if you got to pick one camera let's say no shift, tilt, swing needed to shoot portraits. Which one would you use? suppose you only have one lens. (That rules out TLR).
if you got to pick one camera let's say no shift, tilt, swing needed to shoot portraits. Which one would you use? suppose you only have one lens. (That rules out TLR).
I'd choose the speed graphic I already have. Something with a rotating back would be a little better, but not necessary as the camera can be rotated on the tripod. I'd want to use some old lenses, so a focal plane shutter would be handy. Otherwise, ignore the extra ounces of weight or get a crown graphic.
Which lens depends on what sort of aesthetics or style you're going for. A 200-210mm range anything will be in real nice range. A shuttered 203 optar/ektar is good for most purposes being a tiny bit soft wide open with lots of smooth bokeh and will have flash sync. An old tessar will also be similar and probably cheaper. A kodak 305 portrait lens or other purpose made soft focus will be lush soft wide open and sharper stopped down. If you're going for existing light handheld, then a faster lens like a 210/5.6 planar style from schneider/nikon/etc..
My concern is regarding work flow. I have a lens with shutter, would like to shoot with a few grafmatics. Of course TLR is my best bet, if I have two identical lens.
My preference is a heavy #5 Gitzo and a heavy metal monorail that locks down nice and tight, like a Sinar Norma, a Linhof Kardan, Horseman L, Toyo G, etc.
What you want to do is not worry about moving the camera as you change the film quickly. A heavy set-up allows you to shove holders in, pull Grafmatics in and out, flick the shutter... and nothing moves by accident.
With lighter cameras it is very easy to rotate or cock it as you try to shoot several holders quickly. Unlike landscape shooters who can take their time, with portraits you sometimes are in a hurry to capture a feeling before it passes and often you want to shoot more than one or two sheets.
At wide-open, close portrait distances I have never been able to get consistent, reliable results using handheld rangefinder cameras with 127-150mm lenses, so I doubt I could do better with a 210. Cameras I've used include Speeds and Crowns, Technika IV and V, and the Polaroid 110 conversions. I think that you can handhold for moderate distances, especially if you stop down, but I remain skeptical of anyone who claims they can shoot 4x5 head & shoulder shots wide open and focused where intended, consistently. You can get lucky but it is a good way to burn film.
If your vision is good, the Graflex SLR is probably the best portrait camera for handheld close work. I found it hard to focus w reading glasses, and the viewing system (mirror mostly) must be in good condition.
At close distances, the 4x5 TLR has quite a difference between the top and bottom lenses, more so than smaller cameras. It usually doesn't matter, but it could.
In the end, after trying them all (except the TLR), I believe the conservative, heavier professional camera and heavy tripod- or stand-mounted approach is best practice for large format portraiture.
Thanks Frank.
If I leave the camera on tripod, and intend to use a rangefinder, what would be my best option?
It's hard to use a rangefinder on a tripod because you want to aim the rangefinder at the point you want to focus on, which probably isn't where it falls when mounted on the tripod. Also, I do not think that rangefinders have the required accuracy at portrait distances of 4-8 feet.
You are better off focusing on the ground glass and watching your subject for any movement between focusing and the exposure. This is another reason why I like a heavy camera -- because I am watching my subject, not the camera.
Some people will focus and use a piece of string tied the camera. Then they will put a marker on the string - a knot or tape - and use the string as a way to check focus.
There are other techniques if you search threads on "how to" for large-format portraiture.
If you don't care about shift/swing/tilt, do you care about carrying it around ? Must it be portable ? Indoors only ?
If not, then the cheapest camera is best, as long as it has sufficient bellows draw and a decent groundglass.
Subjects often respond warmly to wooden cameras with brass fittings. Something about the hand-made quality, puts them at ease.
If you have money left over for boxes of film (and a wife or daughter to change film-holders), then you definitely need a press or Prontor type shutter.
Im no expert, but feel a battered old 5x7 2D with a 4x5 back on a heavy tripod would be ideal. Heavy and fairly ridgid. Cheap and friendly. The best thing is they are not at all pretentious and can allow the sitter to be natural. Is this guy for real? People are much more natural if they think you are an idiot, or some kind of eccentric, not threatening in any way, egoless. They can be curious about what you are doing and enjoy the experience of being photographed. Shoving a Hasselblad or a shiny Cannon in someones face is not a nice thing to do, unless you are dealing with a paid model who expects such things.
David Cary
www.milfordguide.nz
Thanks everyone!
I have considered
1. SLR
2. TLR
3. Rangefinder
What I tried to do is to reduce the time between focusing and shooting as much as possible.
SLR have vibration, and slower sync time.
I prefer TLR, however, I can not afford another lens, and cannot justify another expensive lens for viewing only. (I just bought a ladder for my TLR, and might wear contacts instead of regular glasses)
Rangefinder have the problem as Frank mentioned, it is just a small window, doesnt cover whole frame. and you need a separate view finder.
Prontor is nice, I have one, it can speed up the work flow a little bit.
Ken's suggestion regarding wood camera is very good, I think most ppl are less intimidated by a wood camera than a metal one.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks