Handheld LF, why?

[Pete Andrews]

I'm always amazed when I see posts about handholding 5x4.Is there some myth that camera shake has less effect with large formats?

I've been through the ge ometry and maths, and my conclusion is that, for either angular camera movement, or movement parallel to the image plane, there's no difference between formats. Have I overlooked something?

[Glenn Kroeger]

Pete:

I think you're right on technical grounds... but the implicit assumption is that people choose LF to achieve very high levels of image quality. Why, then, use LF if camera movement is going to limit image quality to that achievable by smaller formats... essentially a "weakest link in the chain" issue.

[Pete Andrews]

"Why, then, use LF if camera movement is going to limit image quality to that achievable by smaller formats... ". That's more or less the whole point of my question Glenn.

[Pete Caluori]

Hi Pete,

I don't know why people would want to use a 4x5 hand held, but conceivably here's one reason. Camera shake is camera shake, but it becomes more noticable the more it's enlarged. You'd have to enlarge a 35mm neg much more to get an 8x10, so perhaps that's the reason - though somehow I don't think so.

Regards,

[steve_782]

Why not hand-hold a 4x5? That's what thousands of press photographers did before 35mm cameras became popular for newspaper work - and - how else can you get that "Weegee look"?

[tim atherton]

"I think you're right on technical grounds... but the implicit assumption is that people choose LF to achieve very high levels of image quality. Why, then, use LF if camera movement is going to limit image quality to that achievable by smaller formats... essentially a "weakest link in the chain" issue"."

Because my 4x5 hand held stuff has an entirely different look that my 35mm Leica stuff or even my 6x7 work. Camera movement isn't always an issue (or rather, is an issue for any of these formats). Suffice to say, it can work and work well. Quite simply, it works. Of course you are shooting in a different way though. And you also get a different reaction if shooting people. It's not just technical stuff.

Also, having worked on a lot of hand held 4x5 stuff in an Archives, there was plenty there that was damned sharp - way sharper than anything in 35mm.

[james norman]

there are several occasions where i must use a handheld 4x5 to do my job. to get certain views for my HABS/HAER work, i sometimes must get into fairly precarious positions, often in places where tripod placement is simply impossible, and i pull out my old crown graphic. to acheive appropriate image sharpness, i do try to use as fast a shutter speed as conditions will allow, and often i cannot filter the same way i might with a tripod situation. i do have to be careful and steady, but i have successfully used shutter speeds as low as 1/4 second. to give you an example of the effects of camera shake on LF work, i have had the opportunity to work in the field with jet lowe, HAER photographer, under some difficult conditions. one of these was recordation of the historic steel bridge across the willamette river in portland, oregon. we climbed up into the truss superstructure above the roadway to get a shot of the trusswork, and jet setup his tripod on a small platform near the operator's house. there was a lot of traffic on the old bridge, and the entire structure shook enormously and moved continuously as we worked there. jet was unperturbed by the movement, and i asked him what shutter speed he was going to use on the shot - 1 sec at f/22. i said, "jet, there's no way you can get this shot like that," commenting on the amount of camera movement during such a long exposure. he just smiled and stuck his hand on the lens and released the shutter with his thumb (not even using a cable release). he told me that even with some shake, he would still be able to get an acceptable 11x14 print from his 5x7 neg, since the enlargement amount is so small for the large negative size, and he was not worried about it. after seeing the resulting image, it was obvious he was quite correct.

[Bruce Wehman]

Gents,

The shake is the same, but to get equivalent depth of field in LF as you have in SF you will need a smaller aperture and a resulting slower shutter speed. You usually find yourself forced to use shutter speeds that border on the ability to hand-hold.....In situations where depth of field is not an issue and you can use big apertures and fast shutter speeds, LF works great. The 9" aerial stuff I shot in the Navy was much better than anything I did with smaller formats.

bw

[nick rowan]

If you're shooting 4 x 5 handheld WITH FLASH, and you can hold the camera reasonably steady, I don't see what factor "camera shake" plays.

[david clark]

Hi Pete, I some times shoot a Graflex hand held with a 150mm lens in day light. The images look fine to me. I think they look much better than hand held 35mm shots I've taken. Even in doors, 5.6 at 1/15, this a group of men having coffee at a cafe table, and I liked the results. David