Sinar P2 8x10 600-1200mm realistic for outdoor photography?

[andrew11]

Hi all,

This is my first post here, I've loved how much of an incredible resource this website is and have been reading endlessly on all the available information.

I am a professional photographer and used digital and medium format cameras for a very long time but are looking to get into large format. Thanks to all the information on here I've been able to learn a lot all ready as it seems like a completely different beast from medium format. I am a landscape photographer with a special interest in long focal lengths [400mm +] I mainly drive to the general area of the location and with medium format have walked any distance required to get the shot. However I'm thinking this is impossible with a 8x10 so have decided to have a 4x4 quad motorbike fitted out to take the 8x10 so I can drive even to the hardest spots without having to carry too far.

I am looking to buy an 8x10 as well as some large focal length lenses [600-1200] although I have just realized that my brother has a Sinar P2 8x10 that he left before going overseas that I can use. I want some advice on if the P2 would be able to be used for what I've described in terms of physically possibility [weight etc] as well as good for the task [600-1200mm lenses]

Initially I was looking at using the P2 and buying these lenses here: (http://www.ebay.com/itm/142473201987) Although they are set up on a Linhof board so will have to use an adaptor?
From what I've read using these 600-1200 lenses you can only shoot 'straight through' with the P2 - I don't think this would be an issue as I've only ever shot like this with fixed focal planes [digital, medium format etc]
This is another point for choice in camera as I will be just shooting landscape with no twist needed in focus. I just want the large negative asset.

My options are use what I've mentioned above, OR if you think there are better way I'm happy to buy a more ideal camera and lenses. Money isn't generally an issue.

Would love to hear some advice from your experience. Thank you all for your time!

-Andrew

[Leigh]

Hi Andrew, and Welcome Aboard.

The Sinar P2 (which I have in 8x10) is an excellent camera.

However...
It has many bells and whistles that you absolutely do NOT need for your intended use.

A regular Sinar F2 will do everything you want, and then some, at much less weight and bulk.
I happen to have a nice 8x10 F2 available.

The "normal" focal length for 8x10 is 300mm.
That equates roughly to 50mm on a 35mm camera, or 80mm on a Hasselblad.

So 600mm is a modest telephoto, while a 1200mm is a serious telephoto.
Is that really what you want?

Have you considered 4x5 format?
You can get excellent results with fine-grain film, comparable to 8x10 work at normal enlargement.
The 4x5 gives you a much greater selection of lenses.

- Leigh

[Peter De Smidt]

Leigh is right. I also have a Sinar P2 8x10. The heavy standards are made for people needing movements. If you're not going to use them, then it is a heavy camera. On the other hand, you have one. Why not play around with it to get a sense of what you'll be dealing with? In the first place, at those extensions, movement of the camera/subject will be a challenge. The Sinar is a sturdy camera, but if you have 1 meter of bellows extension, the camera will get a bit springy. You could add the two rail clamp support, but then you're still on one tripod head, and that's a lot to ask of any head, especially if there's a breeze. I'd consider putting a monopod under the front standard in those conditions.

[B.S.Kumar]

Welcome!

Large format is indeed a completely different beast. If you have access to a Sinar P2 8x10, I see little point in buying another camera. If you are able to carry the camera close to where you will make the image, there is again no point in buying a more compact field camera.

You say that you simply want the advantage of the large format. But a great deal of the enjoyment of LF photography comes from using the movements. You will also find out that many creative opportunities open up when you use movements. Do you have a 4x5 back as well and another lens? I suggest you learn a bit with 4x5 or even roll film on the 4x5 back. 8x10 color film and processing is expensive!

If you buy those lenses, you could either use a Linhof adapter or re-mount the lens in a Sinar board.

Kumar

[aluncrockford]

I have a 10x8 Sinar P2 and I would suggest that taking it on location is something to be avoided, its heavy and cumbersome, and when you add the additional weight of the large tripod needed to use it, it starts to be impractical.I know Geoffery Crewdson use to use one for his work but he had a crew to help him carry the stuff. You might be best served with something like a deardorff, its a lot lighter and definitely a lot easier to use on location, and an added bonus you can use it in the studio for most things a Sinar will do.,

[Corran]

I am a landscape photographer with a special interest in long focal lengths [400mm +]

Assuming a 6x7 negative with 400mm lens at minimum, on 8x10 that equates to roughly a 1200mm lens. And if you want longer, well, it's longer. In comparison, you only need a 600mm lens to get to roughly the equivalent on 4x5. So if you really want that compressed telephoto type image with a larger format, I would highly suggest you start with a 4x5 reduction back and look at the Nikkor 360/500/720 telephoto set, as well as the 600/800/1200 set. This will get you into your extreme telephoto range - otherwise you'll spend a fortune on lenses, not to mention issues with shutters, not mention tripods and supports for the massive 8x10 setup.

The Nikkor 360/500/720 set has tanked in price from what I've seen in the last couple of years. I spent a lot on my set. There seems to be a 360/500/720 set without the 360mm element which you might not really want anyway for just shy of $1k on eBay right now. I'm a wide-angle kinda guy but I like having this set sometimes. I've only used the 720mm a few times - here's one of the images I shot in the Blue Ridge mountains:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fHL2owsUkoc/U2FwBcpHcAI/AAAAAAAAFCM/eQWjM74Lqr8/s600/mountaintops.jpg
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fHL2owsUkoc/U2FwBcpHcAI/AAAAAAAAFCM/eQWjM74Lqr8/s1600/mountaintops.jpg)
The 600/800/1200 set would get you even more length but is a bit more expensive. On 4x5 it'd give you a good spread of focal lengths and would also work on 8x10 but it's 2-3x the cost of the smaller set.

Good luck.

[Ken Lee]

Would love to hear some advice from your experience. Thank you all for your time!

How large a print do you intend to make ?

[Pfsor]

If you're hell-bent on using P2 with 1200mm lens you absolutely need 2 tripods to hold the beast steady and avoid vibrations. A monopod under the lens won't do as it has no way to withstand lateral vibration from wind and the shutter.
I use 800mm Nikon and I would not even dream about it without a second tripod. The 2nd tripod doesn't need to be mighty, it can even be a lightweight version.

[Peter De Smidt]

If you're hell-bent on using P2 with 1200mm lens you absolutely need 2 tripods to hold the beast steady and avoid vibrations. A monopod under the lens won't do as it has no way to withstand lateral vibration from wind and the shutter.
I use 800mm Nikon and I would not even dream about it without a second tripod. The 2nd tripod doesn't need to be mighty, it can even be a lightweight version.

Good point!

[Mark Sampson]

See the work of the late Reinhart Wolf. He used an 8x10 Sinar and long lenses to photograph the tops of skyscrapers in New York City, back in the '70s. Beautiful work- the logistics must have been daunting at times though.

[tgtaylor]

According to Nikon only the 600, 800, and 1200T will cover 8x10 if stopped down for f22 (310mm image circle) otherwise they are basically a 4x5 and 5x7 lens with 200mm of coverage. A 310mm IC doesn't allow for much movements on 8x10. I would for lens that offer a much larger IC.

Thomas

[Eric Leppanen]

I shot long lenses with 8x10 for a number of years, and used the Nikon T lens set you are considering as well as the Schneider APO Tele Xenar 600/800 convertible and Fuji 600C.

Nikon lenses in general have conservative coverage specs, and my recollection is that the Nikon T 800 and 1200mm configurations have some usable image circle (particularly the 1200mm) to spare on 8x10. Coverage with the 600mm configuration is tighter but it still covers 8x10 "straight through" (little or no movements).

As already noted, stability is a huge challenge when shooting 8x10 long lenses. The camera body and both standards need individual support, with dedicated tripods or at a minimum a heavy tripod plus long lens support arms. I used both an Ebony mahogany camera and an Arca Swiss F Classic monorail, and of the two the Arca was easier to stabilize. Dampening the kick of the large Copal 3 shutter can also be useful, draping a bag of sand or dried peas over the lens barrel can help this a bit. You can also increase your success rate somewhat by using faster film, I sometimes used Portra 400, or HP5+ pushed one stop (which still provides a reasonable amount of dynamic range).

Even with all these precautions, even the slightest breeze can destabilize your setup and result in a soft image, as it is difficult to shelter so much extension behind a single umbrella or other portable windbreak. All too often I found myself getting sharper images with my DSLR rather than the 8x10, even though the tonality of the 8x10 image was far superior.

8x10 also has a very limited depth of field, especially with long lenses, which can significantly limit your choice of subjects. So with all these challenges, do you think you really need something as large as 8x10, or can you succeed with a smaller format? I got good results shooting 4x5 with Fuji 450C and 600C lenses, the Nikon 360/500/720 troika is also a worthy solution, although the 720mm configuration is reportedly a bit soft. 5x7 can also be a good compromise if you don't mind group ordering color neg film from Keith Canham or cutting down 8x10 chrome (5x7 B&W is more readily available).

[Corran]

As a side note in the discussion of the Nikkor-T 720mm - I have found that it covers 8x10. I can not say if the periphery of the image is as good as say the Nikkor-T 800mm, but it does work. The 720mm wide-open is at f/16. If you stop it down to f/32-45 it definitely seems to get mushy real quick - but at f/22, just one stop closed, it seems to me to be very sharp. I have an extension bed on my Chamonix 4x5 and I have used a monopod on the front of that to help stabilize the whole setup...but I have never shot long exposures with it or in extreme wind. Pushing film is a good idea due to the natural contrast loss due to haze and atmospheric conditions, especially here in the high humidity south.

[tgtaylor]

According to Nikon only the 600, 800, and 1200T will cover 8x10 if stopped down for f22 (310mm image circle) otherwise they are basically a 4x5 and 5x7 lens with 200mm of coverage. A 310mm IC doesn't allow for much movements on 8x10. I would for lens that offer a much larger IC.

Thomas

The 610mm and 760mm Apo Nikkors' easily cover 8x10 and their huge IC will allow all the movements the P2 can deliver. Both can be mounted in an Ilex 5 shutter, and come in modern (1980's) versions that are coated and extremely sharp. There are several 610's available on ebay right now and the 760's appear from time to time. There is a 1200 or so Apo Nikkor but it is much rarer and AFAIK no shutter available to mount it in.

Thomas

[BennehBoy]

I took my 8x10 P2 to France this summer in an attempt to burn through my remaining color slide film.

In short, you need to transport the camera with lenses using a vehicle, I have a large slik professional tripod and the heavy Sinar pan tilt head. Lenses used were a 165/8 Super Angulon and a 300/5.6 Symmar.

I'm a fairly fit & strong bloke and I struggled to get the camera, on tripod, with lens mounted plus a large messenger bag containing 10 DDS & accoutrements more than 200m from the vehicle on foot - and this was on fairly level ground between some dunes.

The movements did come in a treat for some architectural type shots that I made, but predominantly I shot portraits so sorely wished I had a field camera!

I've no doubt that had I had a lighter setup I would've shot more film - I managed 50 sheets out of the 100 that I took with me.

Even at these modest focal lengths and with a rock solid tripod/head combination, wind on a relatively short belows extension was a problem. I'd hate to think what a 600 or 1200 would be like under the same moderately light wind conditions.

Some of my exposures were in the order of seconds to minutes... (although most were sub 0.5s)

[Joshua Dunn]

I have a Sinar P1 8x10 I sometimes used in the field until I got a Sinar F2 8x10. I echo many of the previous statements about size and weight of the P series cameras in the field. Have you considered K.B. Canham cameras? http://www.canhamcameras.com/ Keith is a great guy to work with and his cameras are top notch. They also use Sinar boards so any lenses you already have mounted on Sinar lens boards would work on his 8x10 camera. Bear in find even if you do use a Nikkor 1200mm lens I think you will still need around 33 to 34 inches of bellows draw to use that lens. Which introduces a whole series of additional variables. Do not underestimate the need for a rock solid tripod/head combination for such a setup.

-Joshua

[Pere Casals]

See the work of the late Reinhart Wolf. He used an 8x10 Sinar and long lenses to photograph the tops of skyscrapers in New York City, back in the '70s. Beautiful work- the logistics must have been daunting at times though.

A Wolf's book, using pretty long focals is Castels In Spain (Taschen)

[Pere Casals]

[600-1200mm lenses]




My advice: Don't focus your LF introduction as an equipment acquisition question, but as a learning process. This would be a big mistake. I'm still a rookie LF photographer, but it is first I understood.

Then you realize that Ansel Adams and Yousuf Karsh did not make those great photographs from gear, but from knowledge and talent. You had given them a wood camera looking firewood and a 75 years old glass, without even a shutter, and still they had been making the same elevated art.


"For instance, Ansel Adams used a Cooke triple convertible for some of his most famous images according to an article by Gordon Hutchings in View Camera magazine, July/August 2004. Ansel used the 19" (480 mm) component for "Aspens, Northern New Mexico," 1958; both components to get 12" (300 mm) for "Clearing Winter Storm, Yosemite National Park," 1940; and the 23" (580 mm) component for "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico," 1941. Enough said? "

http://www.kenrockwell.com/schneider/150.htm


If right now you are shooting landscape with Nikon/Canon FX 200mm focals you know what you want, if not you should investigate it.

IMHO you should start with 45, and first understanding 45 and 810 limitations. 810 is an slightly superior quality than 45, but not always it is clearly superior. A 810 longuer lens covering a larger circle may deliver lower performance than a 45 one in Lp/mm terms, so 810 format size advantage is partially eroded by practical system implementation.

Then a 8x10 drum scan can cost $ several hundreds, if you are to scan in a cheap but good Flatbed like Epson V850 then you should know what you will obtain with 810 and 45

Ultimate performance depends on LF photogfrapher skills, film sharpness, particular lens performance and format.


You have to answer next questions:

What film will I use ? Velvia/Provia ? Ektar? BW tabular? HP5? TMY?

Will I develop E-6, C-41, BW ?

Will I scan or darkroom print ?

Developing BW for LF if different than with rolls ... With LF you have the oportunity to cook every sheet independently, this is a major LF tool. What do I need to learn and what equipment I want ? Rotary ? Trays ?

What do I need to master about Scheimflug principle ? How it can be mastered as an aesthetical resource.


IMHO you can practice all that first in 45, you will shot way more, you will learn much faster, and you will figure better what 810 equipment will fulfill your desires, and when a 810 makes a differnce or not.

So I encourage you to engage that journey. Learn, think about the light, and the visualization, prepare a project. Then selecting gear will be easy.

[Amedeus]

I've shot Sinar P 8x10 at Burning Man using Eidoscope #2 and a 15" Portland lenses on expired instant film. It's a bit of a drag to get around with and you get a lot of attention but it's doable. My alternate "field" camera is a Calumet C1, not much gain in weight. My Deardorff V8 can't handle the weight of the SF lenses I'm using, so that one is relegated to landscapes within bellow limit.

I second the need to sturdy tripod and if you are going for 800+ mm lenses, you will need to use a second tripod to support the front,

Good luck

Rudi A.

[Ken Lee]

Was this post a troll ? Nothing further has been heard from the OP.

[Leigh]

... their huge IC will allow all the movements the P2 can deliver.
Not possible.

If you need more rise than the front standard can normally deliver, you just tilt the base rail and reset the front and rear vertical.

- Leigh

[Jac@stafford.net]

Excellent advice here.

I'll repeat the advice to use 4x5" rather than 8x10" for the reasons stated. I seriously doubt your print quality will suffer.

[Drew Wiley]

I find 4x5 much more realistic for long lens work. It is really difficult to find long lenses for 8x10 which most front standards can handle. I own both a 600C Fuji and a 760 ApoNikkor, and those are difficult enough if there's a breeze, and I bolt my cameras directly to the top of a big Riest tripod with no head in between. I strongly recommend the Sinar Norma for this kind of use, rather than a P or F. Better yet, study how Bradford Washburn did it, rather than AA.Your biggest enemy will be haze and heat currents anyway. I love long lens photography; but it is much easier with 4X5 than 8X10, esp with a 450C Fuji.

[Drew Wiley]

Too big an image circle can be a liability with distant scenes which might be low-contrast to begin with. Lots of flare risk. For that reason I recommend a bellow-style compendium lens shade as well as the tapered main bellows of the original Norma 4x5 (versus the later Sinar "box"bellows).

[Greg]

In the 1980s, I took on shooting several specific cover shots. 4x5 transparencies requested. Lenses needed to take the shots were rented process lenses being 1200mm plus. Camera a 4x5 Sinar Norma. Several extension rails and bellows needed. Main tripod below the back standard a Linhof Heavy Duty. Front standard tripod a Gitzo. Was hell to set up, and actually missed taking one morning shot because of that. Back around 2013 was commissioned to take similar cover image shots. This time used a 400mm and 800mm ED Nikkors and a Nikon D700. Was a thousand percent more easier to do. For me the longest lens I use on my 8x10 is a 27' rear element Protar. Longest on my 4x5 a 500mm optic. Need to shoot any longer that them, just shoot with a FX Nikon and and a long ED Nikkor, then make digital negatives to print from.

[Mark Sampson]

@Pere Casals, I have a copy of Reinhart Wolf's "Castles in Spain". His pictures are beautiful. But the book as published is tiny, maybe 5"x6", and the text is in German, which I cannot read. Someday I hope to find a full-size edition, if one exists.
@Ken Lee, perhaps the OP has been scared off by all the responses. I hope not.

[Drew Wiley]

A couple of tricks: I have a Horseman 28 in bellows that will fit Sinar 4X5 with no need for an intermediate standard. The Norma tapered bellows works well up to about 24 inches. Second, if necessary, you can use two rail mounts attached to a long bar underneath, then bolt this right to your tripod platform, thereby eliminating the need for a second tripod. Sinar offered these kinds of bars, but I made my own out of 5/4X3 maple hardwood for about 2 percent the price. I'm heading up a hill with the Norma tomorrow. Since this is a system camera, you could tote both 4X5 and 8x10 components at the same time, as long as you're not a machine-gunner needing a lot of filmholders per outing.

[Gudmundur Ingolfsson]

This is the setup. German photographer Reinhard Wolf around 1980.

[Pere Casals]

@Pere Casals, I have a copy of Reinhart Wolf's "Castles in Spain". His pictures are beautiful. But the book as published is tiny, maybe 5"x6", and the text is in German, which I cannot read. Someday I hope to find a full-size edition, if one exists.
@Ken Lee, perhaps the OP has been scared off by all the responses. I hope not.

There is also a 12x15" version... I think...

Still workshops about that are available, I think.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?119587-Large-Format-Photography-workshops-in-the-castles-of-Spain&p=1210551&viewfull=1#post1210551

[Pere Casals]

Was this post a troll ? Nothing further has been heard from the OP.

Perhaps it is a marketing manager, wanting to learn about LF business dynamics :)

[andrew11]

8x10 also has a very limited depth of field, especially with long lenses, which can significantly limit your choice of subjects. So with all these challenges, do you think you really need something as large as 8x10, or can you succeed with a smaller format? I got good results shooting 4x5 with Fuji 450C and 600C lenses, the Nikon 360/500/720 troika is also a worthy solution, although the 720mm configuration is reportedly a bit soft. 5x7 can also be a good compromise if you don't mind group ordering color neg film from Keith Canham or cutting down 8x10 chrome (5x7 B&W is more readily available).

Sorry for the delay in replying just got back from a trip overseas. I will look into the 4x5 option with the lenses you mentioned.

Pere Casals, I already shoot digital and have a 70-200mm and 100-400 with extender. And a FujiGX617 with 300mm. What I'm looking for is the best way to shoot very long focal lengths. From what I've picked up from all the comments I probably need to look into the smaller formats, just after using my 6x17 I don't feel like I can get enough distance.

I'm new to the large format arena, but I'm basically trying to fine a way to get the longest distances I can get. Does anyone have some recommendations as to which format and lenses can achieve that? And is it at all possible to use large format lenses on smaller format cameras? Like the 1200mm Nikkor I mentioned on say a 4x5?

I thank you all for your amazing input! :)

[blue4130]

I'm new to the large format arena, but I'm basically trying to fine a way to get the longest distances I can get. Does anyone have some recommendations as to which format and lenses can achieve that? And is it at all possible to use large format lenses on smaller format cameras? Like the 1200mm Nikkor I mentioned on say a 4x5?

I thank you all for your amazing input! :)

Sure, you could even use it on a 35mm camera with an adapter. Wouldn't be the easiest, but certainly doable.

[Ken Lee]

I'm new to the large format arena, but I'm basically trying to fine a way to get the longest distances I can get.

How large to you need to print ?

If you plan to make fine 8x10 inch prints, a 4x5 camera will do just fine. If you need 80x100 inch prints, then 8x10 film may make more sense, but even that can depend on viewing distance.

We can choose our equipment to get a desired result, not the other way around.

[mdarnton]

No one has mentioned the pioneer of this type of photography, Andreas Feininger. Post about him here, with a very interesting interview of him explaining what he was doing: https://nixonphoto.wordpress.com/tag/andreas-feininger/ , and at 8:04 in the video he shows the camera he used.

[Peter De Smidt]

I tried to find a picture of Feininger's setup but failed. It was quite something, complete with guide wires.

[Two23]

If you're hell-bent on using P2 with 1200mm lens you absolutely need 2 tripods to hold the beast steady and avoid vibrations. A monopod under the lens won't do as it has no way to withstand lateral vibration from wind and the shutter.
.


Exactly my thinking. This increases set up time even more, to the point you won't be able to catch fast changing light. For this reason and others, I've stayed with 4x5 for this sort of thing. It's windy here on the Northern Plains, and wind is just hell to deal with using large format.



Kent in SD

[Dan O'Farrell]

As others have stated, since you have free access to use a Sinar P2,
then you should experiment with that camera before you invest your own money to test a whim.

My only 8X10 camera is a Cambo Legend which, after about 5 years, I'm becoming reasonably familiar and comfortable with.
There seems to be a lot of similarity between the Legend, and your P2, but since I've neither seen nor used a Sinar, I'll withhold comment.

I'd never think of using the Cambo on an architectural assignment. It's just too unwieldy and heavy, and no client really cares about
how much you work, or care, to produce; it only matters what the final product is.

For work outside my home studio, I use my Linhof S.Tech. which is as superbly manipulative as my monorail, but at very little mass.

In studio, I have the option to relax with the rail camera, at my leisure, as a hobby.
Never, though, have I produced a better contact print from my 8X10 "studio" camera than any 8X10 enlargement from any of my 4X5 cameras.

YMMV :rolleyes: