what ever is around and hang it from the center of the tripod with rope (but bag touching the ground -- no swinging!)

A new study suggests that woodpeckers' brains are protected not because of padding or other mechanism, but by the fact that their brains don't weigh enough for the knocking back and forth in their skull to do any damage. And for some reason this tells me not to knock my own brains out by using too light of a tripod...

 

[abruzzi]

Also looking for recommendations for a focusing cloth. Light weight is important. I’m amused by the fact that most of the focusing cloths I see in ads and listings are shown being used inside out. Repeating myself to save scrolling, the camera is a 4 x 5 Intrepid.

I mostly use a Harrison cloth. I have mixed feelings about it. What I like is its a simple rectangle with velcro along one of the edges. I've had some that are harder to take on and off. The Harrison is easy to put on which is great because one framing and focusing is done, you want to remove it so you can insert the film holder. (quick tip--don't wrap it around the rear standard, wrap it around the middle of the bellows) The simple rectangle with velcro makes it easy to stash the dark cloth by fastening around your neck like a cape (don't laugh, its the easiest and quickest way to go on and off with the cloth) while some other styles are harder to stash while taking the picture.

The negative of the Harrison is that it is made of two sheets sewn together--a black inner layer, and a silver outer layer. On a windy day those two layers can separate since they are only stitched together around the border. I don't generally have issues with that when the air is still, but it becomes pretty annoying in even a moderate breeze. I've thought of having a seamstress friend stich them together at ~4 inch intervals, but I figure that will add pinholes to let light in. Maybe a good dark fabric tape can solve that issue.

 

[Vaughn]

...
I do have a light metre app in my phone, but have only used it when my battery died in my hand held metre. Seriously, get a proper metre. ...

Same thoughts, but don't delay starting up waiting on a proper light meter. Use the phone's suggestion (for basic exposure, anyway) and expose another sheet adding one stop of light and see if one neg is better exposed (easier to work with) than the other.

Whoops -- just saw that you got a meter. Might be fun to compare reading of the meter and the iPhone -- if they are close or consistently off (e.g. one always reads 1 stop less than the other), then the iPhone can serve as a back-up.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Same thoughts, but don't delay starting up waiting on a proper light meter. Use the phone's suggestion (for basic exposure, anyway) and expose another sheet adding one stop of light and see if one neg is better exposed (easier to work with) than the other.

Whoops -- just saw that you got a meter. Might be fun to compare reading of the meter and the iPhone -- if they are close or consistently off (e.g. one always reads 1 stop less than the other), then the iPhone can serve as a back-up.

I made a video a while ago, using a light metre app on my phone (android). The negatives benefited from a stop or two more exposure. The thin ones were still useable, though. The app will make a decent backup metre.

 

[Oldwino]

I just picked up a Leofoto LM-404C to use under my Rittreck 5x7, and it seems like a good match. Nice height and manageable weight. I’m 6ft tall, and extended enough to put the camera at my eye level, the combo feels very secure.
Haven’t taken it into the field for an extended walkabout yet.