Wanting to try 5 x 4 large format

[Oren Grad]

whoops, well, the convertiable symmar would have been 60's then...

The Symmar was offered at least as far back as the 1930s, though one can distinguish production eras by cosmetics, shutters and serial numbers.

 

[destroya]

the biggest difference I see in people new to large format/sheet film shooting is that fact that every shot needs a tripod (I'm not including press cameras as they seem to be less easily found these days). so moving from scene to scene takes a lot of setting up and breaking down. I dont mind it, but I know a lot of others who are impatient and give up LF to early without really giving it a chance.

 

[Paul Howell]

My question is why do want to shoot 4X5 and what are your expectations?

 

[McDiesel]

@destroya what you're describing is how some people shoot medium format as well. find a spot, set up a tripod, open a backpack, mount a camera, wait for better light, smoke a joint, pick a filter, mirror lock + cable release. A day hike and two rolls later may result in maybe 2-3 images. I enjoy this sometimes, which makes me a good candidate for trying 4x5 some day!

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

If your pockets are deep, look for Rodestock/Schneider. Otherwise, there is a lot of Fuji,Graflex,Caltar and Wollensak lens that you can get cheaper and actually perform pretty well. Caltar are often Schneider Kreuznach/Rodestock and others and usually great lenses. I think the best value/perfomance rate is offered by Fuji lens IMHO. Got a couple of 75/90 Fuji lens that are awesome.

APO lens would get you sharper image, but probably it would worth only if you are expecting to make big enlargements (and I mean quite big) AND IF YOU ARE NOT scanning. Scanning a negative from a APO will perform equal to a regular lens in my experience.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

Chris, go and join the UK Large Format website, the moderators are Yorkshiremen, and there are a lot of members quite local to you. So you could meet up with some and see what's what.

Ian

Great advice Ian

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

One great part of LF photography is that usually your GAS if cured quite fast. Normally your kit will consist of fewer lenses than say a 35mm kit. Also, you usually end up with fewer LF cameras than 35mm/120 cameras.

Unless you have a severe case of GAS, that is.

 

[awty]

Unless you have a severe case of GAS, that is.

Once everything used to be cheap.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

Once everything used to be cheap.

oh the good old times. I still watch for Caltars lens on ebay and snatch them when cheap enough

 

[john_s]

Cameras are all about the lens and you need to spend up big to better a Mamiya 7 ii lens.

A Mamiya 7 on a tripod with an optimal film (maybe FP4+ or TMax100) is going to give you a Very Sharp Print. I have dabbled in 4x5 and nowadays the only times I use it are 1: to use rising front to correct converging verticals and tilt for some near-far landscapes and 2: for effect, I use my wooden camera to do portraits more for the experience than actual print characteristics. My subjects seem to like the procedure.

One advantage over medium format is that boxed sheet film keeps well when past its use by date whereas roll film can be blighted by film-paper interactions, about which there has been a lot reported recently.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Size matters. An optimized large format shot can be a real treat to print compared to medium format, especially if you want relatively big prints. I'm personally multi-format (6x7, 6X9, 4X5, 8x10, once in awhile 35mm). Carry-weight-wise, a 4X5 field camera is often less weight than a MF SLR kit. Don't let anyone scare you away. LF photography can be a wonderful experience.

 

[Craig]

Don't let anyone scare you away. LF photography can be a wonderful experience.

It can be, yes, but you also need a certain temperament for LF. If you're an instant gratification type, LF probably isn't for you. If you are a methodical, patient person it can be very rewarding.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ah, yes indeed. Nowadays everybody expects everything instantly, delivered yesterday if possible. That's how you miss life. Large format slows you down and demands you to look at things carefully. The hunt is just as important as the kill. Soak in the light. Study the subtle relationships between hues. Enjoy the opalescent ground glass and its native compositional boundaries. ... But if you're just going to turn around and nuke the whole thing in loud Fauxtoshop syrup afterwards, why bother? Just take your cell phone instead.

That being said, there are numerous situation requiring greater spontaneity. View cameras also become kites in especially windy weather, so there's that too.
And it helps to be in shape carrying a larger gear load. But in terms of getting in shape, it's a thousand times better to do that out in a lovely landscape with a big camera pack than running on a treadmill like a mindless hamster in some stinky gym.

 

[Allan B]

Hello all,

I’ve just finished my first year at uni (part time).
For much of the course I’ve been specialising (well trying..) in analog/darkroom and most of my photos were taken with the Mamiya 7ii, which I have been very impressed with, apart from the focusing which proved difficult.

I’ve posted many questions here over the last year and the feedback and help has been great, so thanks to everyone that helped me out there. Appreciated.

For my second year I’m wanting to migrate( or try) to 5x4” large format and I’m considering purchasing an intrepid camera when I’m more flush.

Does any one have experience with the format ?
Is it worth trying? In terms of description is it a big leap from 7x6? I’ve not yet witnessed anything yet ( in the physical) with large format, however some people on the course said it’s amazing. I gather it will be better in terms of quality, but what about the latitude? I remember when I migrated from 35mm to 7x6 and I was very impressed by medium format and the description/tonality etc. What are the pros and cons? Any advice, information, experiences would be appreciated.

Thanks

Chris

Depends on you. Your Mamiya is a great medium format camera with some of the best lenses made. You should be able to make high quality prints or scans from your photos.
Depending on your subject and the size of the print, you may gain some quality using 4x5. I currently use 35mm and 4x5 film. Years ago I occasionally used a Mamiya RZ67 and Pentax 6x7. This is my opinion. For small and medium size prints (up to 16x20 inch or so) the difference between medium format and 4x5 may be slight. The larger you go, the more apparent the difference will be.

But technical quality is not everything. I use 35mm film and like the grain for some subjects. Some things are great on 4x5 and sometimes 4x5 is hard to use or impractical. You would not want to use it for action or when you need to take 60 shots. Also carrying film holders, setting up a tripod, focusing, etc. take longer and it probably will be heavier. Also the film and processing costs more. Color large format film has gotten extremely expensive.
A few questions. Are you making very large prints? Do you carry your equipment far distances? Can you afford the film and processing? Do you feel something is missing from the quality or experience of what you are doing now? Then try to rent or borrow a camera to see if it helps solve your problem. Allan

 

[DREW WILEY]

Renting a camera system that's entirely new to you is kinda like speed dating. You might find out something, but you're not likely to fall in love. Just learning to visualize and compose subjects is quite different with view camera, and that gets intuitive only after the logistical handling issues are themselves second nature. But once you're accustomed to this manner of working, you might end up wishing you went down this path a lot sooner. Large format isn't for everyone; but I sure enjoy it, and the prints stand out.

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

Depends on you. Your Mamiya is a great medium format camera with some of the best lenses made. You should be able to make high quality prints or scans from your photos.
Depending on your subject and the size of the print, you may gain some quality using 4x5. I currently use 35mm and 4x5 film. Years ago I occasionally used a Mamiya RZ67 and Pentax 6x7. This is my opinion. For small and medium size prints (up to 16x20 inch or so) the difference between medium format and 4x5 may be slight. The larger you go, the more apparent the difference will be.

But technical quality is not everything. I use 35mm film and like the grain for some subjects. Some things are great on 4x5 and sometimes 4x5 is hard to use or impractical. You would not want to use it for action or when you need to take 60 shots. Also carrying film holders, setting up a tripod, focusing, etc. take longer and it probably will be heavier. Also the film and processing costs more. Color large format film has gotten extremely expensive.
A few questions. Are you making very large prints? Do you carry your equipment far distances? Can you afford the film and processing? Do you feel something is missing from the quality or experience of what you are doing now? Then try to rent or borrow a camera to see if it helps solve your problem. Allan

Thanks for the advice

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

The Symmar was offered at least as far back as the 1930s, though one can distinguish production eras by cosmetics, shutters and serial numbers.

Thanks

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

the biggest difference I see in people new to large format/sheet film shooting is that fact that every shot needs a tripod (I'm not including press cameras as they seem to be less easily found these days). so moving from scene to scene takes a lot of setting up and breaking down. I dont mind it, but I know a lot of others who are impatient and give up LF to early without really giving it a chance.

Thanks for the info

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

My question is why do want to shoot 4X5 and what are your expectations?

I’ve shot with 7x6 and now I’m wanting to try it out. Same reason I tried 7x6 when I was shooting 35mm. I am drawn to the amount of description in larger negatives though. Thanks

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

@destroya what you're describing is how some people shoot medium format as well. find a spot, set up a tripod, open a backpack, mount a camera, wait for better light, smoke a joint, pick a filter, mirror lock + cable release. A day hike and two rolls later may result in maybe 2-3 images. I enjoy this sometimes, which makes me a good candidate for trying 4x5 some day!

Thanks for the feedback

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

If your pockets are deep, look for Rodestock/Schneider. Otherwise, there is a lot of Fuji,Graflex,Caltar and Wollensak lens that you can get cheaper and actually perform pretty well. Caltar are often Schneider Kreuznach/Rodestock and others and usually great lenses. I think the best value/perfomance rate is offered by Fuji lens IMHO. Got a couple of 75/90 Fuji lens that are awesome.

APO lens would get you sharper image, but probably it would worth only if you are expecting to make big enlargements (and I mean quite big) AND IF YOU ARE NOT scanning. Scanning a negative from a APO will perform equal to a regular lens in my experience.

Thanks for the advice

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

Great advice Ian

Great , thanks

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

oh the good old times. I still watch for Caltars lens on ebay and snatch them when cheap enough

A Mamiya 7 on a tripod with an optimal film (maybe FP4+ or TMax100) is going to give you a Very Sharp Print. I have dabbled in 4x5 and nowadays the only times I use it are 1: to use rising front to correct converging verticals and tilt for some near-far landscapes and 2: for effect, I use my wooden camera to do portraits more for the experience than actual print characteristics. My subjects seem to like the procedure.

One advantage over medium format is that boxed sheet film keeps well when past its use by date whereas roll film can be blighted by film-paper interactions, about which there has been a lot reported recently.

Thanks for the info

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

Size matters. An optimized large format shot can be a real treat to print compared to medium format, especially if you want relatively big prints. I'm personally multi-format (6x7, 6X9, 4X5, 8x10, once in awhile 35mm). Carry-weight-wise, a 4X5 field camera is often less weight than a MF SLR kit. Don't let anyone scare you away. LF photography can be a wonderful experience.

Thanks for the info

 

[Chrishuddersfield]

It can be, yes, but you also need a certain temperament for LF. If you're an instant gratification type, LF probably isn't for you. If you are a methodical, patient person it can be very rewarding.

Thanks