When to go 4x5? Or to stay with mf?

[Ag Jones]

I know these questions have been asked and I have read through many of them. I just have not found the answer. So please bear with this ramble.

I shoot landscapes, rocks, trees, and big views. I work slow (ask my wife), but must admit I like that I can work quick with roll film in changing light. I favor wide angles and often use the Cokin P sized filters. I found 35mm film did not cut it and moved upto a Mamiya 645 a few years back. The increased detail in my prints really wowed me. I shoot exclusively chromes (mostly Velvia), on a tripod, and with manual focus primes. I have a local lab scan the images I want to print. Printing for me means 8x10s on my Epson or a 12x18 at Costco-cannot beat $2.99 for that.

While this works for me now, I am thinking about evolving to a bigger camera or bigger printing or both. I also happen to be at a place where I can set aside some cash to make a purchase. Here is what I am thinking.

Large Format- The tool of choice for landscape is still the view camera. My research here has leaned me toward a Shen-Hao and a Nikon 90/8 lens. My plan would also be to use Quickloads. An alternate camera could be the Cadet Wide, but I think I would prefer a field camera. Already projecting a second lens being a Rodenstock 65mm, because it takes 58mm filters and should accommodate my Cokin P sized filters- like I said, love wide angle. Once I started to accumulate a few images, get an Epson 4870 to digitize.

Of course I have had three friends (who all did shoot LF) say that LF is not the best solution and that 6x7 is a better compromise. I can understand their logic of speed and roll film, but wonder about the difference in the details. I know I can see the difference between 35mm and 645 in an 8x10 print I would think that same type of detail increase would be noticeable in a jump to 4x5 too.

So I have looked at an alternative of a 6x7 and think an RZII would be awesome and the Pentax 67II would be pretty nice, but even used they both would cost more than a new 4x5 setup. Would the quality increase of 6x7 over a 645 be worth the price and increased gear size?

I have also considered sticking with 645 and maybe a get Nikon Coolscan 9 or Epson 4000 and printing big from 645 scans.

I have seen but never used a 4x5 so I have a little hesitation on ordering. Renting is not an option for me locally. I have read the Dykinga LF book and looked through Steve Simmons too. I think I could master the controls, it is the myriad ways to mess up and upside down image that worry me.

Does everyone go through this angst?

Any wise words would help. Thanks.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

I have solved this dilemna by the purchase of a 6x9 Arca Swiss F-line camera as my beginner's 'large format' camera. The camera has full movements and is part of a monorail camera system expandable to 4"x5" and beyond. Until now I'm happy with 6x9 on rollfilm but will probably upgrade to a 4"x5" back like Jack Dikinga's equipment sooner or later.

[Calamity Jane]

"Wise words"?

Well, you won't get any of those from me :-)

I just ventured into LF and absolutely LOVE what my 4x5 can do.

However, this morning on my way to work, just as the sun was rising under heavy clouds and a dense fog blanketed all the low lands, I looked out my car window to see the most incredible scene - the bight yellow light and black shadows, the blood-red of the sunrise under leaden clouds, and the silver blanket of fog with the odd tree poking thru - WOW!

The problem? NO CAMERA! Even if I had the 4x5, it would not have been quick enough to capture that 1 minute of perfect conditions, though my Pentax 645 would have.

Each camera and format has its strength and its weakness. As much as I love the 4x5, I MUST start carrying the 645 more!

[Tony Galt]

I shoot with a Shen Hao with a 90mm f/8 Super Angulon (at that focal length a faster lens would be nice), among other lenses. I use both sheet film and I have an old Graflex roll film back that I use mostly for color (often color negative film) because color sheet film and processing is expensive. While 4x5 color transparencies are nicer and probably more detailed than the 6x7 negatives I get with the roll film back, I think the thing that keeps me using a large format camera (rather than thinking more about medium format--actually I do have an old Rolleiflex TLR) is movements. I enjoy cleverly being able to produce sharp focus from just in front of the camera to infinity with a bit of a tilt and/or swing. I like being able to correct for converging verticals on buildings and other upright objects like rock formations or even trees. Also I think the experience under the dark cloth with an upsidedown image on the groundglass actually helps me think about composition better than with quicker smaller cameras. Also using sheet film (especially in color)--because it is more expensive, or with black and white, labor intensive--makes me think more about capturing what I want with a single effort, instead of shooting many frames as one might do with medium format, or especially 35mm and now digital capture.

[Ernest Purdum]

To me, the biggest advantage of LF over MF is the ability to use movements to control perspective and zones of sharp focus. The gain in information that your film can display is a bonus, but secondary to the movements.



You can, of course, always put a rollfilm back on an LF camera, and sometimes it's a good idea to do so, but you can't put a 4X5 holder on a Mamiya.



I'm glad you have already got an idea of your focal length preferences. This is a very personal matter. I'd suggest, though, spending some time with your first lens choice, paying attention to how often you feel limited by it, before spending your money on another lens.



Choice of camera is also a very personal matter. Generally most people who work mostly in studios like monorails and the backpackers want field cameras. Those whose work is strongly varied have a decision to make.



Sure, you have more opportunity to mess up with an LF camera, it goes along with having more opportunity in general. Fortunately, the consequences of messing up are not like those of messing up in your car.



Some people say that the upside down image enables a better sense of composition. Maybe that's rationalization, but you can very quickly get used to viewing an inverted image. I've never heard of anyone finding this a real problem.

[Moe_4073]

To me, the operation of the camera MF vs LF cameras is secondary to the convenience/handling/cost/processing of the film (I have come love battling it out with my monorail and flatbed cameras). Quickloads are nice, but limited to available emulstions (this may not be an issue for you). If renting a 4x5 camera is out of the question, see if you can find a cheap Speed Graphic or Toyo field camera to test out the format, it can always be sold later. There will be extra detail available from the larger negative, as well as perspective control if you choose to use it, but it is very subjective to whether it is worth the expense to move up from 6x7's convenience and quality. All I can suggest is that you try it, you will really love it or, not. Regards

[Leonard Evens]

I had been doing medium format, some of it with a technical camera capable of limited movements, for some 45 years. A few years ago I switched to a 4 x 5 view camera, so, like a lot of others, I can relate to what you are thinking now.

If you are just interested in more detail, going to 6 x 7 may be a viable choice. You will get more detail---a multiplier of about 1.25. (Of course, 4 x 5 will give you a multiplier more than 2.) On the other hand, if you want to use view camera movements, you are entering a whole new world, so you should make sure you understand just what you get and what you lose. There are some medium format view camera possibilities, but they tend to be very expensive and/or not nearly as flexible as 4 x 5 view cameras.

I found that many of my ideas before getting the view camera (a Toho FC-45X) were mistaken or incomplete. So, should you decide to get a view camera, I advise not trying to work everything out in detail beforehand and being open minded as you learn how to use it. For example, the 65 mm Rodenstock may not be a good choice since it has a relatively small image circle. Issues like filter size may be less important.

I wouldn't worry about the ground glass image being rotated 180 degrees. You get used to that pretty quickly, and you learn that up is down and right is left.

[Guy Tal]

A couple of things you might find useful:
1) If you can find a LF photographer in your area (where are you?) who's willing to spend some time in the field with you and show you the ropes - you'll learn more in one afternoon than any book or web site will teach you.
2) Failing that, see if you can rent a LF outfit that's similar to the one you have in mind and test drive it for a day. You will need to learn the basics on your own (practice a lot of "dry runs" until you're comfortable with it). It may be frustrating trying to figure it out on your own, but you'll at least know what's in store.

As most on this forum will tell you - the first successful LF image you produce will likely prove to be a major milestone. There's no going back...

Guy
Scenic Wild Photography

[Stan. Laurenson-Batten]

I will try and give an answer to your question based on my personal experiences. For a number of years I was quite happy with my Nikon and Hasselblads which I still use frequently. Then, I bought a 5X4 for a special commission and I developed my problem. When I am out doing the thing with any other camera than my 5X4 I get Sinar P withdrawl symptoms. I have become so addicted to the sheer quality of the larger image that any picture I take with a lesser format gives me guilt complex - that I am not doing the scene justice. I am now under a self imposed course of treatment to limit the desires of the 5X4 by making sure that I select locations that are just not compatible to the humping of a heavy monorail camera, lenses and equipment. I hope this confession has helped you arrive at a rashional decision.

[Stan. Laurenson-Batten]

I will try and give an answer to your question based on my personal experiences. For a number of years I was quite happy with my Nikon Fuji 6X9 and Hasselblads which I still use frequently. Then, I bought a 5X4 for a special commission and I developed my addiction problem. When I am out doing the thing with any other camera than my 5X4 I get Sinar P withdrawl symptoms. I have become so addicted to the sheer quality of the larger image that any picture I take with a lesser format gives me guilt complex - that I am not doing the scene justice. I am now under a self imposed course of treatment to limit the desires of the 5X4 by making sure that I select locations that are just not compatible to the humping of a heavy monorail camera, lenses and equipment. I hope this confession has helped you arrive at a rational decision.