New To LF and To LFPF

[Fenton]

Hello.

I'm a recent graduate to large format, still an ardent user of MF and 35mm. Based in London, I do a mixture of still life, landscape, cityscape and skyscape photos, always on the lookout for new ideas.

Some of my biggest challenges in the early stages of LF are figuring out Fomapan 200 reciprocity (when exposing at 100 ISO) and how to set myself up for colour processing at home. Could also use insight into tripod heads that will comfortably hold my Sinar P2 4x5, as the ball head that has worked so well for my MF cameras is not as sturdy as I'd like and very fiddly to get level. Any and all guidance appreciated.

Regards,

Fenton

[mpirie]

Welcome Fenton.

For a tripod head, i'd suggest any of the Manfrotto heads that take the RC4 or hex plates. Another option could be the Manfrotto geared heads.

Then, there's heads made by Linhof that come up now and again.

Mike

[BrianShaw]

I love a ball-head with MF but NEED a 3-way pan with LF. What works for me is a Bogen/Manfrotto 3047. Out of production but plentiful on eBay. Look for the later versions. Earlier versions likely will need an overhaul.

Welcome to the forum!

[Alan9940]

Welcome to the forum and LF!

Not to disagree with Brian above, but I have two Bogen 3047 heads and I find it of questionable use with my 8x10 Deardorff (about 12 lbs.) I believe a Sinar P2 4x5 weighs in at around 13 lbs so, personally, I wouldn't recommend a 3047. I don't like ballheads for LF, but the RRS BH-55 would definitely hold your camera with ease. For a more traditional approach of a 3-way head, I'd suggest the Gitzo G-1570m or, if you've got the budget, an Arca-Swiss Cube. I'm not familiar with any geared head, but I'd think one of those should work; the Majestic 1007 will hold cameras up to 35 lbs, for example.

[Louis Pacilla]

Hi Fenton & Welcome to the forum!

The answers/advice above are very sound & I'll only add seeing how your camera is a Sinar P2 4x5 it will be most at home on the Sinar Pan/tilt head. I know you'll find nothing more stable or easy to use with Sinar cameras. One reason for the Sinar head being so stable & working so well w/ Sinar cameras is owing to how side to side tilt/movement is a builtin function of the Sinar camera rail/rail block system so the Sinar head does away with this side to side axis point making it a VERY solid platform and it just works like a charm in conjunction with any & all Sinar cameras.

One more point is the base of the Sinar pan/tilt head has pins & groves that mate with your Sinar tripod block which does away with any unwanted swinging of the Sinar camera on the Sinar head base.BTW The pins are removable for use with other brands of cameras.

Here's an example. https://oneofmanycameras.com/products/sinar-pan-tilt-tripod-head-cat-516-41

[Peter De Smidt]

I have that camera. I've tried a bunch of heads over the years, and my favorite is the Sinar Pan Tilt...by far.

[BrianShaw]

“Not to disagree with Brian above, but I” disagreed nonetheless. LOL No problem... all opinions are welcomed! :)

BTW, I use my 3047 with Cambo SCN 4x5, which is pretty heavy, and a couple of Speed Graphics. It has been in use since 1982 and was getting to the point I didn’t like it myself... hard to lock down. But after an easy overhaul it worked great for me, even with a heavy monorail. YMMV.

[penguinoid]

Hi Fenton,

Hello from Australia! I'm pretty much in the same boat, as I just started large format photography recently, albeit with an Intrepid 5x7. There's quite a learning curve! The Intrepid at least is quite light (1.4kg, vs the Sinar P2 at 5.9kg), so I'm just using the same tripod head I use for everything else with no issues so far.

I grew up in London, and (believe it or not) still miss the place. What part of London are you based in? There should be plenty of opportunities for cityscapes, unless things go back into lockdown again.

[Fenton]

Hi Penguinoid.

I noticed you joined shortly before me and wish you a great time here. I've lived in several parts of London over the years, now in a leafy part in the south. No shortage of cityscape material, although that 5.9kg weight you mention limits mobility. I guess the lighter weight of the Intrepid will make that part easier for you.

[Fenton]

Sticking with Sinar makes good sense. Thanks. It may take some patient shopping to find one, but I'm up for it. If anyone knows of one available in the UK, I'm interested.

[penguinoid]

Hi Penguinoid.

I noticed you joined shortly before me and wish you a great time here. I've lived in several parts of London over the years, now in a leafy part in the south. No shortage of cityscape material, although that 5.9kg weight you mention limits mobility. I guess the lighter weight of the Intrepid will make that part easier for you.

Thanks! I used to live in south London too, but in a not-so-leafy part: Rotherhithe. I did live in Bromley for a bit too, though.

The lighter weight of the Intrepid is a big advantage. There are disadvantages too: it can be a bit difficult to lock down rigidly, and I can't change the bellows or add extension rails, both of which would be good. It was actually affordable (relatively speaking!), which is what allowed me to buy it in the first place.

Hope you have a great time on the forum too. Sorry I can't help with the query re Foma 200 film -- I've only used Foma 100 so far. I'm experimenting with rating that at ISO 80 to keep more highlight details.

Reciprocity failure seems to be a weak point with Foma film however -- at a certain point it just seems to fall off a cliff. A 1 sec exposure with Foma 100 actually ends up as 2 sec with reciprocity failure calculated in, while apparently a 30 sec exposure would end up as 5 min 47 sec(!!!). I'm using the Reciprocity+ iPhone app for this, which is pretty handy. This has the data for Foma 200 included (https://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-200), but obviously at EI 200, not EI 100. I honestly have no idea how pulling the film one stop would affect reciprocity failure. This post on another forum (https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=169817) was about the only advice I could find, and it's not specific to Foma 200. It seems worth a read, however — there are a couple of useful replies. One suggests it won't have any affect, you just need to use the right amount of reciprocity correction for the exposure you've metered. Another suggests that it really needs trial and error to determine (but in more complex terms than that — it's worth reading).

Also, a factsheet from Ilford (https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Reciprocity-Failure-Compensation.pdf) notes that:

You may also find that the contrast is increased withlong exposures. This is because of the light level difference in light levels between highlights and shadows in the image in effect giving different reciprocity failure within the image. If this occurs, then pulling the development may be required (reducing development time) but will depend on the range of light levels in the image.

Not sure if any of that is helpful....

[Peter De Smidt]

You can also check out Luland's copy at: http://www.luland.com.cn/en/info/214.html

[jmdavis]

For heavy cameras I use either a Ries, or a Bogen cine tripod and head (I forget the head number, but it had no problem with old 3 tube video cameras, an Arri 35 or with an Arri Super 16 in a blimp). After using the Ries I now realize that much of what people think that they need, they don't.

I have the 200 Foma but I have only shot a few sheets. I rated them at 160 and shot in sunlight. I am now finishing my last 50 sheets of Forte 200 from the Freezer.

[lassethomas]

Some of my biggest challenges in the early stages of LF are figuring out Fomapan 200 reciprocity (when exposing at 100 ISO)
Fenton

The reciprocity failure of Fomapan 200 is absolutely horrible.
To get 10 seconds of exposure you need to expose for 90 seconds for example. All according to Foma's own data sheet (https://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-200)
At ISO 200 though.

[Fenton]

The reciprocity failure of Fomapan 200 is absolutely horrible.
To get 10 seconds of exposure you need to expose for 90 seconds for example. All according to Foma's own data sheet (https://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-200)
At ISO 200 though.

The Fomapan data sheet seems to move in four big steps. I wonder if there should be a smoother curve, where a measured exposure of 30 seconds might require slightly more reciprocity compensation than 9x and a sixty second exposure might need yet more again. As I said, though, I'm new at this and probably need to do some trial and error.

[Peter De Smidt]

There's info in other threads about user-tested reciprocity for Foma 200. It might be worth hunting down.

[lassethomas]

The Fomapan data sheet seems to move in four big steps. I wonder if there should be a smoother curve, where a measured exposure of 30 seconds might require slightly more reciprocity compensation than 9x and a sixty second exposure might need yet more again. As I said, though, I'm new at this and probably need to do some trial and error.

I tried this summer with exposures up to measured 30 seconds and got useable results, when trying to go by the data sheet.
Still, as much as I like FOma 200 and 400, I rather use something with less failure for long exposures.