Which affordable 4x5 (or6x9?) camera should I buy?

[Phillip Reeve]

Hi guys,
I am thinking about buying a large format camera and would like to hear some suggestions for an affordable camera and your opinion on my plan.
To make a good recommendation you need to know something about me, so here are some details.

About me and my photography
I am a 26 years old student and photography plays an important part in my life. I am photographing my local landscape 3-4 times a week and whenever possible I travel.

Most of my subjects can be found in nature and fall in the landscape category. Some of my better images can be found here (http://www.flickriver.com/photos/birnenbaumgarten/popular-interesting/) and for an overview of my everyday photography you can visit my flickr stream (https://www.flickr.com/photos/birnenbaumgarten/).

Currently I use a Sony Alpha 7 and a wide range of manual lenses from the 70's and 80's. I am certainly a gearhead in the sense that I am fascinated by equipment, learn everything about it that I can and I write gear reviews from time to time. But I also like to use very cheap lenses on my camera and creating images is more important to me than reading about and testing gear, but I enjoy both.

Lately I have had the feeling that there is no real progress in my photography and I would like to step out of my comfort zone and challenge myself a bit.
And that is why I am thinking about buying a large format camera. I think especially my compositional skills need some improvement and my hope is that the slower and more deliberate process of LF-photography will support me in that. I am also a huge fan of the work of Joe Cornish and as a digital native I would like to enjoy the gorgeous colors of Velvia in my own images before it is no longer available.

What I need
Being a student with limited income money is an issue for me and I wold like to keep it as expensive as necessary. I don't want to buy a camera which is a pain in the a** to use or likely to break because in the end that would be more expensive than paying a little more in the beginning. But I don't want to pay for a few grams less or some nice features which are not that necessary.
Okay, now you want to hear a number: 300€ would be great, 400€ would be okay, 500€ would hurt.

Image sharpness isn't that important to me, so a medium format camera would give me more than enough detail. If there was a medium format camera which could tilt and shift, was lighter and not more expensive than a LF camera with affordable lenses that would be great, but so far I have not found one.

Thanks for your time and advice,
Phillip

[Pete Watkins]

Hi Phillip,
Welcome to the forum.
My first LF camera was a Wista 45DX. I've still got it. It has good movements for landscape and it's easy to make lens boards if you don't want to buy them. It's a nice light usable camera.
Pete

[Andrew Plume]

Hi Phillip

...........and welcome

Pete is spot on here, it's light but still very decently solid

just a suggestion, have a look at this one:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/291173155487?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

I have no interest or connection with this sale. If it's still available it hasn't been relisted

good luck

andrew

[Regular Rod]

You are in Germany so delivery from the UK is no problem. Landscape work would suggest a folding Field Camera rather than a a monorail View Camera. You want a robust and reliable camera that is easy to set up and use. Your budget is modest. An MPP Mk VII in good condition would be a fine introduction to 4x5. They are well made of metal and designed to take a lot of use.

http://www.mppusers.com/mtmkvii.jpg

http://www.mppusers.com/mkviirotatingback.jpg

Try and get one with the old plain 150mm Symmar because you will be able to close the camera with the lens fitted (very safe for your lens) and it is convertible, so, by removing an element, you get a 265mm lens as well.

They use standard 4x5 film holders. There is a plethora of spares still available and a very good MPP Users website http://www.mppusers.com/microtec.htm

RR

[Andrew Plume]

and

...........as RR has said, these are great Cameras and usually a lot cheaper than Linhof's.....but they're fairly heavy

I have a similar model at the moment, there's at least one other option with the (convertible) Symmar - remove the rear element and you have a 7 1/2" f5.6 lens. With both elements together you have a 150mm f5.6 but when I made a brief test, the f stop is unchanged at the longer single element focal length

good luck and regards

andrew

[Regular Rod]

That's a great tip about removing the rear element Andrew! I never knew that. So we really get three lenses in one! I'm going out to try that...
Are they heavy in the scheme of things? Mine weighs 7lbs 14oz or just over 3.1kg
:)
RR

[Andrew Plume]

thanks RR, much appreciated

.....btw, I play around with lenses...........probably too much...........I've always been 'an outside of the box thinking person'...........it's the same with the Rapid Rectilinear's and Anastigmat's, they're 'triple convertibles' too, although with the RR's, the image seen will be the same, it's just the additional focal lengths available, i.e. the standard 8" UK designed RR, becomes a 12" with the front end and 16" with the rear, the speed correspondingly reduces however

Symmar's will display significant softness when used for macro style work, with just the one element

regards, andrew

[Jim Jones]

Phillip; For many of us, the advantages of 4x5 over 6x9 are significant. A 6x9 outfit may be lighter and more compact, and makes capturing many images in one outing more convenient. However, a comparable 4x5 outfit may be no more expensive and is probably more versatile. Many cameras and lenses are available at modest cost. The negatives scan better for digital printing. Actual experience with both formats is valuable in making the best choice for you.

[Dan Fromm]

I'm with Jim, and then some.

Some years ago I was given a 2x3 (6x9 in metric, the catalog says 2x3) Cambo and have used it as the basis for several rigs. I'm very happy with them but there's no guarantee that they'd suit anyone else. I'd have spent much less money on parts/attachments if I'd based my rigs on a 4x5er. 2x3 view cameras are much less abundant that 4x5ers. Parts and attachments for them are less common too. They usually cost more than equivalent 4x5ers.

The usual recommendation for inexpensive view cameras is Cambo or Sinar. Both are capable modular systems and both are very available in the US market. In the US market Calumet CC-40x cameras are probably the least expensive. These are very capable monorail cameras with one potentially major limitation, permanently attached bellows. Most newer cameras are modular, have interchangeable everything.

4x5 Graphics (press cameras, much less capable than view cameras) are often recommended as starter 4x5 cameras. I started with 2x3 Graphics. Again, I like 'em but these days Graphics are getting pricy and they have limits.

Thinking of limits (RR, Andrew, pay attention), convertible Symmars are indeed convertible but using a single cell requires more extension than some cameras have. For example, a 4x5 Graphic (also MPP Press) can't quite focus a converted 150/5.6 Symmar to infinity.

[DG 3313]

Many of the LF cameras accept 120 backs in various formats. I have a 6x7 back that I can use on my rail camera or the Toyo 45a. You could shoot roll film and sheet film with the same rig.

[Pete Watkins]

DG's right. There are 6x9 & 6x7 roll film backs available for Wista cameras. It keeps the cost of colour down. MPP's are all getting old now and are a bit specialist. The Wista 45DX is just a fairly light simple field camera made to a well tested formula, there are others in the same mould but I've only ever tried the Wista. If you don't mind a bit more weight you could consider a 5x7 with a reducing back. My 5x7 Burke & James is wonderful, despite the fact that they are prone to criticism for sloppy build and all that rubbish. Use some fiber washers if they don't lock down as you would like, I've had mine for a few years now and I won't be parting with it. This is only my opinion but a lot of older cameras don't have front tilt, if you want to do landscapes I would not buy a camera without this facility. Yeah, you can still manage but if I want to take a landscape I leave the 5x7 circa 1926 Ansco at home and take the B&J. It's just easier!
Pete.

[John Kasaian]

That's a beautiful color portfolio you've done, Phillip. Thanks for sharing!

[Regular Rod]

I'm with Jim, and then some.

Some years ago I was given a 2x3 (6x9 in metric, the catalog says 2x3) Cambo and have used it as the basis for several rigs. I'm very happy with them but there's no guarantee that they'd suit anyone else. I'd have spent much less money on parts/attachments if I'd based my rigs on a 4x5er. 2x3 view cameras are much less abundant that 4x5ers. Parts and attachments for them are less common too. They usually cost more than equivalent 4x5ers.

The usual recommendation for inexpensive view cameras is Cambo or Sinar. Both are capable modular systems and both are very available in the US market. In the US market Calumet CC-40x cameras are probably the least expensive. These are very capable monorail cameras with one potentially major limitation, permanently attached bellows. Most newer cameras are modular, have interchangeable everything.

4x5 Graphics (press cameras, much less capable than view cameras) are often recommended as starter 4x5 cameras. I started with 2x3 Graphics. Again, I like 'em but these days Graphics are getting pricy and they have limits.

Thinking of limits (RR, Andrew, pay attention), convertible Symmars are indeed convertible but using a single cell requires more extension than some cameras have. For example, a 4x5 Graphic (also MPP Press) can't quite focus a converted 150/5.6 Symmar to infinity.

Have you seen the extension available with the standard bellows on an MPP Mk VII? The bed has a triple extension built in. I've not found any problems with the longer lens...

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/ODI1WDE2MDA=/z/xQAAAOxyCGNTMqmh/$_57.JPG

If 6x9 is needed too there is a back on eBay at the moment.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/ODg4WDEwMDA=/z/8OQAAOSwFL9TsT0p/$_57.JPG

RR

[old time photo]

Quick question Do you want a film camera or digital.

[Andrew Plume]

I'm with Jim, and then some.

Some years ago I was given a 2x3 (6x9 in metric, the catalog says 2x3) Cambo and have used it as the basis for several rigs. I'm very happy with them but there's no guarantee that they'd suit anyone else. I'd have spent much less money on parts/attachments if I'd based my rigs on a 4x5er. 2x3 view cameras are much less abundant that 4x5ers. Parts and attachments for them are less common too. They usually cost more than equivalent 4x5ers.

a good point (last para) as ever Dan, thx and regards

andrew

The usual recommendation for inexpensive view cameras is Cambo or Sinar. Both are capable modular systems and both are very available in the US market. In the US market Calumet CC-40x cameras are probably the least expensive. These are very capable monorail cameras with one potentially major limitation, permanently attached bellows. Most newer cameras are modular, have interchangeable everything.

4x5 Graphics (press cameras, much less capable than view cameras) are often recommended as starter 4x5 cameras. I started with 2x3 Graphics. Again, I like 'em but these days Graphics are getting pricy and they have limits.

Thinking of limits (RR, Andrew, pay attention), convertible Symmars are indeed convertible but using a single cell requires more extension than some cameras have. For example, a 4x5 Graphic (also MPP Press) can't quite focus a converted 150/5.6 Symmar to infinity.

[old time photo]

Sorry about that question.
I have read some of the response and this
forum is leading you in the right direction.
Good luck.

[Bob Salomon]

and

...........as RR has said, these are great Cameras and usually a lot cheaper than Linhof's.....but they're fairly heavy

I have a similar model at the moment, there's at least one other option with the (convertible) Symmar - remove the rear element and you have a 7 1/2" f5.6 lens. With both elements together you have a 150mm f5.6 but when I made a brief test, the f stop is unchanged at the longer single element focal length

good luck and regards

andrew

Then there was a serious exposure error with your test. There is a significant speed difference, that is why the shutters the lenses that the convertible lenses were originally mounted in had dual aperture scales.

[Dan Fromm]

Rod, the MPP Press is a Speed Graphic made under license by MPP. It isn't to be confused with MPP's own designs.

[Andrew Plume]

Then there was a serious exposure error with your test. There is a significant speed difference, that is why the shutters the lenses that the convertible lenses were originally mounted in had dual aperture scales.

well Bob, this is what I did - I measured to infinity and then to the gg and divided that into the width of the glass, even if I was wrong and I cannot dispute your considerable experience etc, there's still a longer fl and there's the option of simply using the lens 'as a barrel lens', which is fine with me

regards, andrew

[Regular Rod]

Rod, the MPP Press is a Speed Graphic made under license by MPP. It isn't to be confused with MPP's own designs.

That's interesting Dan. I have to admit I'm not familiar with either camera. The cameras I associate with MPP are the technical cameras like the Mk VII and VIII and their ancestors...

All I know is my old Mk VII is a tough and versatile tool that is quick to set up and easy to use with enough movements to do most things with.

RR

[Phillip Reeve]

First thanks for all the input and the warm welcome :-)


You are in Germany so delivery from the UK is no problem. Landscape work would suggest a folding Field Camera rather than a a monorail View Camera. You want a robust and reliable camera that is easy to set up and use. Your budget is modest. An MPP Mk VII in good condition would be a fine introduction to 4x5. They are well made of metal and designed to take a lot of use.

Try and get one with the old plain 150mm Symmar because you will be able to close the camera with the lens fitted (very safe for your lens) and it is convertible, so, by removing an element, you get a 265mm lens as well.

They use standard 4x5 film holders. There is a plethora of spares still available and a very good MPP Users website http://www.mppusers.com/microtec.htm

RR
From what I could gather that sounds like a very reasonable choice.
What do you think about this offer: http://www.ebay.de/itm/181477831858?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
It ended today with no bids but I could contact the seller and ask if he would sell it for a little bit less, suggestions for a fair price are welcome.
In the description it is mentioned, that there are some pinholes in the bellows, could I just put some gaffa on them or are they a real issue because it is likely that the bellows are brittle and will fail completely sooner or later?

I would like to get a 90mm lens for the camera and read some comments about limited movements with the Mk7 and WA lenses while others say there isn't too much of an issue. I have a 35mm T/S lens for my Sony FF camera which can be shifted +-12mm so it covers about twice the size of my sensor, so that is my only point of reference. How much can I shift lenses like the 150mm Symmar or an affordable 90mm lens for around 150€ on the Mk7?

thanks,
Phillip

[Steven Tribe]

There is a problem here as the lister of the camera you refer to has already contributed to this thread - so I'll respond and say he is very reliable, but I can't really comment on the "fair" price for the set!

[Brian C. Miller]

300€ would be great, 400€ would be okay, 500€ would hurt.

Image sharpness isn't that important to me...

#1, It's hard to go wrong with anything you purchase in LF. It takes a really bad lens to screw up the image on LF film. The lenses are simpler to design than the smaller formats, so the image is better. Any cheap late year lens will be incredible, and by cheap I mean something rebranded, like Caltar. The normal length lenses, 90mm - 210mm, from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, and Rodenstock, will all give excellent results and don't cost too much.

#2, I started out with a Graphlex Super Graphic in the late 1990s, and I still use it. I was just out at the local waterfront Friday morning with it, with the stock Wollensak Optar 135mm, and a Caltar 210mm. Any press camera will give you wonderful results, just as they have been doing for decades. The MPP comes highly recommended, and you should have no problems buying something on the cheap.

#3, You simply need one camera and one lens, and then use them well. I used my Super Graphic for many years with just the 135mm lens. I simply worked to find what fit, and everything was fine.

#4, sharpness again. The Wollensak lenses tend to get short shrift, but with my 135mm I can get bicycle spokes at over a block away, and it takes a 16x20 enlargement to begin to see them on the print. The 1935 vintage 6-1/4" wide angle for an 8x10 will show you individual blades of grass in the lawn across the street. If a LF camera doesn't put out results like this, then it needs a bit of adjusting, and then the results are phenomenal.

#5, movements. For landscape work you don't need much movement. Any press-type camera should be fine. If you want to photograph buildings or some type of architecture, then you'll need movements. Monorail cameras are also really cheap, but, depending on the design, may not be very compact for transportation. The only MF camera I know that came with movements was the Fuji 680, but it's the same size and weight as a 4x5. It was designed as a studio camera, and I understand that they've been extensively used by portrait photographers.

You should be able to get completely set up for basic photography and developing your own film for your low end figure. Just keep looking around, and you'll find something that will suit you.

Oh, and welcome to the forum! :)

[Phillip Reeve]

There is a problem here as the lister of the camera you refer to has already contributed to this thread - so I'll respond and say he is very reliable, but I can't really comment on the "fair" price for the set!
hehe, small world!

I just did some research and found two auctions on ebay: this one (http://www.ebay.de/itm/M-P-P-Micro-Technical-Mk-VIII-4x5-MPP-5x4-with-2-lenses-/231239034236?pt=UK_Film_Cameras&hash=item35d6eba57c&nma=true&si=Dkv10rW%252Bf2yGyBf%252FlmCG7zcPr20%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557) ended at 205 pounds and there was a 90mm lens + a 135mm lens included.
This (http://www.ebay.de/itm/M-P-P-Micro-Technical-Mark-VII-5-x-4-/191217468246?pt=DE_Alte_Kameras&hash=item2c85730356) one ended at around 300 punds but there were 3 lenses included. So I think that 300 pounds for a camera with just one lens and a not lightproof bellows is a bit too expensive and I would not be able to sell the camera for about as much if I found that LF wasn't for me. Or is the 150mm lens that much more expensive than the other lenses?


#1, It's hard to go wrong with anything you purchase in LF. It takes a really bad lens to screw up the image on LF film. The lenses are simpler to design than the smaller formats, so the image is better. Any cheap late year lens will be incredible, and by cheap I mean something rebranded, like Caltar. The normal length lenses, 90mm - 210mm, from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, and Rodenstock, will all give excellent results and don't cost too much.

#2, I started out with a Graphlex Super Graphic in the late 1990s, and I still use it. I was just out at the local waterfront Friday morning with it, with the stock Wollensak Optar 135mm, and a Caltar 210mm. Any press camera will give you wonderful results, just as they have been doing for decades. The MPP comes highly recommended, and you should have no problems buying something on the cheap.

#3, You simply need one camera and one lens, and then use them well. I used my Super Graphic for many years with just the 135mm lens. I simply worked to find what fit, and everything was fine.

#4, sharpness again. The Wollensak lenses tend to get short shrift, but with my 135mm I can get bicycle spokes at over a block away, and it takes a 16x20 enlargement to begin to see them on the print. The 1935 vintage 6-1/4" wide angle for an 8x10 will show you individual blades of grass in the lawn across the street. If a LF camera doesn't put out results like this, then it needs a bit of adjusting, and then the results are phenomenal.

#5, movements. For landscape work you don't need much movement. Any press-type camera should be fine. If you want to photograph buildings or some type of architecture, then you'll need movements. Monorail cameras are also really cheap, but, depending on the design, may not be very compact for transportation. The only MF camera I know that came with movements was the Fuji 680, but it's the same size and weight as a 4x5. It was designed as a studio camera, and I understand that they've been extensively used by portrait photographers.

You should be able to get completely set up for basic photography and developing your own film for your low end figure. Just keep looking around, and you'll find something that will suit you.

Oh, and welcome to the forum! :)
When I moved from an APS-C camera to a FF camera I noticed how much better the results with the same lenses were because the image wasn't enlarged that much. That was a sensor size increas of 2.25 now with a 4x5 camera the factor would be somewhere around 15 so I can only imagine how much better the image quality must be. But that is not the reason why I want a LF camera, my 24mp FF camera is more than good enough for any print size I have printed so far.

[Andrew Plume]

There is a problem here as the lister of the camera you refer to has already contributed to this thread - so I'll respond and say he is very reliable, but I can't really comment on the "fair" price for the set!

as usual Steven, I'm very grateful

best

andrew

[Steven Tribe]

Thinking about your current image interests, I can't see any great need for extreme movements, so I would suggest a field reise tailboard kamera - made in Germany!

These are most common in the 13x18cm size. The advantage of going a step up from 9x12cm is that contact prints have real value in themselves - without the need for scanning or enlargers. There are 120 roll film backs around that can fit.

These are quite easy to get hold of. But you should be aware that the "dealer-type" listers in Germany put an inflated value on these (even those without a set of plate holders!) - you shouldn't have to spend more than 150 euros.

Bellows with small or large holes are really no problem. You will be using a dark cloth to focus on the ground glass. Just drap this cloth over the bellows before you insert the film holder. I have a sinar/copal shutter modification to an 18x24 reisekamera and there are some cracks between the tin adapter and the bellows plate - so the dark cloth comes in handy!

[Regular Rod]

First thanks for all the input and the warm welcome :-)


From what I could gather that sounds like a very reasonable choice.
What do you think about this offer: http://www.ebay.de/itm/181477831858?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
It ended today with no bids but I could contact the seller and ask if he would sell it for a little bit less, suggestions for a fair price are welcome.
In the description it is mentioned, that there are some pinholes in the bellows, could I just put some gaffa on them or are they a real issue because it is likely that the bellows are brittle and will fail completely sooner or later?

I would like to get a 90mm lens for the camera and read some comments about limited movements with the Mk7 and WA lenses while others say there isn't too much of an issue. I have a 35mm T/S lens for my Sony FF camera which can be shifted +-12mm so it covers about twice the size of my sensor, so that is my only point of reference. How much can I shift lenses like the 150mm Symmar or an affordable 90mm lens for around 150€ on the Mk7?

thanks,
Phillip

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?96202-Successful-Bellows-Repair

See if you can get the camera at a reduced price as you may have some work to do as above.

If the pin holes are small then Liquitex BASICS, Mars Black paint will certainly seal them up, as per the link above. Gaffer tape is not always light tight and when you remove it can pull bits off the bellows. External cracks in the outer layer of the bellows don't always mean that there are pinholes right through to the inside that let in light. How long the bellows will last depends on how they are now but they are usually very strong and there is a good chance the pin holes described do not go right through to the inside. Before you use the camera take the back off and remove the lens board. Open the bellows to its fullest extent, with the triple bed fully extended and with a new dry 1" paint brush, brush out all the dust and fluff you find in there and then vacuum out any remaining bits and pieces. While it is fully extended you can then spot paint the pinholes from the outside, with a fine artist's brush not the 1"! When it's all dry put the camera back together. Clean out your film holders, load them and get out there making photographs with it.

I think the advice to simply start with the "standard" lens is the way to go. The 150 Symmar has scope for lots of movement. Certainly it has been enough for photographing medieval churches without converging the verticals... 90mm Angulon is something you can add later. They often come up on eBay complete with MPP lens board!

RR

[Regular Rod]

#1, It's hard to go wrong with anything you purchase in LF. It takes a really bad lens to screw up the image on LF film. The lenses are simpler to design than the smaller formats, so the image is better. Any cheap late year lens will be incredible, and by cheap I mean something rebranded, like Caltar. The normal length lenses, 90mm - 210mm, from Nikon, Fuji, Schneider, and Rodenstock, will all give excellent results and don't cost too much.

#2, I started out with a Graphlex Super Graphic in the late 1990s, and I still use it. I was just out at the local waterfront Friday morning with it, with the stock Wollensak Optar 135mm, and a Caltar 210mm. Any press camera will give you wonderful results, just as they have been doing for decades. The MPP comes highly recommended, and you should have no problems buying something on the cheap.

#3, You simply need one camera and one lens, and then use them well. I used my Super Graphic for many years with just the 135mm lens. I simply worked to find what fit, and everything was fine.

#4, sharpness again. The Wollensak lenses tend to get short shrift, but with my 135mm I can get bicycle spokes at over a block away, and it takes a 16x20 enlargement to begin to see them on the print. The 1935 vintage 6-1/4" wide angle for an 8x10 will show you individual blades of grass in the lawn across the street. If a LF camera doesn't put out results like this, then it needs a bit of adjusting, and then the results are phenomenal.

#5, movements. For landscape work you don't need much movement. Any press-type camera should be fine. If you want to photograph buildings or some type of architecture, then you'll need movements. Monorail cameras are also really cheap, but, depending on the design, may not be very compact for transportation. The only MF camera I know that came with movements was the Fuji 680, but it's the same size and weight as a 4x5. It was designed as a studio camera, and I understand that they've been extensively used by portrait photographers.

You should be able to get completely set up for basic photography and developing your own film for your low end figure. Just keep looking around, and you'll find something that will suit you.

Oh, and welcome to the forum! :)

Excellent post!

RR