WHat would you do?

[BobbyR]

I am putting this here because outside of a little 120 and 126 135mm is what I have shot all my life.

I have come across an amount of money, which paid for all the items I acquired previously and give me a chance to buy a truly top line item.
I will absolutely be selling, when the market seems good, some of the items I acquired out of curiosity or I was cash strapped.

Anyway, I have always, and I mean for thirty plus years wanted to get a good 4x5 press camera. Now I know that Wista, Horseman make good ones, but I am, depending on what is available, aiming at either a good Speed Graphic, it has the focal plane shutter and can use barrele lenses, or a Linhof because it is the best non-focal plane 4x5 press camera.
VERSES
I have also, thought it would be nice to have a Kinoptic 210 F2.8, with a 150 as a second best, because over the years this/these lens have been said to about the vest ever made.
Either Canon or Nikon or Topcon mount.(I cannot afford the five figure items from Zeiss, or a few other recent items)

Against that the Leica zooms 35-70 and 70-180, from what I have read are outstanding as far as zoom lens go.(It would be one, not both)
Which body would you choose for the Leica, the wizz-bang R8 (the more expensive R9 has nothing worth the extra money) or a R6.2 which can take a beating and keep on clicking.
OK
From the above, which would you choose and why or do you have another top line but still relatively affordable, total cost under 5,000.

As I said I will be selling some of what I acquired and this will be the best of what I like to think of are top line equipment.

 

[Ian Grant]

You really need to decide whether to go to LF. It's great, it's fun, it actually isn't that expensive, when you do it most don't look back.

Take a little time, Crown & Speed Graphics are OK but very limiting, I definitely wouldn't recommend as a first 5x4, Linhofs with decent movements MKV's are expensive. Look at new Shen Hoa's, or go for a nice antique but full working camera like a Korona, I know one's that might be available for probably $250-$300, with full front movements, add the same for a lens and your away to a flying start.

Ian

 

[jstraw]

My first 4x5 was a speed graphic and the only thing I got out of it was confirmation that I wanted to shoot LF. I'd suggest a good field camera.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Um, Bobby, why are you contemplating moving up in format? For the experience? To look cool? Just because? Or to get better large prints?

If the last, you'll get a better return for your investment from a 4x5 (or even 2x3) camera than from a marginally better lens for 35 mm.

 

[Fotoguy20d]

Against that the Leica zooms 35-70 and 70-180, from what I have read are outstanding as far as zoom lens go.(It would be one, not both)
Which body would you choose for the Leica, the wizz-bang R8 (the more expensive R9 has nothing worth the extra money) or a R6.2 which can take a beating and keep on clicking.
OK
From the above, which would you choose and why or do you have another top line but still relatively affordable, total cost under 5,000.

Why Leica except for the name? In 35mm, why not a Canon EOS 1, 28-70 f2.8L and 70-200 f2.8L IS? Or, the equivalent offering from Nikon?

 

[Nick Zentena]

$5K on a speed? You can buy LOTS of LF for $5 K if you stick to 4x5. Even buying new I bet you could get three lenses a body and holders for 1/2 that budget. Buying used you could go up to 8x10 and still be less that 1/2 that budget.

But it's already been ask. Why? What? What are you looking for?

 

[BobbyR]

Um, Bobby, why are you contemplating moving up in format? ... Or to get better large prints?

If the last, you'll get a better return for your investment from a 4x5 (or even 2x3) camera than from a marginally better lens for 35 mm.

This is not, though for many years my interest in photography was driven by making a living off it, money driven.

I actually most take pictures to record an item or event, it has been twenty years since I shot my last art inspired shot.

It would be nice to shoot a car, plane scene with either a 35mm that would even any shor-comngs totally on the photographer, especially in a enlarged print (bad photos are the photographers fault, but lens short-comings cannot be overcome)
The barrel lens option of a Speed Graphic put, if one takes the time, a huge array of lenses available.
A Linhof is a Linhof.

To others who have posted, I said press camera, because while I do use a tripod at times, I would use a LF in the manner newpaper photographers used a Speed Graphic.
I have over a case of flash bulbs, and am now in the process of getting good flash for them.
But
The Leica zooms, from what I have read, are as good as it gets, period.
Whereas the 210mm Kinoptik is in the size I used most often, the larger Leica zoom covers more ground. (The small one is said to be as good, and thinking in monetary terms here, because it is rare and out of production, will always maintain value.)
I am not simply ignoring any comments here, but consider them equally valuable.
With the exception of the Speed Graphic, and I have seen some retired kits belonging to pros who used them for sale recently, non of these items are cheap, and If I spend the money, it will be for the item I believe I will use most often, thereby I am equating return for investment.

I do not have a darkroom and the LF, considerations, include getting film processed and printed.
Thank you for your replies.
Bobby

 

[BobbyR]

Why Leica except for the name? In 35mm, why not a Canon EOS 1, 28-70 f2.8L and 70-200 f2.8L IS? Or, the equivalent offering from Nikon?

I have a Canon EOS 1n RS, which I may keep or sell.
While Canon L lenses are good, they are not, at least the ones I can afford, that fit the EOS, to the level of the Kinoptik or Leica zooms.
In the apprx. 70-200 zoom lens range, the tests I could find actually put the Sigma lens to be somewhat better than the equivalent Canon.

The price of a R6.2, which is actually more versatile and expensive than a R8, is one thing that makes me hesitate.
I am really excluding anything, but it seems whereas before I was spending beyond my means, now that I actually have the money, I am at least triple checking any decision.
Bobby

 

[BobbyR]

$5K on a speed? You can buy LOTS of LF for $5 K if you stick to 4x5. Even buying new I bet you could get three lenses a body and holders for 1/2 that budget. Buying used you could go up to 8x10 and still be less that 1/2 that budget.

But it's already been ask. Why? What? What are you looking for?

5k is the absolute top I could spend and that would be a long pondered, for something unusually good decision.
I said that to quickly eliminate the Zeiss or even Nikon and Canon lenses that are out there whose used prices are higher than that.
Bobby

 

[Ole]

Despite also having one of the finest "field cameras" ever made, I still find use for my 1946 Anniversary Speed Graphic. Sometimes movements are less important than the focal plane shutter.

The camera cost me $56, the lens $65, and as long as the results look like this I'm satisfied.

 

[Paul Howell]

For a grand I would get a good basic 4X5 view camera like a Graphic View, a good 150mm lens with good coverage, either a Speed or a Crown with a
135mm lens a heavy duty tripod and film holders and see how well you like LF before you sink the rest of your money in a camera you dont really like. I have both a a Crown and Speed, the crown is light, easy to use, I shoot it with a monpod or hand held. Kodak Extar lens are really pretty good for the times.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Bobby- I'm still confused- Nikon/Zeiss/Canon lenses for large format? Nikon glass for large format is first rate, but often inexpensive, relative to the big German makers. Zeiss glass for large format is so rare in general that it's not an issue for most large format photographers in the first place. Canon never made LF glass. If you're talking about those lenses for 35mm, well, different story.

As someone who owns Zeiss glass for 35mm, unless you are getting in to the EXTREME wide-angle or superfast telephoto lenses, their glass is very reasonable - cheaper than Leica glass, and at least as good. Canon and Nikon are very similar that way - you'll only drop a mint if you get their fast telephotos or their fancy L - glass zoom lenses. Even with Canon gear, you could get a clean used Eos 1n body and brand new 50mm f1.2 L, 85mm f1.2 L, 135mm f2 L and a 24mm f1.4 L lenses for under your $5k.

As to press cameras, from the US there were also Busch Pressman cameras, which have more movements and a revolving back, but no FP shutter. There were even Burke & James and Kalart press cameras. The Kalart had dual-eye rangefinders and double-exposure prevention interlocks. From the UK there are the MPP Technical cameras which are something between a press and a view camera, like the Linhofs. Large format lenses are so diverse that they're hard to talk about without more specific guidance as to what you're looking to do.

 

[Dan Fromm]

This is not, though for many years my interest in photography was driven by making a living off it, money driven.

I actually most take pictures to record an item or event, it has been twenty years since I shot my last art inspired shot.

It would be nice to shoot a car, plane scene with either a 35mm that would even any shor-comngs totally on the photographer, especially in a enlarged print (bad photos are the photographers fault, but lens short-comings cannot be overcome)
The barrel lens option of a Speed Graphic put, if one takes the time, a huge array of lenses available.
A Linhof is a Linhof.<large snip>

Bobby, if you want large prints there's no alternative to moving up in format. FWIW, I have great difficulty getting a KM macro shot that can be printed as large as 8x10; part of this is due to my shortcomings as a photographer (I tend to shoot at too small an effective aperture) and part is due to my, um, pickiness.

We all tend to carry on at great length about highly significant differences, we say, between similar lenses from different manufacturers for 35 mm cameras. Yeah, sure, first best is a little better than second best. But when all's said and done, 35 mm is 35 mm. The only way to get really good large prints is to start from a large negative. And, of course, to use a lens that's good enough and to use good technique.

Since you're up for spending money, spend a couple of bucks on a copy of John Williams' book Image Clarity. Then reconsider what you want to accomplish and how best to do it. If you are the problem more gear won't help.

It seems that I tell you to make haste slowly at least once a month. I'll say it again. Make haste slowly. Educate yourself before going nuts again.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[BobbyR]

To clear things up, when I speak of lenses, unless stated otherwise I am speaking of lenses for a 135 camera.
I know of 4x5 lenses but not any where near what I know of lenses for a 135 camera.

I could--could go up to 5k, but having thought about it, 4k is the absolute twilight zone limit, and for reality sakes, spending apprx. 3k, which would be a camera and at least one lens, would make me think LONG and hard if it made even a bit of sense.

I exclude the EOS system, even though I have one, as I far, far prefer a camera that can still be used if one is down to taking photos using asa at F16 as a baseline.

I have done searching and a Linhof can be obtained for less than 2,000 dollars with a goodly amount of gear, including lenses, yes plural, or thereabouts, as of now.

I apologize if I was too vague.
Thank you for your input.
Bobby

 

[Curt]

With no darkroom what will you do with a 4x5 negative/positive? Up to $5000,00 for gear but no darkroom, how about a medium format system with a medium format enlarger? All a fraction of that budget.

Curt

 

[ricksplace]

I vote for a speed. You should be able to get one in great condition, several barrel lenses, and a complete darkroom with a 4X5 enlarger for about half your budget. Use the other half of your budget for supplies and a nice photography trip. Just my .02.

Rick

 

[BobbyR]

I purchased a Leica R6.2, but still may get a Speed Graphic some time in the future.
A Linhof would be nice but I just cannot see that the expense is justified although there are some fair deals out there.

The R6.2 I bought came broken, the mirror had dislodged during shipping.
Eugene Kuo who I bought it from had me send it to Dagcamera for repair and paid for it.
It seems that packing a camera TOO tightly during shipping can have the opposite effect desired but I was surprized anyway that the mirror dislodged that easily but it is far, far better than being just plain broken.

Now I need a lens/es.
Bob

 

[ehparis]

No mention is made of the Leica rangefinders. Personally I'd consider an M6 with two lenses, 35mm f1.4 and 75mm f1.4. The glass doesn't get any better.

 

[BobbyR]

No mention is made of the Leica rangefinders. Personally I'd consider an M6 with two lenses, 35mm f1.4 and 75mm f1.4. The glass doesn't get any better.

I actually did consider a range-finder camera but I have large hands and prefer a large camera or a 135 with motor drive.