Ultralight Hikers

[StoneNYC]

The frist image was shot using a 4x10 and the second image was shot using a 5x7. I have found that the difference between a 5x7 and 8x10 is not that much with regard to sharpness and tone. However, 5x7 is far more portable and cheaper to supply than 8x10. I buy my film in 8x10 sheets and cut it down to two sheets of 5x7 or 4x10. So I get twice much film for the same price as 8x10.

It will probably take me a few years to make the decision to publish and another year to write and publish the book. I already have a publisher who loves my work that is very interested in publishing my book about the "Power of Color Negative Film".

Thanks for sharing, I'm at the precipice where I'm not sure I'm happy with my 4x5 and would like 5x7, but film availability is higher with 8x10, but I also can't wrap my head around cutting sheet film, I tried it once with some x-ray film trying to cut down 11x14 to 4x5 and went through two sheets and couldn't cut a single sheet properly. Although, I was doing this in my Harrison tent because that's the only dark space I have. I scan everything, but I don't do any heavy editing work that a normal person couldn't do in the darkroom, probably less since I don't even dodge or burn...

Your system sounds like it makes a lot of sense, but why not just use one 8x10 camera with a 4x10 and 5x7 reducing back instead of 2 cameras, wouldn't that save a little weight? Or is it a "don't put all your eggs in one basket" thing?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Your system sounds like it makes a lot of sense, but why not just use one 8x10 camera with a 4x10 and 5x7 reducing back instead of 2 cameras, wouldn't that save a little weight? Or is it a "don't put all your eggs in one basket" thing?

That's what I do. I carry around the 8x10 Canham LW with 4x5 reducing back. I don't have a dedicated 4x5 camera.

[StoneNYC]

That's what I do. I carry around the 8x10 Canham LW with 4x5 reducing back. I don't have a dedicated 4x5 camera.

That's my plan, getting a reducing back when I size up

[Zndrson]

Hey Everyone,

First post on these forums. Can't describe how happy I am to be shooting large format again.

I was wrestling with this topic earlier today. Of course after lugging around a large backpack all day on my hike I found this scenario, but hey, better late than never.



My 4x5 is the Chamonix 045N-1. I'm sure this model has come up previously in this thread because of its weight and compact size, but I haven't had a chance to read all 11 pages quite yet. I gutted my Tamrac Expedition 3's separators and managed to squeeze in the Chamonix and the Fuji 210mm wrapped in a lens cloth. That still affords me some height so I can put 3 film holders on top of the Chamonix and another two or so in another compartment. With some elbow grease I can fit in a might meter as well as a loupe, lens cloth, and lens wrench. May try wrapping the Chamonix in a dark cloth next time.

The Tamrac also has a strap on the back for a travel sized tripod. I haven't used this particular tripod yet, but I just ordered a 3 Legged Monster with AirHed which folds down to 16" and is only just over 3 lbs, so it should fit nicely.

Obviously 10 sheets isn't a ton of film, but this pack is more of a day traveler than anything else. Hope to give it a whirl next weekend.

[Stephen Willard]

Thanks for sharing, I'm at the precipice where I'm not sure I'm happy with my 4x5 and would like 5x7, but film availability is higher with 8x10, but I also can't wrap my head around cutting sheet film, I tried it once with some x-ray film trying to cut down 11x14 to 4x5 and went through two sheets and couldn't cut a single sheet properly. Although, I was doing this in my Harrison tent because that's the only dark space I have. I scan everything, but I don't do any heavy editing work that a normal person couldn't do in the darkroom, probably less since I don't even dodge or burn...

Your system sounds like it makes a lot of sense, but why not just use one 8x10 camera with a 4x10 and 5x7 reducing back instead of 2 cameras, wouldn't that save a little weight? Or is it a "don't put all your eggs in one basket" thing?

Your approach to using reducing backs is a good one, and that is what I hope to do eventually. I have been looking at an 8x10 Ebony with reducing backs and other accessories. This will allow me to shoot 4x10 vertical photographs easily, and I will get the bellows extension I need for my 1200mm lens. Currently, I have to us a home made bellows extension, and it takes a lot of time to setup. The price for the Ebony is around $13,000 which is one of the reasons I have not switched to that configuration yet. There is also a potential problem with reducing backs because the ground glass is moved away and out from the camera body. As a result, there may be wide angle lenses you cannot use with a reducing back. For example, I cannot use my Nikkor W 75mm lens with the 4x5 reducing back on my 5x7 because I am not able to move the lens close close enough to the film plane. Ebony claims their reducing backs will not cause such problems.

I would think it would be impossible to cut film in any film tent. You will need a dark room and a good rotary paper cutter to cut film. If are interested in how I do it, I would be more than happy to post instructions and photographs of the tools I use. I can now cut film and load film in the field and have equal to or less dust problems than what was realized from the Readyloads and Quickloads.

[Daniel Stone]

Your approach to using reducing backs is a good one, and that is what I hope to do eventually. I have been looking at an 8x10 Ebony with reducing backs and other accessories. This will allow me to shoot 4x10 vertical photographs easily, and I will get the bellows extension I need for my 1200mm lens. Currently, I have to us a home made bellows extension, and it takes a lot of time to setup. The price for the Ebony is around $13,000 which is one of the reasons I have not switched to that configuration yet. There is also a potential problem with reducing backs because the ground glass is moved away and out from the camera body. As a result, there may be wide angle lenses you cannot use with a reducing back. For example, I cannot use my Nikkor W 75mm lens with the 4x5 reducing back on my 5x7 because I am not able to move the lens close close enough to the film plane. Ebony claims their reducing backs will not cause such problems.

I would think it would be impossible to cut film in any film tent. You will need a dark room and a good rotary paper cutter to cut film. If are interested in how I do it, I would be more than happy to post instructions and photographs of the tools I use. I can now cut film and load film in the field and have equal to or less dust problems than what was realized from the Readyloads and Quickloads.

Stephen,
I know Ebony is beautifully made, but have you given Chamonix a thought? I'm sure you can get a wonderful camera(albeit a different design), but for a lot less money(even with reducing backs) than Ebony charges.

Also, you're cutting film down from 8x10, IN THE FIELD? I guess this allows you to not overpack on one format(and have none of the size you need), but still?

just wondering, I'm not at the stage of being llama dependent, yet !

-Dan

[Stephen Willard]

Stephen,
I know Ebony is beautifully made, but have you given Chamonix a thought? I'm sure you can get a wonderful camera(albeit a different design), but for a lot less money(even with reducing backs) than Ebony charges.

Also, you're cutting film down from 8x10, IN THE FIELD? I guess this allows you to not overpack on one format(and have none of the size you need), but still?

just wondering, I'm not at the stage of being llama dependent, yet !

-Dan

Dan, I will check out the Chamonix. My biggest concern is the rigidity of the camera especially at full bellows for my 1200mm lens. I got a chance to try my friends 8x10 Ebony with my 1200mm, and it was very rigid.

No I do not cut film in the field. I cut it at home. That said, dust can be introduced when you cut film and when you load film in the field. In either case, it took me a long time to figure out how to do those operations without getting dust on the film's emulsion side prior to exposure. In the back country you do not have vacuum cleaners or showers to increase the moisture and cleans dust from the air. In fact, many places where I change film, it is down right dusty, yet I have figured out how to change film without contaminating the film with dust.

It has gone way beyond llama dependencies. It is a progressive addition .

[David A. Goldfarb]

Another multiformat option is to carry one film size and use cut darkslide masks to make multiple images on one sheet. I do it with one mask to make two 4x10's on an 8x10" sheet, but one could also make a pair of masks for 5x7". It involves a bit more meticulous attention to avoiding double exposures, but you can label the holders with check boxes to keep track, and you can carry one format of film and holders, no reducing backs, cut down the negs after processing, and the masks are just like a few spare darkslides. If you're enlarging, you can even cut back on lenses in the pack.

Some older wooden cameras, like Deardorff, have the option of wooden masks that fit into the back to make multiple exposures on a single sheet. You need a camera with sufficient rise/fall, though, to use this method effectively.

One of the main reasons I sold off my 617 extension back for 4x5" is the realization that with the bulk of the back and camera sufficient to support it, I might as well shoot 4x10" with the half-darkslide mask on my ultralight 8x10" Gowland.

[Bill Burk]

Hey Everyone,

...My 4x5 is the Chamonix 045N-1. I'm sure this model has come up previously in this thread because of its weight and compact size, but I haven't had a chance to read all 11 pages quite yet. I gutted my Tamrac Expedition 3's separators and managed to squeeze in the Chamonix and the Fuji 210mm wrapped in a lens cloth....

I assume that's a daypack you add water and snack and a light jacket and go...

If you want to take it backpacking, that's a good compact setup... would fit nicely in the sleeping bag compartment of a regular backpack... Leaving room for the bear can and sleeping bag in the top compartment... The rest of the pack can be filled with lightweight choices appropriate for conditions. Bring a friend, so you have someone to send out when you get hurt.

[Bill Burk]

It has gone way beyond llama dependencies. It is a progressive addition . ...

I always like hearing how you solved the dust problem in your own unique way...