Why Aren't There More 4x5 Reflex Cameras?

[spacegoose]

Shooting 4x5 portraits I can't help but wonder what it must be like not to lose sight of the subject after the film is in place ... I've read (perhaps here) that some value this uncertainty, or just don't liking being able to continually focus.

Has anyone used 4x5 in Super D, Gowlandflex, ART-FLEX, or Arca Swiss Reflex? Any opinions on SLR vs TLR? Does the Super D's mirror function automatically, or does it need to be engaged and disengaged manually - (if so, is this still better then having no continuous focusing ability)?

[Dan Fromm]

Press a Graflex' trigger and the mirror will rise and the shutter will go, in that order. Big thud followed by mighty klunk. The mirror has to be lowered -- put back in the viewing position -- manually. There is also a provision to release the shutter manually after the mirror is up; not what you want but may be essential for the Baby Bertha I'm tinkering with. I made the Bertha to use long lenses; they punish unsteadiness, including vibration, severely.

Don't rule out a Mentor Reflex, but note that although I'm aware of them I've never seen one in the, um, flesh. After Graflexes, Mentors are probably the most common relatively modern 4x5 SLRs; look for them on eBay.de. Arca Reflexes are much less common. There are also a fair number of UK-made 4x5 SLRs, most quite ancient and much less well-supported than Graflexes or Mentors.

[Vaughn]

And somewhere out there is a 100-sheet 4x5 film magazine.

PS -- motor driven, also!

[Mark Sampson]

The Graflex SLR was a standard professional camera for decades. Steiglitz, Strand, Weston, Bourke-White, Lange, all used them from about 1903 onwards. But he fashion changed after say 1950; portrait shooters went to the Rollei and the Hasselblad, which could use electronic flash, and to the Mamiya RB67- which is essentially a modern roll-film Graflex. Graflex made the Super D until the 1960s; perhaps they made them too well, since there are so many still giving good service 75+ years later.

[John O'Connell]

I've looked at/played with a late model Gowlandflex and a Super D.

The Gowlandflex is pretty huge, and is a very tall camera. The one I saw had a 240mm lens setup, and it didn't exactly look interchangeable. It seemed like a good camera for full-length portraits, but you'd need a stepladder close to a subject to avoid the up-the-nostrils TLR perspective problem, I think.

The Graflex is a different kettle of fish. I've never seen one in good shape, so I'm reluctant to judge the breed based on my experience. I do think one would be a lot of fun with a bag mag, tho.

[Bill_1856]

The 4x5 Graflex is large, heavy, ungainly, slow, noisy, shaky, and a PITA to compose and focus for anyone wearing glasses.

[spacegoose]

Press a Graflex' trigger and the mirror will rise and the shutter will go, in that order. Big thud followed by mighty klunk. The mirror has to be lowered -- put back in the viewing position -- manually. There is also a provision to release the shutter manually after the mirror is up; not what you want but may be essential for the Baby Bertha I'm tinkering with. I made the Bertha to use long lenses; they punish unsteadiness, including vibration, severely.

Don't rule out a Mentor Reflex, ...

Thanks for the info, never had heard of these.

[Peter K]

Has anyone used 4x5 in Super D, Gowlandflex, ART-FLEX, or Arca Swiss Reflex? Any opinions on SLR vs TLR?

In the late Sixties I've used the "Technika-Flex", a TLR top piece for the Technika V. With exchangeable viewer lenses 150mm and 270mm. This camera could alse used handheld if one has arms like Popeye.

Here is another TLR-LF camera aviable.

Peter

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Has anyone used 4x5 in Super D, Gowlandflex, ART-FLEX, or Arca Swiss Reflex?

I have an Arca Swiss (Oschwald) reflex 6x9 camera.
This camera was probably used by a portraitist, it was fitted with an old dagor lens (I think it is a 210, to be checked) and a very unusual RADA 6x6 (not 6x9) rollfilm back for 120 rolls.
The model I have is on a monorail and is supported by conventional A/S (Oschwald, silver-finish) function carriers & format frames. In principle all movements allowed to the monorail are allowed to the reflex camera.
However very few movements are actually useable except if a focal length longer than 210 mm is in use.
The Oschwald Bros. eventually introduced a simplified version of this 6x9 reflex camera with a bellows supported by a simplified rail sytem, with fewer movements, probably to save weight, complexity and cost, for protraitists ???

The reasons why there are few "modern" (i.e. post-WW-II) large format SLRs are probably that they are not able to provide sufficient clearing distance in front of the mirror to accommodate non-retrofocus wide-angle lenses.
Retrofocus wide-angle lenses were a true challenge for the lens designer up to the 1950's, so there was probably no market incentive to design retrofocus lenses for the large format, even covering 6x9cm-2x3" only.
Hence large format SLRs are good for portraits and narrow angles of field... but in this class of applications, after world war II, they were put into a direct competition with 6x6 camera of all kinds, rangefinders, TLRs like the Rollei (although the tele-twin-rollei / Sonnar-135 was introduced only at the end of the fifties, as an aswer to the Mamiya, but as of 1960, the 6x6 TLR had already lost the battle against 35mm cameras...) ... and large format SLRs simply were not in demand by "modern" professionals who hav to use the lates "modern" equipment
Strange enough to see that the Oschwald Brothers introduced this kind of LF reflex cameras when the commercial battle was almost lost, in the 1960's, hence the very few number actually manufactured.

I'll be too happy to answer all technical questions you would have about the Arca Swiss (Oschwald) 6x9 reflex camera, a rare camera, indeed, since even the Internet does not seem to show any image of this smaller 2x3" sister of the A/S 4x5" reflex camera !
(hence I have to make a decent picture of it to share with friends !)

[Sevo]

Plaubel made the Pecoflex, which was fairly similar to the Arca 6x9 reflex in being a reflex with monorail front - no 4x5" though, and the Pecoflex did not sell much either.

Essentially, the LF SLR was doomed after WWII for multiple reasons. High weight and size, no lenses, and no more makers left - the British camera industry never found a way back to civilian production, the German LF makers ended up on the wrong side of the iron fence, and Graflex were merely continuing production of ancient designs - where development was concerned, they had put their money on the Graphic by the thirties, and were already moving on towards smaller formats.

The lack of a variety of lens types obviously put them further back in competition with 6x6 and 6x7 reflex cameras - LF SLRs were designed around portrait length Tessar types, and many could not even hold a short normal (4x5" usually bottom out in the 145-180mm range, most shorter lenses don't clear the mirror). There were neither other (retrofocus or tele) lenses designed for that type of body, nor bodies developed that could make use of the wide coverage of modern view camera lenses. And where late SLRs had movements, they were restricted to a very modest tilt (on Mentor and Bentzin cameras). Even on SLR monorails like the Arca or Pecoflex, the mirror box was in the way of most movements that reached beyond the capabilities of a Tessar.