Final check before making the leap

[Robert Hughes]

Another possibility is to go LF handheld with a press camera. Get a Speed Graphic and go to town, Weegee style!

[venchka]

If it's not too late, a jogging stroller makes fast work of moving a lot of gear. Even 8x10. I have a friend who uses one for a big metal case full of RB67 gear, tripod, etc.

Good luck! Show us the photos.

Talk to Jeff at Badger.

A 6X17 roll film back will not fit a 4X5 camera. However, it will fit a 5X7 camera.

A 6X12 roll film back is probably the largest you can use for 4X5. The 150 will work okay for 6X12.

However, a 180 or 210 will give you more coverage, allowing greater movement capability.

By the way, I find it a little freaky that 2 of the 3 people who have replied to me thus far are from Texas, which is where I am from originally.

It gets more freaky. We know each other. I bought a nice 4x5 Zone VI system and 180mm Nikkor lens from Eugene.

Eugene? Is this a Eugene I know in NYC?

No, I think you might have the wrong John then. I'm going to turn on PM if I have that off and you can PM me so we can figure that out.

I'm one of the 2 guys from Texas. Eugene (Gem Singer) was the other. We know each other and have done business together. Neither of us are in NYC. Clear as mud?

[Nick_3536]

You don't mention budget.

I'd lean towards the Shen 5x7 camera and the matching 6x17 back.

Why?

Better camera. Cheaper back. So the total cost isn't much higher. If you later want to shoot 4x5 it'll take a 4x5 reducing back and still not be much bigger or heavier then the 4x5. It'll go wider with the 6x17 back mounted. Or longer for that matter.

[rugenius]

There is an additional camera back attachment/ adapter that will allow for the image circle, or "cone" to expand past the 4x5 inch film periphery to allow the use of a 6x17 cm roll film back. This is available many places such as Badger Graphic.
That item is approx $595 new
See this link for comments:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...-hao-6x17.html

I personally would choose to limit the addition to 6x12 format Graflex compatible roll backs made by Horseman, Calumet, etc,...
These backs are widely available in the used market.
If you want all of that extra weight on the rear of a 4x5" format camera you might as well choose to go with a 5x7" field camera and then use the 4x5" reducing back.
This is a much more versatile setup for the larger panorama while sacrificing nil weight in comparison to the DAYI attachment to your proposed Shen Hao.

Anyway,
My2Cents...
Bill

[redrockcoulee]

There is not a lot of savings in buying a used newish large format camera so if you want to get a Shen Hao you might as well go new if that is what you want. I bought mine used three years or so but have followed some of the prices and used sell for more than new when I got mine. Lenses are a different story and one changes one's prespective of which focal lenghts or sizes and used can be much cheaper than new. For what you mention the 180 might be a good starting lens. I have 90, 150 and 210 and many times I think that the 180 instead of the latter two would have been a better choice knowing what I know now.

I too am one whose large format has taken a second seat to a Hasselblad and think the tripod idea is good however the 'blad on a tripod is still so much easier and quicker than LF. The advantage of LF is it alows not only movement but so many other options that MF does not such as the old type of lenses, pinholes, paper negatives etc.

The 5X7 option although a bit more expensive will give you a much larger negative and a less square one as well. My first LF camera was (still is) an older 5X7 with a 4X5 reducing back and it was only after owning it for more than a decade that actually bought 5X7 film as like the squarer format and convinence of 4X5 better.

Good luck and enjoy your journey into LF

[photographs42]

John,
I think you are on the right track. I used 4x5 for 18 years before moving up to 5x7 and I wouldn’t go back. But I only do B&W and film choices are limited with 5x7. I never used a 150mm on 4x5 or 5x7. I use a 300mm more than any other (and I have a lot of lenses) and that is true with both formats.

Just thought you might like an opinion from some state other than Texas. Wait a minute; I grew up in Fort Worth. Sorry!
Jerome

[pocketfulladoubles]

I'd forget about the 6x17 back and get another lens instead. I have a 4x5 and never wish I had a roll film back. If I need that aspect ratio, I just use cropping guides on the ground glass. You get about half the final area after cropping on the 4x5 as compared to the 6x17, i.e. not much of a difference, and less weight to carry. That 150mm is a very fine lens, but honestly a 150 is the least used lens I have. I'd rather carry a 90mm and something in the 210-250mm range instead. There are fewer options in 5x7 film, the equipment is heavier and more expensive, and again you can crop and enlarge and you're only about half the area to start with.

[John NYC]

I'm one of the 2 guys from Texas. Eugene (Gem Singer) was the other. We know each other and have done business together. Neither of us are in NYC. Clear as mud?

Gotcha. When you said this. "It gets more freaky. We know each other." I took that to mean that you and I knew each other.

[John NYC]

I'd forget about the 6x17 back and get another lens instead. I have a 4x5 and never wish I had a roll film back. If I need that aspect ratio, I just use cropping guides on the ground glass. You get about half the final area after cropping on the 4x5 as compared to the 6x17, i.e. not much of a difference, and less weight to carry. That 150mm is a very fine lens, but honestly a 150 is the least used lens I have. I'd rather carry a 90mm and something in the 210-250mm range instead. There are fewer options in 5x7 film, the equipment is heavier and more expensive, and again you can crop and enlarge and you're only about half the area to start with.

I did a bunch of reading on this site for weeks now. It seems that many people recommend either a 135, a 150 or a 210 to start.

But from pictures of landscapes I've seen, clearly 90 is a great choice.

So, this is the kind of thing I am asking here. If I buy the 150 because that is what you are supposed to start with, am I going to hate it in just a little while? I should add that I love the 80mm and 150mm on my Hasselblad, and on 35mm I use mainly a 35mm and an 85mm lens (and I don't like it when the 35mm turns into effectively a 50mm-ish lens on my D90).

Glad I made this post because some of these responses are getting me thinking maybe I am not ready for the leap after all. I am pretty happy with medium format, but it is more of wanting to learn about movements and the slow pace and consideration that is making me want to try large format.

John

[Bob Salomon]

John,

Since you are in NYC why not go over to FotoCare, Ltd and rent a camera or two to see how you like it?