Advantages of 5x7 over 4x5 - flexability?

[Michael_4021]

I have been an avid amature photographer for over 20-years, using 35mm and medium format cameras (Canon AE-1 Programs and Hasselblads) to shoot a great variety of subjects. Living in New Hampshire, I enjoy close proximity to the White Mountains and photograph a lot of mountain scapes, macro shots of plants/foliage, and star trail photography (follow link to great example of this as shot by photographer Bill Proud: http://forums.naturephotographers.net/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=8306088241&f=7086090941&m=5026011941). I want to step up to large format but am not sure of the camera size I should be looking for. I expect that I will mostly shoot 4x5 sheet film and am considering the Arca-Swiss F Metric, but do I understand correctly that a 5x7 camera with a reducing back, would allow broader camera adjustments across the larger ground glass, easier focusing and the ability to shoot the occasional 5x7, or should I just stick with the 4x5 model for its lighter, more compact frame? Though I backpack into many locations, I would be comfortable carrying up to 12 or 13 pounds of camera equipment (I know I'm going to regret putting that in writing) on those occasions, if I will have greater freedom in other aspects.

[John Kasaian]

Michael,

5x7 Rocks! No polaroids, fewer choices for films, but It Rocks!

---Cheers!

[Ernest Purdum]

To me, a major advantage of the 5X7 + 4X5 reducing back combination is that it makes fuller use of your expensive lenses. The same lens that provides worthwhile user of movements on 4X5 provides a truly wide angle view on 5X7.

[John D Gerndt]

As you mentioned you own a Hasselblad I will assume you were won over by the superior optics afforded you by that choice. A 5x7 is 75% larger and thus 75% sharper at a given enlargement. At 5x7 you can also enter the beautiful world of contact printing, from there, there is no looking back.

There isn’t really a reason NOT to buy into a 5x7 outfit. Many 4x5 cameras are 5x7s with a “reducing” back. The added weight is not really much in material, the options afforded are important. Yes DO go 5x7.

Sincerely,

[N Dhananjay]

In general, the weight difference between a 4x5 and a 5x7 is minimal. Many cameras use the same basic frame - for example, most Deardorff 4x5s are really just reducing backs on a 5x7 frame. Deardorff did make a special 4x5, typically referred to as "The Baby", which was lighter and more compact but the weight difference is nothing like going up to 8x10. I don't know about whether movements are greater with 5x7. Within a particular model, I think you would find a similar range of movements.

5x7 provides a bunch of advantages. Most people feel 5x7 is the first truly viable size for contact prints i.e., 4x5 is too small. And you get contact printing without the weight and bulk of an 8x10. Second, as mentioned already, 5x7 probably provides you the most range of options for lenses. Third, 5x7 typically will have a longer bellows and will allow you to use longer lenses than most 4x5s. 5x7 also has a distinctly different aspect ratio from the more square 4x5 and 5x7 formats. Ignoring debates about the merits of different aspect ratios, it is nice to have both since i tgives you the flexibility to deal with a wider variety of subject matter. The one disadvantage is probably the fact that 5x7 enlargers are a little rarer and more expensive than 4x5 enlargers but in the larger scheme of things, I think that is a trivial disadvantage. And if your logic for working with 5x7 is for contact prints plus enlarging 4x5s, there is probably no issue there.

Cheers, DJ

[Bruce Watson]

Michael,

You are going to be carrying quite a bit more than 13 pounds of camera equipment no matter what large format size you pick. I've done a fair amount of work getting my "kit weight" down. I'm using a 4x5 Toho, carrying four lenses (three from Kerry Thalman's lightweight list). Ten film holders (hey, if Kodak, Ilford, or Fuji would give me an ISO 400 B&W film in readyload/quickload format I'd be all over it - it would save a bunch of weight, not to mention dust). Pentax spot meter, filters, stepup rings, etc, and a Gitzo tripod and Arca-Swiss ball head. Fully packed, that's 13.5 kg - just under 30 pounds.

As to which format from an aesthic standpoint, the two formats give you slightly different aspect ratios (1:1.25 vs. 1:1.4). With the quality of today's films, you can enlarge either of them to wall size with excellent quality.

If you are going to mostly use 4x5 anyway, I guess you have to ask yourself what you really gain by having a 5x7 camera. If that gain is worth the higher cost of the film/processing, and the incremental weight (which shouldn't be more than 10% more), then go for it.

What I'm wondering is, why not commit to a format and use it pretty much exclusively for a while so that you can get used to LF in general, and that format in particular? If you do that for either 4x5 for 5x7, I suspect that in the end you won't change over to the other. But, that's just me. Your milage may vary.

[jnantz]

just to repeat what others have said ...

you won't be sorry if you get a 5x7 - the pro's definitely outweigh the cons ...

best of luck!

[steve simmons]

There are several things I like about 5x7

the proportions of the format. It, to me, is much nicer and more useful than the squarer 4x5/8x10. It works for the landscape, architecture, and portraits.

A 5x7 is nice for a contact print. I've always liked smaller prints but 4x5 is too small. It still feels like a proof print.

steve simmons

[Gem Singer]

Hi Michael,

Take a look at Jack Dykinga's book, "Large Format Nature Photography". He uses the 4X5 Arca Swiss. The book has excellent photos, diagrams, and explainations. It may help you to make your decision.

The Canham T645 Woodfield is a nice folding field camera that can be furnished with either a 4X5, or a 5X7 back. It's fairly light weight, and it will match the type of photography that you described.

[e]

As you get older your eyes will like the 5x7 screen MUCH better than 4x5. My 5x7 Anba Ikeda comes in at 3.8lbs so not any extra weight there.Sometimes I wonder what an Ebony 5x7 would be like but when I see the photos from the Anba I don't think there would be any difference except ease of function but not of weight. That said I don't think you will go wrong with either format. But...if you are going to take the time to hike with it and put it on a tripod why not have the camera with the most negative area.