ULF and the Grand Landscape

[ReallyBigCameras]

As I'm assembling my 7x17 kit, I have been wondering which other ULF shooters are photographing the "grand landscape" (links to web sites welcome). I've seen a lot of excellent ULF work, but not much in the traditional landscape area recently. I realize the logistics of hauling a big camera, holders, tripod, etc. up and down mountainous trails is a bit of a deterent. And, I have also noticed that it is currently fashionable in some circles to bash Ansel Adams and other "traditional" landscape photographers. In spite of the added weight and bulk, I plan to keep shooting the same subjects in ULF that I have always shot in 4x5 and 4x10. So, who else is shooting predominatly "grand landscapes" with their BIG cameras?

Kerry

 

[Dave Wooten]

Kerry,

I am just in the first stages of a landscape project....7 x 17.

Dave in Vegas

 

[jimgalli]

I've had the 8X20 deep into the Ancient Bristlecones and also at little painted desert Az., and Eastern Sierra, but I would be the first to admit it's not my primary subject and also I should qualify that I was within steps of the pickup. I've not hauled bigger than 810 around on my back.

 

[colrehogan]

I guess to some extent it depends on what you call a 'grand landscape'. I do photograph the landscape around here, but I don't consider it 'grand' in the least.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Kerry,

I've just started assembling an 8x20 rig. It will probably be a good year before I get it into action since nearly everything has to be re-tooled to handle it. My project is the Flint Hills region of Kansas. I've made several excursions with the 8x10 but this area just begs for 7x17 or 8x20.

Nearly all of my shooting is done from the road, so i don't have to get away from the truck. To get off-road access, one must get permission from the land owner which is not easy unless someone is known. Even then, this region is still good horse country. The hills are not mountains but they are quite steep. Up, down, up, down, up, down. No end to it.

BTW, do you know of a good list of lenses that will cover 7x17 or 8x20?

 

[Steve Sherman]

Web Site

Hi Kerry,

 

[Steve Sherman]

Web Site

Hi Kerry,

Sorry about the previous post. You are welcome to check out my web site.

I would consider it traditional landscape and some industrial landscape thrown in. http://www.steve-sherman.com/

Also, each month under the Technical Notes Page I discuse three different images, one is always a 7x17

No bashing here of the Grand Master!

Cheers

 

[jgjbowen]

Kerry,

I too am putting together a 7x17 kit. I expect to receive my camera in late spring/early summer. A list of lenses that cover 7x17 would be much appreciated. The TMY and Azo replacement are already on order.

Best,

John

 

[DeanC]

7x17 Lenses

Here's a list from the LF site.

Dean

 

[Dave Wooten]

I am using the following lenses

240 computar

305 Kowa and G claron

355 G Claron

450 fugi compact

480 Artar

760 Nikkor

I would like to add the 600 fugi compact

 

[resummerfield]

I’ve been using 8x10 for landscapes, and will be using my 7x17 soon. So far I’ve only ventured a half-mile or less off the road, usually much less, so I haven’t consolidated or pared down my equipment much from the 4x5 kit. But this summer I’m planning on some longer trips.

 

[DeanC]

Another useful lens list from the LF site.

 

[Donsta]

Kerry

I have just put together an 11x14 kit for shooting "grand landscapes"! Until now, it's pretty much been the domain of my 8X10 (you need a "grand parking" lot to get the 12x20 close enough...). I took an 8x10 to South Africa for 5 weeks at the end of last year and having examined the results, decided that it would be worth the effort to haul an 11x14 kit around to particularly scenic places. I shot a mixture of mountain and seascapes for Pt/Pd.

I found a Phillips compact 11x14 (the one with the reversible back), a Gitzo 1325 and a small selection of lenses - 240 Kowa, 305 G Claron, 450 Nikkor (or Fuji) and 600 Fuji will be the lean kit along with a three holders and a jumbo Harrison tent. I also have a 355 G Claron and a 210 SSXL which also work well - the 355 is a little close to the others to go wandering off with and the 210mm is definitely an extra trip back to the vehicle. It's outstanding but huge and heavy.

I use a Lowepro super trekker to carry the tripod, holders, filters, lenses etc. and a very light Tenba car case to carry the camera. I've done a couple of local trips and it seems that a couple of miles is reasonable with this outfit. Not that we have any "grand landscapes" around SE Michigan - I think it's so flat that you'd really want to be shooting 7X37 to make it dramatic.... However, industrial landscapes and urban decay we have in abundance...

 

[Dave Wooten]

Dean those are great lists,
however please note that the circles given are often smaller than actual...

i.e. 355 Claron will cover 7 x 17, as will the 305 G Claron....any lens that covers 11 x 14 is ok for 7 x 17...

of interest Iobtained a 300 nikor m f/8 From Fred Newman at View Camera, that does cover my 7 x 17! ..not supposed to do that, but it does...there are good threads on apug with info from Sandy King on coverage for this format...

 

[Jim Chinn]

I think it becomes harder and harder to find good landscape work in the tradition of Adams only because so much has been done of the same locations and subjects over and over. Sometimes my eyes glaze over as soon as I see the name Yosemite or words slot canyon or arch in the title of a portfolio or photo article.

I think there is excellent work currently being done but it is of landscapes in places like Vietnam and China and the Andes Mountains that are really exciting for me to look at.

For someone who is not a photographer there is probably plenty of work done today in North America that is as beautiful and relevant today as Adams' work was 50 and 60 years ago or the work of Watkins or Jackson 60 years before that.

I have never had the knack to be able to make images of Adamesque scale. I am more interested in the world closer at hand ( I mean really, I live in Nebraska for God's sake) I have great admiration for those that have the vision and skill to produce new and unique grand landscape images.

 

[DeanC]

Dean those are great lists,
however please note that the circles given are often smaller than actual...

i.e. 355 Claron will cover 7 x 17, as will the 305 G Claron....any lens that covers 11 x 14 is ok for 7 x 17...

of interest Iobtained a 300 nikor m f/8 From Fred Newman at View Camera, that does cover my 7 x 17! ..not supposed to do that, but it does...there are good threads on apug with info from Sandy King on coverage for this format...

Aye, they're the mfgs. specs in general. I'm slowly trying to build my 8x10 lens collection with an eye to being able to cover 7x17 at some point. I tend to do a lot of searches here and on the LF site for "Sandy King" "7x17" ;-)

 

[Dave Wooten]

Dean,

Note the lenses I posted in this thread, in addition the nikor m 300.... Not only do I use them on 7 x 17, I use them also on my 8 x 10, 5 x 7 and 4 x 5, .....I do favor the nikor m for 4 x 5 color. In addition for all but the 7 x 17 I use rodenstock sironar 210 it does cover 8 x 10 barely....the shot of the Viet Nam memorial wall, in this months Photographers formulary newsletter was shot with this lens on 8 x 10.

my "wide on 8 x 10 is wollensak 159 mm.

hope this helps...thats my total arsenal..

 

[John Kasaian]

I have a 12x20 F&S with it's original case, two film holders in "dust proof" muslin pillow cases, a 450mm Nikkor M and a 19" Goerz Double Anastigmat. The whole thing perches atop a pre A-100 Ries. I still haven't gotten the handle replaced so the camera dosen't go far from the truck.

What I like about ULF is the luxury of space! Like Ansel Adams later work, where the sky predominated the landscape, I feel this works very well with my ULF endeavors---it makes big look even bigger! Another "way of looking" I especially enjoy with ULF is close ups of natural subjects with my "wide" lenses---the subjects seem to "pop" out of contact prints and the detail in the negatives is pure information overload. This frees me from getting stuck in a "Grand Landscape" rut and I hope will lend some pleasant variety to my ULF portfolio.

I am tempted to set the beast up on the Santa Cruz pier, aimed at the beach crowd and pull a "WeeGee" on the first day of summer.

Nahhh!

I hope this helps.

 

[DeanC]

Thanks, Dave. I've currently got the Nikkor M 450 and a 270 G-Claron for the 8x10. I don't think the 270 will cover 7x17, but I've been keeping my eye out for a 270 computar or 305 G-Claron. I'll add the 300 Nikkor M to my watch list.

 

[John Kasaian]

I'd check out Nikkor 300 Ms before committing to one. I've heard several people claim they'll cover 8x10 and several others say they're marginal, which wouldn't speak well of covering a 7x17. Mine is seriously iffy if any movements are used trying to cover 8x10, so I'm thinking that maybe there is a difference between individual 300 M lenses. Considering the generous coverage of the 450 M is pretty uniform among examples of that fl Nikkor, I don't know why the difference occurs with 300 Ms, but it is something worth being aware of.

 

[Shinnya]

Hi,

I do 7x17 landscape too. It is not "that grand landscape", but it can be grand depending how you look at things. I really enjoy the episode where Ansel Adams sees Harry Callahan's images for the first time...

Here's one example of my landscape:

http://www.projectbasho.org/~tito/gumover/wlh_04.jpg

Warmly,
Tsuyoshi

 

[Dave Wooten]

I'd check out Nikkor 300 Ms before committing to one. I've heard several people claim they'll cover 8x10 and several others say they're marginal, which wouldn't speak well of covering a 7x17. Mine is seriously iffy if any movements are used trying to cover 8x10, so I'm thinking that maybe there is a difference between individual 300 M lenses. Considering the generous coverage of the 450 M is pretty uniform among examples of that fl Nikkor, I don't know why the difference occurs with 300 Ms, but it is something worth being aware of.

Correct John,

When Fred mentioned the 300 nikor I was dubious, the one he sent me does cover...my favorite is the 240 computar on the 7 x 17, got it on Sandy Kings recommendation...

The 305 G claron however covers easily.. the Nikor 450 m will cover 7 x 17 with more coverage than the fugi 450.

 

[roteague]

I've been following this thread; you peaked my interest when you asked about the "Grand Landscape" - I've been trying to do the grand landscapes for years. But, I think I will stick with 4x5 and Velvia.

 

[Jorge]

I dont know if it is grand but here is a 12x20 for you......

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

BTW, do you know of a good list of lenses that will cover 7x17 or 8x20?

Alex,

Check out this thread on 7x17 Focal Length Preferences.

There are actually quite a lot of lenses available that cover 7x17. It gets narrowed a bit for 8x20 and narrowed further for 12x20. I've already got more lenses than I need that will cover 7x17. My list is similar to the one posted by Dave. I expect my main lenses to be:

240mm Computar
305mm G Claron
450mm Nikkor M
600mm Fujinon C

I also have a 210mm Computar I want to try. It may JUST hit the corners. When I want to go light, I also have the 450mm Fujinon C. In the 360mm focal length, I have a 360mm Fujinon A that is supposed to cover, but has gotten mixed reviews on coverage for 7x17 and a huge and heavy 355mm Symmar that will only be used for "road kills" (photos within spitting distance of the truck). All but the 355mm Symmar are reasonably compact and lightweight. For backpacking and longer hikes, a three lens kit of 210mm (or 240mm) Computar, 305mm G Claron and 450mm Fujinon C would be very small and light - smaller and lighter than many people's 4x5 lens kits.

Kerry