Paul Caponigro turned me on to 5x7 back in the '80's. He likes the aspect ratio, as do I. I also like the fact that the logistics of using this format are very similar to those of 4x5 - and for folks like myself (and many others on this forum from what I can gather) who depend on our aging backs to schlep our equipment, sometimes far into the field, for enough elapsed time/variety of subject matter to justify a dozen holders and three to five lenses, and who can then dependably enlarge resulting negatives to large sizes (in my case, 40x60)...this format is a godsend!
And then there are those situations where if I could choose any format, I would go to 5x7 as a "sweet spot" for reasons relating to size/aspect ratio (compared to 4x5), and "point of diminishing returns" relating to the use of 8x10 when dealing environmental factors, balance of movements with DOF requirements while being cognizant of diffraction-inducing aperture values when wanting to significantly enlarge results, relative consistency of film flatness, etc. etc. Given these potential issues, 5x7 is often hard to beat!
Bookmarks