Please tell me how easy it is to shoot with a 4 x 5

[Doug Paramore]

Boy, David started a good discussion. The beauty of LF is that there are so many of us going in the same direction but different paths, none of which are really wrong. Whether we spend thousands of dollars on the latest and greatest or $150 on a Speed Graphic with the original lens, we still wind up at the same place: great negatives and prints. The point about the upside down image is well taken. Nothing improves composition like an upside down image. It adds another diminsion that seems to make the whole process easier, although it kind of blows one's mind at the beginning. A right-side-up image looks strange after using a LF for awhile. Ain't LF great!!

[David Richhart]

Well Dave, you only have to please one person, so I guess you could go jack-off.

But if you want to take pictures with the BIG BOYS, why are you afraid of large format???

Or why do you feel so threatened that you have to post false questions?

We are a small group of people passing along whatever we can to help others with similar interests.

The internet has such great potential for the exchange of information and ideas...why do some people feel the need to take advantage???

But you know Dave...

As I read back, I can identify with every message that has been posted but yours. You didn't understand before, you don't understand now, and you never will understand, and I don't care.

So, can you please tell me when your next photo will appear in the next edition of the local "Early Bird"??? -Dave

[Ellis Vener]

David I'd start with different lenses: the 110mm XL f/5.6 Super Symmar,a 210mm f /5.6 (schneider, rodentock or nikkor) and a 300mm f/9 M-Nikkor. You won't need a center filter for any of these lenses. From what you've told me of your interests you'll probably want either an Arca Swiss F-Line camera, Sinar X or Sinar P2, or a Linhof TK45s camera. Don't bother with the lighter weight Si nar F cameras: the Arca and the Technika are significantly better in that weight class.

Ellis Vener // Houston, Texas

[David.R.Williams]

First of all I would like to thank all of you nice people once again for all your kind and considerate input. All of you have been very compasionate not to mention having patience with the many people, who such as myself, are curious about large format and who desire the large format's attributes. All of you with the exception of Mr. Richhart. I'm sorry if I said anything that affended you. From what I've said and from all the warm feed back I've recieved from all the other people, I have no idea where your comming from and why you have all this rude hostilities towards me. To think that because you shoot with a larger negative makes you a better photographer or a "man" is pretty weak to say the least. I feel sorry for you. On my first statement, when I asked about it being easy, I ment "relatively easy". For the record I already have a point and shoot camera. I own two F5 Nikon's and being that there 35mm is one of the many reasons I'm looking at getting a 4 X 5 along with a medium format system. No one seemed to touch base with me on using a 4 X 5 on fashion or even portrait work for that matter. If any of you have any experience with this type of work on a large format system I would appreciate any feed back. Even though I desire a large format system for mostly landscape work and some architectural work, I would also like to use it from time to time in "some" fashion/commercial shoots. Most of the people I shoot for are Versace, Gucci, Versus, Dolce & Gabbana, Lucho, Tootsies, Festari, North Beach Leather, Givenchy and Hawaiian Tropics to name a few. I'm just doing this as a part time hobby, for right now anyway. But I would like to shoot full time some day. I still have to buy the proper tools for myself and my clients, have the desire and put forth the effort, dedication and patience to learn how to achieve the best results I can possibly obtain. Thanks again everyone!

[Ellis Vener]

If you are going to shoot fashion with an LF camera you'd be well advised to hav e at least one if not two assistants.

[Pete Su]

The only thing that really scares me about getting into 4x5 is film loading and processing.

Otherwise, if you've shot 35mm off a tripod, I don't think 4x5 is all that different in principle. You set the camera up, you focus, you set the shutter speed and apeture, you close the lens, stick the film in the camera, fire. The only difference is there are a couple of extra things to remember and the camera is a lot larger, and the amount of film you can burn at once is lower.

Go get a speed graphic and play around. Its fun.

[Erik Ryberg]

David,

The three Schneider lenses you mentioned aren't going to be anywhere near sufficient for you. Three lenses! You will need more than that. Get the whole line-up, at least. Also, since different manufacturer's lenses make subtly different images, you should invest in a few of your favorite focal lengths of the Nikon, Rodenstock, and Fuji offerings. But more importantly, equipment of different eras produces different effects, too, so you will need to look into older models no longer made. Finally, you keep speaking about this as if you will only need one 4x5 camera. You will need at least two, a field and a monorail, but most likely you will require both a wooden and a metal model of each. And don't forget the tripods! You will need a great number of these. Finally, if you haven't invested yet in at least one recent 4wd, you will need to get to work on that end of things, too. Actually, having one spare SUV will be almost necessary. Only then can you get on the path to making fulfilling images in photography.

[Dave_958]

David: Let me add my 2 cents. For portraits, a 4 x 5 format with a 210, 300 or 3 60 mm lens can give you stunning images. However, a 5 x 7 or 8 x 10 LF allows yo u to make contact prints with Azo paper that produces incrediblely rich tones no t achievable with enlargements. For ease of use, I would recommend the Linhof Ma ster Technika (inclcuding its top of the line MT 2000) or the Linhof Technikarda n 45S. The MT requires only one bellows for long focal length (up to 360 mm) and short focal length (as little as 35 mm for the MT 2000). The 360/500 Nikkor T l ens combination can be used with the MT cameras. The camera folds up like a clam to dimensions of 7 x 7 x 4.5 inches, one of the most compact 4 x 5 cameras avai lable. Its metal construction enhances impact resistance, durability, and stabil ity. Like the TK 45S, its lens board is relatively small (99 x 96 mm), which mak es it easier to fit a lens into a pouch of a camera bag. The small opening of th e bellows limits selection of lenses to those whose rear element diameter does n ot exceed 80 mm. This is not a serious problem, because only the bulkiest and he aviest of lenses have rear elements exceeding that limit. Both the TK45S and the MT have center axis lens tilt, which eases sharpness adjustment so that near an d far come into focus. With base tilts, the camera has to be refocused. The TK45 S has a 485 mm bellows extension. This enables use of a 210 mm G-Claron Schneide r lens both for 1:1 image reproduction at 420 mm extension, for portraits, and f or landscape photography at standard extension. This lens has one major disadvan tage: it offers only a f9 maximum aperture, in contrast to other lenses with ape rtures of f5.6 I have been able to focus with ease at light levels as low as EV 7 using this lens. Macrophotography with the MT requires purchase of a separate 180 mm lens that can focus only between 1:1 and 1:4 image reproduction and canno t be used for landscape photography at infinity. The TK45S is especially easy to handle because it uses separate levers to control lens tilt and lens rise. The TK45S folds up to a book size 8.5 x 10 x 4 inches. It weighs about 6.4 lbs, slig htly heavier than the MT. Unlike the MT, it leaves the bellows exposed to wear a nd abrasion and greater care must be taken in storing or transporting it. The TK 45S has a centimeter scale on its monorail, that eases calculating increases in exposure required when shooting with the bellows extended. Neither camera has th e geared movements and expandibility to 5 x 7 or 8 x 10 available with the Arca- Swiss field camera. All of these cameras are more expensive and heavier than woo den field cameras and cannot match the aesthetics of some of the wood cameras, w ith their brass fittings and hard wood finishes. The TK45S can use a 120 mm roll film holder with a 4 x5 adapter. I am unsure about the MT. Most 4 x5 cameras, i ncluding wooden field cameras, can use a special type of slip-in 120 mm film hol der, but it is bulkier than the conventional 4 x 5 roll film back. For ease of f ilm loading, I would recommend the Polaroid 545 film holder and Fuji Quickload o r Kodak Ready-Load film if you are shooting color transparencies. Loading and ca rrying dark slide film holders can be a hassle and requires extra caution to avo id fingerprints and dust. Kodak's Ready-Load film selection for black and white is limited to T-Max films. One advantage of T-Max films is that reciprocity comp ensation is less than more conventional films. It can be the equivalent of up to two f stops more speed in low light situations. Ball heads such as the Arca-Swi ss B-2 are great for ease of use. Choosing small, compact, light-weight lenses w ith apertures of f8 or more will ease transporting lenses in camera bags, but so me photographers prefer bulkier f5.6 lenses for ease of focussing in low light s ituations. Consider the availability of filters for odd sized lenses. I follow a strategy of buying lenses that use either a 67 or 49 mm filter. I have a step u p ring to fit my 67 mm filters to the 49 mm front lens element. I used to own a lens that required a 82 mm filter, and that was a real downer. The black and whi te and polaroid filters would take up too much space and were far more expensive than the 67 mm filters.

[Bob Peasley]

Dave, I can say that moving to large format, for me, was a great great adventure. using it for very large product shoots as well as small table top is not that difficult. Of course I had at first a Sinar F1 which was great but have moved on to a Sinar X which is even better. The Sinar system, although expensive, is quite simple to use.

I would not suggest any other system....

Good luck,

Bob