Users of roll film backs?

miha · Jan 24, 2016

I have a nice 6x7 roll film back that I use regularly on my 4x5 monorail. More film selection, easier developing and I kind of like the 150mm focal length in 6x7 (for portraits, table tops, etc). Is anyone else using roll backs often, reasons behind?

BrianShaw · Jan 24, 2016

Ian Grant · Jan 24, 2016

I have a few roll films backs. I have a 6x9 Wista back for my Wista 45DX and used to use it when out shooting/walking as a back up as I couldn't carry more that 8-10 DDS.

The others are used with pre-WWII 9x12 or quarter plate cameras, these are I think all 6x9 but one of my Rada's has a 6x6 insert as well. I've also got two Graflex RH-10 backs and use these with a vintage wooden quarter plate with an adapter or a small Busch Presman.

Ian

wildbill · Jan 24, 2016

yes. I have some rare emulsions which only existed in roll film.
roll film won't fit into any other type of holder on my camera so.....

Roger Cole · Jan 24, 2016

Yes - mainly for color on the Linhof given the outrageous prices of color sheet film.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

removed account4 · Jan 24, 2016

hi

i use a roll film back ( graphic 23 ) on a graflex slr.
i started doing this when my mamiya folder ( 6 iv )
was damaged ( repaired? ) by a repair guy ..
i masking taped the roll back to the back of the camera
because there was on other way to attach it
( and plenty of people told me my focus would be off, and it was dumb and wasteful to do it )
.. and i never looked back.
its been about 600 rolls of film since then. i don't own a MF camera
so the series D and rapid rectalinaer lens ( or 21cm 3.8 tessar )and roll film seem to be a nice combo.

grahamp · Jan 24, 2016

I have a 6x9 Cambo that slips into the spring back on the Wista, or replaces the ground glass on the MPP VII. It serves several purposes.

As a backup in case I run out of loaded film holders - not so much of a problem these days.
As a way of using emulsions not available in 5x4.
As a 'poor man's telephoto'. This is probably the most overlooked option, especially with a shortish fixed bellows like the Wista. The longest lens that will take without losing close focus or using a top-hat is about 270mm, or a well under twice standard. The same lens on 6x9 is around 2.5 times standard. Obviously the effective magnification is achieved at the enlarging stage, with a matching increase in grain.

miha · Jan 24, 2016

Good to know I'm not the only one lugging around a heavy 4x5 camera only to shoot 120.

BrianShaw · Jan 24, 2016

miha said:
Good to know I'm not the only one lugging around a heavy 4x5 camera only to shoot 120.

And don't let anyone make you feel guilty about it!

Old-N-Feeble · Jan 24, 2016

BrianShaw said:
And don't let anyone make you feel guilty about it!

Then avoid LFPF.I

Roger Cole · Jan 24, 2016

grahamp said:
As a 'poor man's telephoto'. This is probably the most overlooked option, especially with a shortish fixed bellows like the Wista. The longest lens that will take without losing close focus or using a top-hat is about 270mm, or a well under twice standard. The same lens on 6x9 is around 2.5 times standard. Obviously the effective magnification is achieved at the enlarging stage, with a matching increase in grain.

You can get the exact same effect if you just go ahead and shoot the photo on 4x5 sheet film and then crop to 6x9 (or 6x7 or whatever) in printing. You do waste more (and way more expensive) film, though.

Roger Cole · Jan 24, 2016

miha said:
Good to know I'm not the only one lugging around a heavy 4x5 camera only to shoot 120.

Well for most of us it isn't "just" to shoot roll film (though there are people who do this to shoot panoramic formats.) The roll film holder is in my 4x5 bag along with regular 4x5 holders.

removed account4 · Jan 24, 2016

film is film, people should be able to do what they want
and if someone doesn't like it they should be ignored

miha · Jan 24, 2016

Roger Cole said:
Well for most of us it isn't "just" to shoot roll film

It isn't for me either. I love Ilford DPP or big Provia slides (hard to get them developed though), but for B&W I often just shoot roll film, although my enlarger goes to 4x5 if needed.

miha · Jan 24, 2016

jnanian said:
film is film, people should be able to do what they want
and if someone doesn't like it they should be ignored

miha · Jan 24, 2016

BrianShaw said:
And don't let anyone make you feel guilty about it!

It can be difficult sometimes.

Patrick Robert James · Jan 24, 2016

I have two Graflex 120 backs, one 6x7 and another 6x7 (6x9). I find it amusing that the 6x9 is barely larger than the 6x7... I like to keep a roll of color in one. Color 120 is a heck of a lot cheaper than 4x5 color. I also shoot with one on my Polaroid conversion every now and then. I don't have marks for the film size in the finder so it is a bit of an eenie-meenie proposition, but I find that liberating.

Dan Fromm · Jan 24, 2016

miha said:
I have a nice 6x7 roll film back that I use regularly on my 4x5 monorail. More film selection, easier developing and I kind of like the 150mm focal length in 6x7 (for portraits, table tops, etc). Is anyone else using roll backs often, reasons behind?

Miha, I don't see myself as a large format photographer. Medium format, that's me.

I started in MF shooting 2x3 with 2x3 Graphics. For my purposes roll film has advantages over sheet film; if nothing else, more emulsions are available.

Some time after I started I was given a 2x3 Cambo. Another way to shoot roll film.

I eventually decided to shoot 6x12. This isn't easily/inexpensively done with 2x3 cameras. So I got some 4x5 Cambo bits including a 4x5 standard, tapered bellows (2x3 at one end, 4x5 at the other) and a 6x12 roll holder and off I went. And then a 2x3 roll holder to fit a 4x5 Graflok back, the better not to have to carry the Graphics. Modular cameras are handy.

My, um, hybrid Cambo looks like a 4x5 camera but that's now how I use it.

Sirius Glass · Jan 24, 2016

No I do not use a roll back. If I am going to carry around a 4"x5" camera, then I am damn well going to shoot 4"x5" film! I have Hasselblads for 120 film.

grahamp · Jan 24, 2016

Roger Cole said:
You can get the exact same effect if you just go ahead and shoot the photo on 4x5 sheet film and then crop to 6x9 (or 6x7 or whatever) in printing. You do waste more (and way more expensive) film, though.

The trouble with cropping 5x4 is the extra enlargement required for a given final print size. I will selectively enlarge 5x4 if I have to, but I'd rather start with a whole frame on 120 if I know I will be making a bigger print. It works for me, and ultimately that's all I care about

Sirius Glass · Jan 24, 2016

grahamp said:
The trouble with cropping 5x4 is the extra enlargement required for a given final print size.

No problem, just raise the enlarger head and crop as necessary.

Roger Cole · Jan 24, 2016

grahamp said:
The trouble with cropping 5x4 is the extra enlargement required for a given final print size. I will selectively enlarge 5x4 if I have to, but I'd rather start with a whole frame on 120 if I know I will be making a bigger print. It works for me, and ultimately that's all I care about

But it isn't any "extra enlargement." Whether you start from a 6x9 negative or print a 6x9 cropped section out of your 4x5, the enlargement is exactly the same.

Roger Cole · Jan 24, 2016

The only way in which the smaller negative might be better would be that a roll film back might hold your film flatter than a 4x5 film holder, depending on the design (or if it takes a reverse curl might be worse!) and you're less likely to have dust on the film with roll film.

removed account4 · Jan 24, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
No I do not use a roll back. If I am going to carry around a 4"x5" camera, then I am damn well going to shoot 4"x5" film! I have Hasselblads for 120 film.

that's great if you want to use a hassy and modern glass
but if you want to use a RR or tessar or anythining else that isn't modern with a hassy mount
you are hosed. a series d rb as you know isnt' very heavy, is perfectly weighted and can be used
as a weapon to clunk someone on the head with if they try to mug you .. it has shutter speeds from below 30thS to above 250
and its pretty much the perfect camera .. no reason not to use a roll back on IT, or any other large format camera.
i used to have a 35mm recomar back i used as a 4x5 reducing back. it was PERFECT and was a blast to use and
get perspective control 35mm images with schneider glass, wish i still had it
...as i said, film is film
who cares what camera it is used it, i find purists to be, ... well too pure.
and history has shown that family lines that keep their lineage "pure" end up with lunatics ...

Pioneer · Jan 24, 2016

I use a Graphic 23 on my Travelwide in addition to 4x5 film. I can change back and forth at will if I want.

Neither the camera or the film back is very heavy and the entire setup works quite well. My Super Angulon 90 goes easily from wide angle to almost a normal lens that way.

Users of roll film backs?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency