4x5" to 5x7"... is it worth changing?

[Alberto Bregani]

Are you simply posing in that image or really adjusting the shutter speed? How good is your distant and closeup vision? Have you experienced any of the issues yet that arise when one's "arms become too short?"

You're dealing with a complete system that you are part of. When presbyopia sets in, you'll appreciate the much easier viewing and focusing available with a 5x7. Should your distance vision require negative diopter correction and you either wear eyeglasses or a different contact lens in each eye, 5x7 enables working without a loupe. Also worth knowing is that one can get a Maxwell Hi-Lux integral screen/fresnel for 5x7. Larger formats are stuck with actual ground glass and a separate fresnel, a less bright combination.

Another thing to consider is how many lenses of what focal lengths you carry. This can impact the weight/bulk differences between 4x5 and 5x7 kits almost as much as camera and holders will.

Using black and white film exclusively in large format, my approach has been to stick with 5x7 on the longest hikes for as long as I can carry it.

Nice thread again
thank you all for your precious comments

Since Sal introduced the sight/eyesight issue and most of your following comments were around this argument i start with this

@Sal
you exactly hit the centre :-)
I was not posing, i was really adjusting the shutter speed... :-(
When i talked about "composing the scene" i was saying that the 4x5 Gg maybe is too little for me and the loupe i usually use ..Hasselblad 6x loupe (i feel very confortable looking into it ) is too big for a 4x5 GG - Without it I just see nothing. Fog

I have a standard +4.5 hypermetropia so i daily use contact lenses BUT when i have to read something ( books, documents, ...shutter speed..) i have to wear the red glasses you see in the picture since I have a little presbyopia too ( +1.5) . So when i look into the GG i have to use glasses, when i have to see into the loope i have to take them off... then i have to use them again to see aperture and speed.. UFF just tiring :-))

Maybe with a 5x7" i could have less problems ; i could work withoup a loupe ( or now and again ) and feel much confortable in terms of composing the scene
I say it again: to go for 5x7 format is not a bigger negative issue for me. Just a more confortable way to take photographs

Could it be the right choice for me?

ps well i know 8x10 and more could it be better. but as i said when i climb or i go around mountains i have no possibility to have sherpas ))
So lighweight is vital.

@Vaughn: thanks for your remarks and experience

@Rol Domaz Roger dupont and others thanks again

[Greg Y]

Roger, 5x7 enlargers are out there. I had a Durst 138 w/ a colorhead fall into my lap about 5 years ago, & got a beautiful 70s 210 Rodagon off ebay for $40. Love those modest 16x20' enlargements. Alberto I was wondering how you have dificulties with the screen on a 4x5 coming from a Rolleiflex? The Rollei & the 5x7 Deardorff are my standards & I love them both. Good luck with your decision. Your mountain work is very beautiful. I'm a professional mountain & ski guide from Canada & have always appreciated the opportunity to climb on either side of the Swiss/Italian border. I hope you are able to resolve your focusing issues.

[Alberto Bregani]

Roger, 5x7 enlargers are out there. I had a Durst 138 w/ a colorhead fall into my lap about 5 years ago, & got a beautiful 70s 210 Rodagon off ebay for $40. Love those modest 16x20' enlargements. Alberto I was wondering how you have dificulties with the screen on a 4x5 coming from a Rolleiflex? The Rollei & the 5x7 Deardorff are my standards & I love them both. Good luck with your decision. Your mountain work is very beautiful. I'm a professional mountain & ski guide from Canada & have always appreciated the opportunity to climb on either side of the Swiss/Italian border. I hope you are able to resolve your focusing issues.

Greg, cool I'm a ski teacher too: maybe one day we'll go skiing together in Alberta ( if i come to) or here in the Dolomites ( if you come to) ;-)
due to my difficulties, with Rolleiflex i usually use the prism. No eyeglasses, just contact lenses and i'm happy with it. With the hasselblad i use a metered prism too

Thanks for remarks :-)
ciao!
A:-)

[jose angel]

I use to shoot 4x5"; I have a very good 5x7" lightweight camera, and a 8x10" as well. Almost exclusively b&w.

I don`t use to shoot 5x7" for several reasons... I like to develop with the small Jobo tank... only accept 4x5" sheets (4509?). My 5x7" enlarger head is not as good as my 4x5" one, and there isn`t a huge difference in the sizes I like to print.
Other "secondary" reasons are my preference for the 4x5" compactness, my current lens setup (optimal for 4x5"), price and camera quality (Canham, Sinar, Linhof).

If you give me a few expensive lenses, a top 5x7" modern enlarger, and some Jobo 3000 series drums (processor included), I`d shoot 5x7" more often. Maybe. I`d probably need a larger darkroom, too.

Right now, when I need more, I prefer to shoot 8x10", instead of 5x7". The processing pain is the same, but the difference with 4x5" is bigger.

[Sal Santamaura]

...the loupe i usually use ..Hasselblad 6x loupe (i feel very confortable looking into it ) is too big for a 4x5 GG - Without it I just see nothing. Fog

I have a standard +4.5 hypermetropia so i daily use contact lenses BUT when i have to read something ( books, documents, ...shutter speed..) i have to wear the red glasses you see in the picture since I have a little presbyopia too ( +1.5) . So when i look into the GG i have to use glasses, when i have to see into the loope i have to take them off... then i have to use them again to see aperture and speed.. UFF just tiring :-))

Maybe with a 5x7" i could have less problems ; i could work withoup a loupe ( or now and again ) and feel much confortable in terms of composing the scene
I say it again: to go for 5x7 format is not a bigger negative issue for me. Just a more confortable way to take photographs

Could it be the right choice for me?...

Your +4.5 diopter distance prescription puts you in the opposite situation from me. There's probably no way for you to avoid using a loupe. However, 5x7 still seems like a good idea to increase your comfort when photographing.

Here's what I suggest. Have a pair of eyeglasses made that you will wear continuously (over your contact lenses) when hiking/climbing/photographing. There should be bifocal lenses in these frames; the top clear (0 diopters) and the bottom your +1.5 -- or more as presbyopia increases over the years -- reading prescription. A 5x7 screen is large enough that you'll be able to comfortably compose under the dark cloth by tilting your head back a bit to look through the +1.5 area; bring camera and tripod to your optometrist's office so an optimum height can be found for the bifocal line. To fine focus, simply level your head and use that Hasselblad loupe through the clear eyeglass area.

The only thing you'll have to do that I don't is use the loupe, since their -6 diopter distance prescription means looking over the top of my eyeglass lenses is equivalent to using a +6 diopter loupe. We'll both wear eyeglasses continuously and give our neck muscles as much exercise as our legs and arms get.

[Frank Petronio]

For what it is worth and not wanting to upset anyone, no insults implied or anything, but the 5x7 Tachihara ultralight camera I owned for a week was so flimsy compared to what I am used to - metal cameras - that I am surprised anyone can enjoy using it, much less shoot successfully. It's dainty and I am clumsy.

[Gem Singer]

I didn't keep my 57 Tachihara for very long, either. It was not up to my standards.

Replaced it with a 5x7 Canham Traditional (wood) camera, and there was a huge improvement.

Moral of the story: don't judge all 5x7 wooden cameras by the 5x7 Tachihara.

[Sal Santamaura]

...the 5x7 Tachihara ultralight camera I owned for a week was so flimsy compared to what I am used to - metal cameras - that I am surprised anyone can enjoy using it, much less shoot successfully...

I didn't keep my 57 Tachihara for very long, either. It was not up to my standards.

Replaced it with a 5x7 Canham Traditional (wood) camera, and there was a huge improvement...

I've never seen any size Tachihara, so can't comment on it, but did once make a 130-mile round trip to Samy's in LA for some hands-on experience with the 5x7 Canham Traditional. Although it is, in my opinion, the most beautiful wood camera made, and Keith Canham's reputation is sterling, I found opening/closing it to be fiddly and rigidity lacking.

Eventually I acquired and still use an Ebony SV57. While lacking the extreme precision of a metal 5x7 Arca F-line, it's only 10 oz. heavier than the Canham, but 2 lb. 10 oz. lighter than the Arca. Ebony's SV57 has been the best overall compromise for me.

[Frank Petronio]

I wouldn't expect a quality Canham, Ebony, Chamonix or even a Shen-Hao to be as loose. I wouldn't expect anything to be as rigid as a studio camera but for most work the better wooden cameras will do great.

[Vaughn]

For what it is worth and not wanting to upset anyone, no insults implied or anything, but the 5x7 Tachihara ultralight camera I owned for a week was so flimsy compared to what I am used to - metal cameras - that I am surprised anyone can enjoy using it, much less shoot successfully. It's dainty and I am clumsy.

I lent my 4x5 Gowland PocketView to a friend and he quickly returned it -- he could not put up with its lightweight squirreliness and lack of zeroing indents. But I used the camera for years (5-month bike trip in NZ, in Costa Rica, backpacking in the Grand Canyon, years in the redwoods, etc) and love it. Can't recall ever losing a negative to camera shake.