PDA

View Full Version : 11x14" vs. 7x17"



unityofsaints
27-Oct-2020, 22:33
Hi,

Does anyone have experience with both of these formats? I'm looking at the next step beyond 8x10" and having trouble choosing between these 2 - camera cost, film cost/availability and weight are all roughly the same. Are there any "gotchas" or positives that might sway a newcomer one way or the other? I mean beyond the difference in aspect ratio of course.

Phil Hudson
28-Oct-2020, 00:41
Lots to consider here. One big difference might be the portability of your next camera. Many backpacks won’t fit a 11x14 camera but the narrower dimensions of a 7x17 might. Just a thought.

unityofsaints
28-Oct-2020, 01:47
Lots to consider here. One big difference might be the portability of your next camera. Many backpacks won’t fit a 11x14 camera but the narrower dimensions of a 7x17 might. Just a thought.

Yes that's indeed a big consideration, e.g. the Chamonix 7x17 is exactly the same width as my 8x10 Mark II. But then I think about the added complexity of developing 7x17 and that seems to balance the backpack considerations out a little bit.

Tin Can
28-Oct-2020, 04:39
11X14 film is easier to buy and cheaper

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Sheet-Film/ci/335/N/4093113314?filters=fct_sheet-size_3122%3A11x14in

X-Ray 11X14 film fits more holders than 7X17

Oren Grad
28-Oct-2020, 07:17
Does anyone have experience with both of these formats?

Yes.


...and weight are all roughly the same.

Not necessarily true. Without having the exact number handy, I'd guess that my 7x17 Korona is substantially lighter than any 11x14 I'm aware of. Regardless, if that's a major consideration you really have to compare the particular models you're considering, not assume that as a generalization. Also check the film holder weights.


But then I think about the added complexity of developing 7x17....

I use the Jobo 3062 and 3063 drums for ULF. The 3063 can serve for both 11x14 and 7x17. No difference in complexity of developing the film. There could be a difference in printing, depending on your printing habits. For example, I like to contact print on larger paper so that the prints have a border for safe handling and for corner mounting. I can certainly use 16x20 paper for both, but I can fit 11x14 on 12x16 paper, which is readily available from Ilford, and that allows for smaller trays, smaller volumes of chemicals, etc. Just because of the particular dimensions of my wet-side workbench and sinks, 16x20 trays, though usable, are distinctly more hassle for me than 12x16's. If you don't mind printing on same-size paper, the difference between 11x14 trays and 16x20 trays is even larger. Of course, coming full circle, if you intend to develop the film in open trays rather than a drum, similar size/space considerations would apply there too.

7x17 needs lenses with slightly larger coverage than 11x14 does, though in practice there aren't that many lenses that fall between the two.

From my own very limited experience lugging these formats in the field, I'd say that the aspect ratio of 7x17 tends to make it slightly easier to fit the camera plus holders to a backpack, but I've done 11x14 using the same pack I use for 7x17, though I might carry only two holders rather than three. Again, really depends on the specific backpack that you find. Look at packs sold for hikers by "outdoors" outfitters, not just packs marketed to photographers.

Tin Can
28-Oct-2020, 07:31
Yes, as I have a Korona 7X17" and two 11X14"

But almost never use the 7X17, preferring 6x17cm tiny format to enlarge however I want and it fits on my scanner...

Thom Bennett
28-Oct-2020, 08:00
I had an 11x14 for a bit but decided to sell it to afford the 7x17. The primary reason was that the boxy 11x14 ratio was so close to what I already had in 8x10 and I felt that the 7x17 pano format would complement what I was doing in 8x10. Also, the pano format is ideal for the flat land- and city-scape I live in. I will say that the 11x14 contact prints had a more powerful visual impact than the 8x10 but I couldn't justify running and maintaining 3 large format cameras. It did take me awhile to get used to working in the pano format but I think I am starting to get what I want out of it. Good luck!

Vaughn
28-Oct-2020, 09:12
Difficulty of making vertical 7x17s with most cameras -- (Ritter's -- no problem except a little time).

I use a modified darkslide to make 5.5 x 14 negatives (two per 11x14) in my 11x14 -- verticals are easy. I carry two cameras by adding the weight of a half-darkslide. This gives me versitility.

Zion: 5.5x14

Jim Noel
28-Oct-2020, 09:14
I love 7x17. It seems that it comes closer to what I see than any other format. I was very sad when age forced me to move to 5x12 and give up my 7x17. Although very similar ratio, it just isn't the same.

Lachlan 717
28-Oct-2020, 12:28
7x17 is easier to scan on the ubiquitous Epsom scanners - two scans and stitch.

cuypers1807
28-Oct-2020, 14:10
It really depends on your subject matter. 11x14 would be more useful for a variety of subjects not being stuck in a landscape format. The film is more readily available and cheaper. I love my Chamonix 11x14. I mostly shoot portraits but I recently got a half frame dark slide to shoot 5x14 panos and love the almost 1:3 format.

Michael Roberts
29-Oct-2020, 16:30
For a direct comparison, why not 11x14 vs 8x20? 154 vs 160 square inches?

If you just want a 40% ratio option, you can always shoot two 4x10s on a single sheet of 8x10 using a 4x10 splitter.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?153498-4x10-Point-n-Shoot-Camera-Build&p=1520725&viewfull=1#post1520725

Vaughn
29-Oct-2020, 21:19
It really depends on your subject matter. 11x14 would be more useful for a variety of subjects not being stuck in a landscape format. The film is more readily available and cheaper. I love my Chamonix 11x14. I mostly shoot portraits but I recently got a half frame dark slide to shoot 5x14 panos and love the almost 1:3 format.

I just measured the image area of one of my 'half-frame' 11x14s...close enough to 5" x 13.5".

I find it best to compose the image on the upper half of the GG of my Chamonix 11x14 (using Fidelity holders), as the half-frame darkslide seats flat that way. I have had it slip when composed on the bottom half and ended up with one crooked edge on the neg.

unityofsaints
2-Nov-2020, 21:27
11X14 film is easier to buy and cheaper

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Sheet-Film/ci/335/N/4093113314?filters=fct_sheet-size_3122%3A11x14in

X-Ray 11X14 film fits more holders than 7X17

For someone based in the U.S. that's true but if importing the film (like me), can be cheaper, e.g. there is ADOX CHS at 6.50 euro per sheet.




Not necessarily true. Without having the exact number handy, I'd guess that my 7x17 Korona is substantially lighter than any 11x14 I'm aware of. Regardless, if that's a major consideration you really have to compare the particular models you're considering, not assume that as a generalization. Also check the film holder weights.


Yes it was a gross generalisation but the point I was trying to make was that if weight is important, one can get a camera in the 5.5 - 6 KG range in either format.


No difference in complexity of developing the film.

20th Century Camera makes reels for 2 sheets per drum for 11x14 and if tray processing, smaller tray sizes can be used. With 7x17 you are limited to print drums, which puts it into the same "complexity category" in my mind as all formats bigger than that up to 20x24.


For a direct comparison, why not 11x14 vs 8x20? 154 vs 160 square inches?

8x20 is heavier, harder to develop and needs lenses with much bigger coverage. For example I have an 8x10 kit already and some of those lenses will cover 11x14 / 7x17 while stopped down but there's no hope of that being the case with 8x20.

Oren Grad
2-Nov-2020, 23:04
Yes it was a gross generalisation but the point I was trying to make was that if weight is important, one can get a camera in the 5.5 - 6 KG range in either format.

FWIW, the catalog spec for the 7x17 Korona is 10 lb / ~4.5 kg. Up to you whether that's enough of a difference to matter for your purposes.

Tin Can
3-Nov-2020, 05:06
I have drums, but only use trays for 7X17 and 11X14

Not quite there for 14x17, I better hurry this winter

cuypers1807
3-Nov-2020, 19:51
I just measured the image area of one of my 'half-frame' 11x14s...close enough to 5" x 13.5".

I find it best to compose the image on the upper half of the GG of my Chamonix 11x14 (using Fidelity holders), as the half-frame darkslide seats flat that way. I have had it slip when composed on the bottom half and ended up with one crooked edge on the neg.

Vaughn, I haven't had a problem with the HF darkslide slipping when using Chamonix holders. I don't think they recommend their use for other holders.

Vaughn
3-Nov-2020, 20:05
I have had it happen with 4x10, also. Not often, and not when I double check the how well the modified darkslide is seated before exposure. I have to expose on the upper or lower, so now just go with the upper unless I need to be exact on border placement on the upper portion of the image.

I made my own HF darkslide for my 11x14 Fidelity holders (metal). It definitely will not fit in SS holders.

unityofsaints
10-Nov-2020, 05:53
Well, I took the plunge on a Canham 7x17. I'm not looking forward to completely changing my development and contact printing process but hopefully it will be worth it. The slightly lower weight and it fitting inside my existing backpack ended up being big factors.

Tin Can
10-Nov-2020, 06:04
Very good!

Thom Bennett
11-Nov-2020, 12:40
Cool! It took me awhile to get the hang of composing in such a wide format. If the same happens to you, don't get frustrated. In the end, it's a wonderful format to work in.