4x10 how does it work and what do I need

[PatrickMarq]

After seeing all those beautifull images of the 4x10 size I’m getting more and more interested to use this.

I have a Chamonix 045F-2, on the website of Chamonix viewcameras I did not see a 4x10 back.
Also I believe I have to cut my own film for this 8x10 -> 4x10

I have 3 lenses: 90mm, 150mm and 300mm are the still good ?
What kind of filmholders do I need ?
For development, as I don’t have a darkroom I need to buy a 8x10 Stearman or something else.

As I’m hopefully going to the French Pyrenees this August, this will be a good place to use this size.

Patrick

[Tin Can]

Not to dissuade you in any way

I wanted a 4X10 negative too

I decided 6X17 roll film and gear was so affordable

and I can optically enlarge

I took the other path

[Delfi_r]

The Chamonix cameras are not modular. There is a 4x10 model and you can use a 8x10 camera and expose half sheets. For a 4x10 camera you need 4x10 holders and you can cut fill or buy it in 4x10 size

(Ilford offers this size on their annual special purchase program)

[Tin Can]

Incorrect

https://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/cameras/45h1


The Chamonix cameras are not modular. There is a 4x10 model and you can use a 8x10 camera and expose half sheets. For a 4x10 camera you need 4x10 holders and you can cut fill or buy it in 4x10 size

(Ilford offers this size on their annual special purchase program)

[Richard Wasserman]

Patrick, I use a Chamonix 410N3 with Chamonix film holders and like it a lot. It's actually played a large role in keeping my sanity, such as it is, through Covid. The lenses you currently have will not cover the 4x10 format with the possible exception of the 300mm. Which one do you own? I use a 110mm Super Symmar, which absolutely needed a center filter on 4x10, a 210 Apo Sironar-S, and a 300mm Docter Optics Apo Germinar.

I am not really familiar with the Stearman you mentioned, but I did take a quick look at it. If it will hold 4x10 sheets without them slipping out it should work fine. I use a JOBO 3005 Expert drum which is great.

[Christopher Barrett]

So addictive... lately I've been thinking a lot about 4x10 Wet Plate ;)

[Richard Wasserman]

So addictive... lately I've been thinking a lot about 4x10 Wet Plate ;)

Yes please!

[Doremus Scudder]

I like the panorama format for many subjects as well, but I wouldn't want to be limited to it.

So, how about 8x10 and just crop when you want that panorama? Then you could make an 8x10 print too, and anything in between.

Would it really be more economical to get a dedicated 4x10 camera and cut down 8x10 film? Are you really sure you want to limit yourself to that format?

Personally, I'd want the flexibility, but many see format constraints as a creative advantage.

Best,

Doremus

[Roger Beck]

If you are in to wide views you can crop to the subject, wherever it is in the frame. Easy to make square - 4x4, 1:1.25 - 4x5, 1:1.5 - 4x6, 1:2 - 4x8 and 1:2.5 - 4x10 and then crop further to a 1:3 ratio with 3.33x10 or 1:4 with 2.5x10.

[abruzzi]

I like the panorama format for many subjects as well, but I wouldn't want to be limited to it.

So, how about 8x10 and just crop when you want that panorama? Then you could make an 8x10 print too, and anything in between.


what about an 8x10 camera, and a half dark slide--two panoramas per sheet of film. I actually don't know how well that would work, but it would be less annoying than cutting film in the dark (I cut 5x7 into 4 3.5x2.5 for my baby linhof, and it very annoying to have to do.) I would also worry about flare from one photo bleeding into the other...

[lassethomas]

Got my 4x10 back to my Chamonix 45H--1 a month back or so.
So I'm just started on that format. 4x5 was my largest before.

So why did I not go to 8x10, as some suggest. It's indeed more flexible in many ways... but...

- 8x10 would mean I had to invest in new drums or trays and space for development. With 4x10 I can use my current drum with only a small adjustment to my sheet film holder.
- 8x10 would mean a new scanner, probably a Epson flatbed instead of my current Imacon Flextight with a 4x10 holder. A flatbed would not produce on par with the flextight on 4x10 in my opinion (And please, let us not get into a scanner debate here ;) )
- A good 8x10 camera would cost at least the double compare with the Chamonix 4x10 back (as I already have the 45H--1).
- It's still portable, and fits in my regular 4x5 backpack.

So it all depends, just making a case for 4x10.

In my case a 6x17 back on a 4x5 or 5x7 would have been an option. Shooting on rollfilm is very convenient sometimes. But 6x17 has always felt a bit too wide for me. 4x10 is more balanced as a format I think.

[Vaughn]

After seeing all those beautifull images of the 4x10 size I’m getting more and more interested to use this...Patrick

I have seen a couple nice old 5x12 cameras...just saying...:cool: I bought some 5x12 film for a friend on an Ilford special order.

I already had the 8x10 and associated developing set-up, so I went with the modified darkslide for two 4x10s on an 8x10 sheet. And I now do the same for 5.5x14s with the 11x14 camera.

Making 4x10s, I seem to default to the FujiW 250mm rather than my 300mm. According to the list below, I should be able to use my FujiW 180mm also, but that is on a lensboard for the 5x7 right now...an interesting idea.

Have fun!

[lassethomas]

I have 3 lenses: 90mm, 150mm and 300mm are the still good ?

Patrick

The answer is no and it depends. Without knowing what your lenses are:

There are no 90mm that cover 4x10 as far as I know.
And if it's a common 150mm it's probably not covering either. There are 150mm that cover but they are often expensive and large and usually not what you are using on 4x5.
Most 300mm would cover 4x10.

There is an old post here on the forum with a very convenient list (extensive but not complete as it only goes to 210mm, but then longer lenses often cover)

List of lenses covering 4x10 (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?15684-Lens-image-circle-to-cover-4x10&p=136830&viewfull=1#post136830)

[Oren Grad]

There are no 90mm that cover 4x10 as far as I know.

90mm Super-Angulon XL, stopped down, just barely. Long ago, Keith Canham built a handful of 4x10 box cameras around the 90 SA XL in a helical focus mount. Most users will want the center filter.

[ic-racer]

Is it really that much of a waste of money to just crop 8x10? The enlarger is the same, the film holders more expensive, the lenses are the same, the camera just as expensive. Plus cropping 8x10 give the flexibility to do 4 1/8" x 10 also (baby 7x17).

[eric black]

Ive always liked that format. My go to lenses for wide angle are a 120 Nikkor SW and sometimes a Fujinon 180 W. Normal for me in that format is about a Fujinon 240A. The Chamonix camera I use is an N3 and it packs down to a lightweight package that is easily backpack-able with a couple of film holders. With the price of 8x10 color transparency film lately, getting two shots for the price of a single sheet makes sense to me.

[PatrickMarq]

Patrick, I use a Chamonix 410N3 with Chamonix film holders and like it a lot. It's actually played a large role in keeping my sanity, such as it is, through Covid. The lenses you currently have will not cover the 4x10 format with the possible exception of the 300mm. Which one do you own? I use a 110mm Super Symmar, which absolutely needed a center filter on 4x10, a 210 Apo Sironar-S, and a 300mm Docter Optics Apo Germinar.

Richard, For me also and still going out with a large format camera helps in these days.
I’m are working from home now more then one year, and my hobby space is turned into a work office what is not good, so if the weather allows it I’m out every weekend for a few hours.

My lenses:
Nikkor M 300mm
Rodenstock Sinnar-N 150mm
Sneijder Super-Angulon 90mm

[PatrickMarq]

I like the panorama format for many subjects as well, but I wouldn't want to be limited to it.

So, how about 8x10 and just crop when you want that panorama? Then you could make an 8x10 print too, and anything in between.

Would it really be more economical to get a dedicated 4x10 camera and cut down 8x10 film? Are you really sure you want to limit yourself to that format?

Personally, I'd want the flexibility, but many see format constraints as a creative advantage.

Best,

Doremus
Doremus,
My dream was/is always to ‘envolve’ from 4x5 to 8x10. It would bring an extra cost. And as I only make alternative contact prints 8x1O would be perfect for me.
But the weight of the whole setup I’m afraid. Now I’m carrying about 10kg and that’s more than enough for several hours.

[PatrickMarq]

Not to dissuade you in any way
I decided 6X17 roll film and gear was so affordable
and I can optically enlarge
I took the other path

Yes, this is an option that I have exploited also, but the whole digital part is getting me frustrated.
Before falling into the scanner discussing trap, I’m not satisfied with the digital Epson stuff. And finding a good drum scan close to home and not to expensive is just impossible here.

[esearing]

Buy an 8x10 and use half frames if on a budget. Film is readily available and lenses are not too difficult to find. Swapping backs will be cumbersome in the field. A 4x10 dedicated camera will be a bit more costly, requiring special holders and special order or cut film.
Print some of your images at 4x10 and see if you really like the format. It felt a bit small to me.

If you want a dedicated pano format, 5x12 is a little bigger visually than 4x10 yet still somewhat compact when folded compared to 7x17 and can use most 8x10 lenses. Chamonix made 3 of them last year as part of a special order so contact Hugo if you want to step up.

[fotopfw]

I'm confused, after using LF for 30 years. How do you use 4x10" in a 4x5" camera? Really want to know that.

[Willie]

I'm confused, after using LF for 30 years. How do you use 4x10" in a 4x5" camera? Really want to know that.

You buy two old Calumet/B&J/Kodak metal cameras. The long monorail types that sold for around $100 when new.

You take the backs off and work with a machinist to combine them to one 4x10 back. You do the same with the rear standard of the camera and split the bellows on one and tape the cut out pieces from the other to make it work. Or, you cut off one side of one bellows and the other side of the second one, tape together and you have a 4x10 bellows for your new FrankenCamera.

It works. Have seen and used one. Cost, including machining was under $600 for the finished camera.

[fuegocito]

I'm confused, after using LF for 30 years. How do you use 4x10" in a 4x5" camera? Really want to know that.

Wisner Technical Field had a 4x10 back that is interchangeable with the 4x5 back, these days Chamonix has a 4x10 back for its 4x5 H1 system.

[fotopfw]

Thanks for the clarification! So just as any other format change.

[fuegocito]

Thanks for the clarification! So just as any other format change.

Yeah, it's somewhat more rare in a typical field camera design, unlike in more modular studio platform like a Sinar, where the format change option is part of its design.

[Jim Noel]

I won't enumerate, but there are so many misleading statements in here i can't believe it. 4x10 is a nice format. not my favorite which is 7x17, but a nice format. I don't know what is the cheapest way to get into it, but a good old folding flatbed 8x10, with a cut down holder is likely it. 5x12 is only slightly larger, but film is available and the cameras are light. Finding a good old Korona like I use is not easy, but a lot less expensive than a new one.

[Keith Pitman]

One thing you should think about is how you are going to produce your work. Contact printing 4x10 negatives results in pretty small prints. If you can print them in the darkroom with an 8x10 enlarger, you have more options. I print my 4x10s in the darkroom on 8x20 paper. Scanning and digital printing may give you reasonable options.

[Vaughn]

Hey Patrick! I hope you are getting good info and opinions! If I had the money and room for another LF camera around the house, getting a dedicated pano LF camera would be fun...but like I mentioned earlier, I like the idea of 5x12, the older ones are not heavy and the old wood holders are light, also. I am curious if the 'added-on' conversions of smaller LF cameras to 4x10 are weight-efficient.

It is sensible to gear your decision based on your present developing set-up...and on your own carrying capabilities. Of course, one must always ask, why be sensible? I make platinum/palladium prints and carbon prints in 4x10. A nice size for both in the hand and on the wall (I mat/frame mine 12x16). I also make 5.5x14 negs/prints, but that size is for the wall since it seems (to me) to need a little more viewing distance even with my long arms.

[PatrickMarq]

One thing you should think about is how you are going to produce your work. Contact printing 4x10 negatives results in pretty small prints. If you can print them in the darkroom with an 8x10 enlarger, you have more options. I print my 4x10s in the darkroom on 8x20 paper. Scanning and digital printing may give you reasonable options.
Keith,
I know but at the moment I don’t like the digital part and a darkroom is not possible.
Perhaps I’m working from home sinds March 2020 on my photography desk :-)
Something for the Lounge I suppose.

[PatrickMarq]

Hey Patrick! I hope you are getting good info and opinions! If I had the money and room for another LF camera around the house, getting a dedicated pano LF camera would be fun...but like I mentioned earlier, I like the idea of 5x12, the older ones are not heavy and the old wood holders are light, also. I am curious if the 'added-on' conversions of smaller LF cameras to 4x10 are weight-efficient.

It is sensible to gear your decision based on your present developing set-up...and on your own carrying capabilities. Of course, one must always ask, why be sensible? I make platinum/palladium prints and carbon prints in 4x10. A nice size for both in the hand and on the wall (I mat/frame mine 12x16). I also make 5.5x14 negs/prints, but that size is for the wall since it seems (to me) to need a little more viewing distance even with my long arms.

Vaughn,
Yes I’m getting good info and feedback, as most houses in Belgium are smaller the the USA a smaller print size make sense here.
Still wrapping my head around a choice, I think a dedicated pano camera is difficult because when you take this with you you can only make that kind of images.
I find Belgium a difficult country to find good subjects, it’s a crowded country with not a lot of open space. So having something modular is quite handy.
And yes the carrying capabilities a few years back 15kg and 25km was not a problem now ... it’s more difficult for the schouders.

[linhofbiker]

My interest in 4x10 started in 2009 when I bought a Fotoman 4x10 with a cone for 121 SA. Using FP4 in 4x10 in 2012 in New Mexico, I shot 14 images that were developed locally using double 4x5 holders that somehow produced uneven development. About that time I obtained 10 sheets of Provia in 8x10 and a splitter (from Fotoman) but have not used either as finding someone to process E6 4x10 was hard.

My interest moved on. I sold the Fotoman at a camera show. Then I found a Linhof Kardan TL and adapted it for 4x10 by purchasing a back from China. I have not got back into shooting yet but have been consolidating (buy/sell) lenses for 4x10 and 5x7 (for Linhof Bi Kardan). The lenses so far are 121 and 165 SA and Symmar's in 210 240 and various others in the 300 range. I also acquired 1920's Doppel Symmar f/6.3 in 120 240 and 270, these are 80 degree lenses so the 120 won't cover. I had a 14 inch Commercial Ektar but decided to sell it to raise money for my other interest, the building of a Tomcat off-road vehicle based on a 1991 Range Rover. I have visions of taking the 4x10 and 5x7 out into the wilds. Just the dreams of a 77 year old crazy English guy.

[Tin Can]

I rejected 4X10 for 6X17 Roll film

More options

I usually enlarge

[linhofbiker]

I rejected 4X10 for 6X17 Roll film

More options

I usually enlarge

I have given up on 4x5 but am still fond of 120/220. Have an adapter to allow super rollex 6x9 (for Technika 2x3) to be used on the 5x7 Kardan Bi.
A 6x17 adapted to the 5x7 would be nice too.

[Tin Can]

I have a dedicated 6X17, all fits with lens and removable GG in a very sturdy case 6X8X12"

[linhofbiker]

I have a dedicated 6X17, all fits with lens and removable GG in a very sturdy case 6X8X12"

Sounds exactly like my Fotoman. There is a guy in Norway who "prints" in plastic these kind of things, more like a point and shoot approach.

[Tin Can]

Correct, really like it

I bought a 4X5 from the Norwegian, perhaps because I am 2nd gen

It replaces my fragile, but still working fine TravelWide


Sounds exactly like my Fotoman. There is a guy in Norway who "prints" in plastic these kind of things, more like a point and shoot approach.

[linhofbiker]

Correct, really like it

I bought a 4X5 from the Norwegian, perhaps because I am 2nd gen

It replaces my fragile, but still working fine TravelWide

WillTravel rather than TravelWide, what catchy names. Amazing what can be done with a 3D printer!

[Alan Klein]

Incorrect

https://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/cameras/45h1

I have the 45H-1 but it will be a long time, maybe never, before I switch up to a 4x10" back standard. Enough is enough. ;)

[Kiwi7475]

Interesting. I dropped 6x17 for 4x10 because I can contact print and get a nice looking print. 6x17 is a bit small and my enlarger only handles up to 4x5.

It’s also convenient if you shoot 8x10, I cut the film in half as I need it and don’t need to do any special ordering. I can also shoot in color neg or slide. I develop in tray, the SPP-810 or Jobo expert drum depending on volume.

I started with one of those 3D printed but quickly transitioned to a Chamonix 4x10.

It’s a great format!

[linhofbiker]

Interesting. I dropped 6x17 for 4x10 because I can contact print and get a nice looking print. 6x17 is a bit small and my enlarger only handles up to 4x5.

It’s also convenient if you shoot 8x10, I cut the film in half as I need it and don’t need to do any special ordering. I can also shoot in color neg or slide. I develop in tray, the SPP-810 or Jobo expert drum depending on volume.

I started with one of those 3D printed but quickly transitioned to a Chamonix 4x10.

It’s a great format!

Agreed. Right now I am holding a foam board mounted 8x20 2x enlargement (digital) from my New Mexico 2012 visit using the Fotoman with 121 SA. 8x20 is the right size to hold at the distance that allows you to view the scene at the correct perspective (like you are there again).

[djdister]

I have given up on 4x5 but am still fond of 120/220. Have aa mean n adapter to allow super rollex 6x9 (for Technika 2x3) to be used on the 5x7 Kardan Bi.
A 6x17 adapted to the 5x7 would be nice too.

Adapted? Ya mean one of these?
226118