PDA

View Full Version : 4x5 with 4x10 camera?



januarys_v
7-Jul-2018, 10:49
Hi, everyone and thanks for a great forum, a lot of info and very nice photography!

I dont shoot LF yet (only digital MF and small format), but was kind of dreaming of LF for some time. In a few month we are mooving to a larger place and after that I plan to finally jump in.

In the meantime, I'm researching my options. Since I enjoy shooting panoramas from time to time and want my first setup to be very simple, one camera and one "normal" lens, I thought of a panoramic camera like 4x10. But may be someone will tell me if shooting a 4x5 film is possible/(in)convenient with a 4x10 camera. I know that some 4x5 cameras have an option of an additional 4x10 back/bellows, but this means more money and more troubles changing those. So may be one could just have a 4x10 camera and a few 4x10 holders, and just occasionally load 4x5 into those. I dont see why this is not possible, but would really appreciate an opinion from an actual LF camera user.
I would shoot mostly landscapes. I am familiar with movements to some degree as I used tilt shift lenses a lot, not exactly the same though.

Thanks!

Vaughn
7-Jul-2018, 11:25
To make, or have made, a 4x10 to 4x5 reducing back should be no problem. Otherwise, putting film stops in the 4x10 holders to hold a piece of 4x5 film in the center can work, too.

I would prefer the former -- 4x5 holders are not expensive and plenty of trashed 4x5 cameras that one could rescue a 4x5 back from to attach to one's 4x10.

Luis-F-S
7-Jul-2018, 11:29
You don't use a larger 4x10 camera to shoot 4x5 when 4x5 cameras are much smaller, cheaper and readily available. Sort of like driving a bus to get from point A to B when you could drive a car. Shoot 4x5 and enlarge to 4x10 if that is your wish.

januarys_v
7-Jul-2018, 11:32
thanks for your reply, what i ment was using a 4x10 camera and a 4x10 holder, so no additional accessories involved to simplify the setup

januarys_v
7-Jul-2018, 11:34
You don't use a larger 4x10 camera to shoot 4x5 when 4x5 cameras are much smaller, cheaper and readily available. Sort of like driving a bus to get from point A to B when you could drive a car. Shoot 4x5 and enlarge to 4x10 if that is your wish.


thanks, I do understand that. with a 4x10 camera i would be shooting 4x10 mostly, but would like to know if shooting an occasional 4x5 would be still possible and convenient

Luis-F-S
7-Jul-2018, 12:04
Possible yes, convenient, no! A lot of things are possible that sensible people (those with experience) would not do. You could also use an 11x14 camera to shoot 4x5 but no sensible person would do that. If you need the bellows length, you use a Sinar or similar monorail with multiple bellows.

Vaughn
7-Jul-2018, 14:22
Putting some sort of stop in the 4x10 holder that keeps the 4x5 film in the center of the 4x10 holder. Then perhaps low-tack double sided tape under the 4x5 sheet to keep it from moving.

I use an 8x10 camera with a modified 8x10 darkslide to put two 4x10s on a sheet of 8x10...works nicely and all I need to carry extra is the modified darkslide to have two formats with me! I can't think of an easy fix like that for your situation unless you mounted something inside the camera that could block off half of the image on the 4x10 -- you could get two 4x5s on a sheet of 4x10 that way. Some older cameras were designed for such things.

My modified darkslide: A diagram and a photo of the one I made for two 5x14s on 11x14. This did not work as well as it did with the 8x10.

Luis-F-S
7-Jul-2018, 14:32
I use an 8x10 camera with a modified 8x10 darkslide to put two 4x10s on a sheet of 8x10...works nicely and all I need to carry extra is the modified darkslide to have two formats with me!

My modified darkslide: A diagram and a photo of the one I made for two 5x14s on 11x14. This did not work as well as it did with the 8x10.

That's very doable, but for 410, I'd rather shoot 4x5 film and enlarge. 4x5 enlargers are reasonable.

consummate_fritterer
7-Jul-2018, 14:40
I would just shoot 4x10 and crop the ends off. If shooting 4x5 is relatively uncommon, this seems to be the simplest and most logical approach.

Vaughn
7-Jul-2018, 21:16
One consideration is that there is a greater availability of different films in 4x5 compared to 4x10.

consummate_fritterer
7-Jul-2018, 22:29
One consideration is that there is a greater availability of different films in 4x5 compared to 4x10.

I assumed the OP is cutting 8x10 but I may be mistaken.

januarys_v
7-Jul-2018, 23:23
Putting some sort of stop in the 4x10 holder that keeps the 4x5 film in the center of the 4x10 holder. Then perhaps low-tack double sided tape under the 4x5 sheet to keep it from moving.

I use an 8x10 camera with a modified 8x10 darkslide to put two 4x10s on a sheet of 8x10...works nicely and all I need to carry extra is the modified darkslide to have two formats with me! I can't think of an easy fix like that for your situation unless you mounted something inside the camera that could block off half of the image on the 4x10 -- you could get two 4x5s on a sheet of 4x10 that way. Some older cameras were designed for such things.

My modified darkslide: A diagram and a photo of the one I made for two 5x14s on 11x14. This did not work as well as it did with the 8x10.

Thank you for the detailed explanations.At the moment this does seem like the least expensive way of doing it. And I would have to carry only the modified holder with a couple of 4x5s in it, so less weight too.

januarys_v
7-Jul-2018, 23:37
I would just shoot 4x10 and crop the ends off. If shooting 4x5 is relatively uncommon, this seems to be the simplest and most logical approach.

thanks, yes, for b/w it is probably so, but if I decide to try shooting transparancies, then cost and availability of film and development services become limiting factors

Pere Casals
8-Jul-2018, 02:26
Since I enjoy shooting panoramas

IMHO a 4x10" camera is less practical than a 4x5" to start with.

> It is a lot more bulk when you shot regular 4x5"

> A lot of lenses that are perfect choice for 4x5 won't cover 4x10, so you will have way higher initial expenses with the glass.

> 4x10" gear may be quite expensive, compared with 4x5". There are a lot of 4x5 offers.


For panoramas you have another choice: a 6x12cm back for the 4x5" camera. You would have next avantages:

> Velvia/Provia in 120 format is half the price per surface unit compared with sheets, (this also happens with Kodak BW film, ilford sheets are cheaper with same per surface price than with rolls), so a shot would cost less than 1/4. You can get 120 Velvia rolls developed easier and cheaper than sheets.

> All lenses you would buy for 4x5" will also cover 6x12cm, being a perfect choice.

> You can enlarge the 6x12cm negatives in the darkroom with an "small" 4x5 enlarger, while 4x10" requires a 8x10" enlarger, that has similar size/weight than a nuclear Aircraft carrier.

> 6x12cm just matches aspect ratio in the monitors and TVs.


You have a drawback with a 6x12cm back, as you use rolls you won't be able to make a special custom development for each sheet, using sheets has the advantage that you can cook each shot as you want. But if needing that you can always shot the panorama in 4x5" and then you crop, just discarting 2cm at the top and at the bottom.

In fact if you don't shot a lot of panoramas the straighter way to start with LF panoramas is cropping from a 4x5 sheet, you won't have additional expenses with gear, you will have a very wide range of 4x5 choices (compared with limited 4x10 options) and you will save weight. Also as you will crop the top and the bottom then you will have the choice to refine the composition, a purist would say that cropping is not allowed, but having the choice of moving the horizon up and down can overcome some pitfalls.

Of course a 4x10" camera will make sense for a photographer wanting just that, but as you start you will need to acquire a lot of things that presently you are not considering, so going to 4x10" gear would would add complications.

Finally, let me encourage you to go forward in this adventure, while I'm a newcomer to LF I'm finding that LF world is amazing. The camera or the format is not linked to better photographs, at all, but LF has an amazing set of aesthetical resources, and also a set of drawbacks. Anyway it creates addiction.

januarys_v
8-Jul-2018, 04:09
IMHO a 4x10" camera is less practical than a 4x5" to start with.

> It is a lot more bulk when you shot regular 4x5"

> A lot of lenses that are perfect choice for 4x5 won't cover 4x10, so you will have way higher initial expenses with the glass.

> 4x10" gear may be quite expensive, compared with 4x5". There are a lot of 4x5 offers.


For panoramas you have another choice: a 6x12cm back for the 4x5" camera. You would have next avantages:

> Velvia/Provia in 120 format is half the price per surface unit compared with sheets, (this also happens with Kodak BW film, ilford sheets are cheaper with same per surface price than with rolls), so a shot would cost less than 1/4. You can get 120 Velvia rolls developed easier and cheaper than sheets.

> All lenses you would buy for 4x5" will also cover 6x12cm, being a perfect choice.

> You can enlarge the 6x12cm negatives in the darkroom with an "small" 4x5 enlarger, while 4x10" requires a 8x10" enlarger, that has similar size/weight than a nuclear Aircraft carrier.

> 6x12cm just matches aspect ratio in the monitors and TVs.


You have a drawback with a 6x12cm back, as you use rolls you won't be able to make a special custom development for each sheet, using sheets has the advantage that you can cook each shot as you want. But if needing that you can always shot the panorama in 4x5" and then you crop, just discarting 2cm at the top and at the bottom.

In fact if you don't shot a lot of panoramas the straighter way to start with LF panoramas is cropping from a 4x5 sheet, you won't have additional expenses with gear, you will have a very wide range of 4x5 choices (compared with limited 4x10 options) and you will save weight. Also as you will crop the top and the bottom then you will have the choice to refine the composition, a purist would say that cropping is not allowed, but having the choice of moving the horizon up and down can overcome some pitfalls.

Of course a 4x10" camera will make sense for a photographer wanting just that, but as you start you will need to acquire a lot of things that presently you are not considering, so going to 4x10" gear would would add complications.

Finally, let me encourage you to go forward in this adventure, while I'm a newcomer to LF I'm finding that LF world is amazing. The camera or the format is not linked to better photographs, at all, but LF has an amazing set of aesthetical resources, and also a set of drawbacks. Anyway it creates addiction.

thanks,
yes, valid points and I do consider the 6x12 back route.

I have to say that at the moment I do not even think about having and using an enlarger, although I do think about developing BW myself. I will scan most probably with my 645D, 120mm macro and a light table.

Pere Casals
8-Jul-2018, 06:26
although I do think about developing BW myself.

I'd recommend you next books:

> Film Developmet Cookbook (https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/3454743/the-darkroom-cookbook-third-edition)

> Beyond the Zone System.

> The Negative (Ansel Adams)

> https://kenrockwell.com/tech/exposure-large-format.htm

> http://www.largeformatphotography.info/


With sheets you have the chance to make a custom development for each sheet, this is a common resource in LF, so mastering the insights of that it is intereting.

januarys_v
8-Jul-2018, 10:27
I'd recommend you next books:

> Film Developmet Cookbook (https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/3454743/the-darkroom-cookbook-third-edition)

> Beyond the Zone System.

> The Negative (Ansel Adams)

> https://kenrockwell.com/tech/exposure-large-format.htm

> http://www.largeformatphotography.info/


With sheets you have the chance to make a custom development for each sheet, this is a common resource in LF, so mastering the insights of that it is intereting.

thanks for the tips, I will have to learn a bit about the chemistry, I have already looked at a few articles from the home page

Joshua Dunn
8-Jul-2018, 17:57
It would be expensive (even used) but K.B. Canham (http://www.canhamcameras.com/) makes 4x10 cameras. You could probably get a kit based on his 4x5 and 5x7 platform that would shoot both 4x5 and 4x10. Like I said, it would be a lot of money. If you bought one of his 4x5/5x7 platforms you could use his 6x17 roll film back right on the back of the camera. It's a different proportion than 4x10 but offers a lot more film choices.

-Joshua

consummate_fritterer
8-Jul-2018, 19:17
IMO, the cost of extra and/or different equipment is usually far greater than all the 'wasted' film most of us would ever shoot. Also, carrying said extra equipment is likely not worth it for most of us. If one shoots a lot of film and isn't backpacking to the shooting locations then it might be worth the cost/weight/bulk. Otherwise, probably not. I would just crop the ends.

Vaughn
8-Jul-2018, 21:20
I must say that 4x10 negatives do look nice on a light table! As do my 5 x14 negatives (minus a few light leaks and operator errors).

If 4x10 is something that tickles your fancy, go for it. Buy used and you can always resell it at close to what you paid if it is not a good fit. How many holders you need will depend on where and how you work. In the field I like to have 5 holders (5x7 or 8x10), but will sometimes take 7 if I will be getting back late. For some folks this is far to few, I often come back with unexposed film.

A dedicated 4x5 camera can be picked up anytime -- which might be a good choice if one does end up using a lot of color film. Enjoy!

A 4x10 carbon print from a 4x10 negative...Mill Creek, 2014, print 2017

Bernice Loui
8-Jul-2018, 21:31
Not just availability of film. 4x10 film would be special order or cut from 8x10 film. 4x10 film holders are not common items..

Beyond these two items, camera size, weight and support system, case for all items required including film in holders must be considered. Oh, there are lenses, film processing and more..

Using half a 4x10 might appear to be a reasonable-good idea until all the other factors are figured into the harsh reality of making 4x5 images with 4x10 system.


Bernice

Chuck Pere
9-Jul-2018, 06:00
You probably will want to be taking a lot more verticals with 4x5 than 4x10. That's going to be harder with a 4x10 camera that will need to be tilted with the tripod head for verticals. Also if you aren't doing contact prints but taking the digital route isn't there software that let's you 2 4x5's and easily blend them into a larger panoramic.

januarys_v
9-Jul-2018, 06:22
You probably will want to be taking a lot more verticals with 4x5 than 4x10. That's going to be harder with a 4x10 camera that will need to be tilted with the tripod head for verticals. Also if you aren't doing contact prints but taking the digital route isn't there software that let's you 2 4x5's and easily blend them into a larger panoramic.

ah, digital :) I already have pentax 645D and fuji xe-3 to stitch if needed. But I have to say that even with digital cameras I dont like stitching. When using 645D 40Mpix allow just to crop and still have relatively nice file, but what a joy would be to have it all in one shot and with movements (no real options with tilt and shift for 645D). When I shot with canon I used tilt-shift lenses and used to stitch more often, but it is a pain if clouds or water or moving leaves/grass are in the frame. often possible but takes all the pleasure away mostly.

I see chamonix have an option for 4x10 foldable for a bit more than 2k, and a reducing back to 4x5 costs usd 215. another choice is their 45H-1 with an additional 4x10 back for around the same in total. on the other hand I can just get a used 4x5 or the Intrepid and save a ton of money.
I still have a couple of months to think about it and might end up with just a 4x5, but I'm not giving up yet )

thank you all for feedback

consummate_fritterer
9-Jul-2018, 17:44
Not just availability of film. 4x10 film would be special order or cut from 8x10 film. 4x10 film holders are not common items..

Beyond these two items, camera size, weight and support system, case for all items required including film in holders must be considered. Oh, there are lenses, film processing and more..

Using half a 4x10 might appear to be a reasonable-good idea until all the other factors are figured into the harsh reality of making 4x5 images with 4x10 system.


Bernice

I nearly always agree with you 100 percent, Bernice. But keep in mind the OP will be carrying equipment to make make both 4x5 and 4x10 images all or most of the time. That's my understanding anyway.

neil poulsen
10-Jul-2018, 09:37
Coming out of left field a bit, how about 4x10 using an 8x10 camera? Versus a 4x10 camera, one can put guides in 8x10 film holders to hold 4x10 film. That would give you the advantage of both panorama and a "4x5" aspect ratio contact prints. The camera and film holders would be less expensive.

One can get 4x5 backs for many 8x10 cameras for the occasional 4x5 negative that can be enlarged. Though, you couldn't use very wide lenses without an 8x10 camera that accepts a bag bellows.

Vaughn
10-Jul-2018, 10:03
One advantage of an 8x10 used as a 4x10 is the ease of vertical 4x10s.
Girders, Golden Gate Bridge, 4x10 negative, carbon print:

PS -- a friend scanned the Girders negative on a flatbed scanner (Epson V850 or something like that) then printed it about 3 feet by 7 feet...pretty sweet.

Willie
10-Jul-2018, 10:42
You are getting more complicated as you move forward. A 4x5 back is simple, easy to carry and will work without all the screwing around you are looking at with getting the 4x10 back to take 4x5 film and your figuring accurate framing with your ground glass.
Just get a 4x5 back and a lot of the problems folks bring up won't be in the mix.

DrTang
10-Jul-2018, 10:44
shoot 2x5

cut a darkslide in half lengthwise - get two exposures per 4x5 sheet


WAY cheaper than 4x10 and the same ratio and you can use your camera for 4x5 too

januarys_v
10-Jul-2018, 10:54
well, 8x10 would be ideal actually, but I am afraid it would also be financially and physically harder to deal with, even if using camera mostly for 4x10.
Neil, I'm not sure what you mean by saying 4x10 camera and holders would be less expensive. I checked Chamonix site and 8x10 camera and holders cost more. though may be i should be looking at used stuff.

neil poulsen
10-Jul-2018, 13:55
On holders, it depends. But as a rule, I purchase used.

Vaughn
11-Jul-2018, 00:21
shoot 2x5
cut a darkslide in half lengthwise - get two exposures per 4x5 sheet
WAY cheaper than 4x10 and the same ratio and you can use your camera for 4x5 too
The array of less expensive lenses that can cover 4x5 is an advantage, also. Starting off with a 4x5 would simplify things and buying used would leave big bucks for film! One could also do panoramas with two 4x5 negs and not try to stitch them together, but print them side-by-side with space between.

Basically what I did in the tree image below (but closer to two 2.5x5 sections of 4x5 negs.) I included the two original full negs and the final result. I also included an image of a 7.5x19 print made from a cropped 4x5 negative.

januarys_v
11-Jul-2018, 01:03
thanks for the tips,
very nice horizontal pano, those branches create such a depth