View Full Version : DIY 4x5 Point and Shoot
Had some free time on my hands, and some scrap materials in the shop...so I hobbled together a 4x5 Point & Shoot.
Built around the Schneider 120mm/5.6 MC lens, it offers a 179mm image circle which adequately covers 4x5. The camera body is made from teak, and some mahogany.
Total weight is 750 grams.
Just completed field testing...seems to work just fine although pics at f/5.6 are soft (not unexpected).
219123219124219125
219126
Ulophot
28-Aug-2021, 19:22
Old-world craftsmanship, as they say. I'm impressed by anyone who can glue two pieces of wood together and make it work; your skills are stardom in my book.
Bernard_L
29-Aug-2021, 00:12
There is a rangefinder but I don't see a focusing helicoid?
What is the brand of the viewfinder?
Michael Roberts
29-Aug-2021, 05:43
Looks great! Congrats!
Tin Can
29-Aug-2021, 05:47
Yes, very nice!
There is a rangefinder but I don't see a focusing helicoid?
What is the brand of the viewfinder?
The viewfinder is made by Voigtlander.
The camera is fixed at infinity. The rangefinder is used to confirm near-field which can be as close as 4-meters depending on f-stop.
Beautiful! My 5x7 P&S is ugly in comparison.
Hello Trog, Lovely camera and good on you for making it. I also made a point and shoot 5 x 4, the original intention was to hand hold it but over time I have looked to the tripod more and more. 65mm f8 Super Angulon with a helicoid. I wanted to upgrade to a f5.6 but the back element is too big for the helicoid and I could not find another. Made mine in the 1980's and even shot a few jobs with it. I have a viewfinder but never use it.219190
Hello Trog, Lovely camera and good on you for making it. I also made a point and shoot 5 x 4, the original intention was to hand hold it but over time I have looked to the tripod more and more. 65mm f8 Super Angulon with a helicoid. I wanted to upgrade to a f5.6 but the back element is too big for the helicoid and I could not find another. Made mine in the 1980's and even shot a few jobs with it. I have a viewfinder but never use it.219190
I like your design choices. After a few field shoots with my camera, I'm leaning towards another build focused on a wider angle lens. I had hoped that my DIY would be a good choice for street photography. I had antipated that the 120mm would allow me to capture reasonable shots at a distance without influencing the subjects.
However I'm finding that the camera (being rather unusual) is still attracting unwanted attention.
And without a helicoid, my best shots have been realized at f/16 (DOF 9M-inf) ... which on a sunny day calls for a shutter speed of 1/60. A challenge for hand held shooting. Moving to f/8 isn't as desirable as near field focus moves up to 15-meters.
Of course a helicoid solves all these issues, at the expense of a marginally larger camera.
Perhaps I should adjust my lens position to its hyperfocal position? Does anyone know what spacing is required to achieve hyperfocal at say f/8? Or can this location only be accurately determined via testing?
I had hoped that my DIY would be a good choice for street photography. I had antipated that the 120mm would allow me to capture reasonable shots at a distance without influencing the subjects.
However I'm finding that the camera (being rather unusual) is still attracting unwanted attention.
And without a helicoid, my best shots have been realized at f/16 (DOF 9M-inf) ... which on a sunny day calls for a shutter speed of 1/60. A challenge for hand held shooting.
If you're talking about "street photography" as that term is usually understood, there are black and white films available in 4x5 that will yield a shutter speed that is plenty fast enough, and one would normally use zone focusing. Also, there are important practitioners of street photography, such as Bruce Davidson, who reject the approach of catching subjects unawares.
As a focal length, 120mm should work well. Just looking at Ilford and Kodak, there's one 4x5 film stock rated ISO 320 (Tri-X), and two rated at ISO 400 (HP5+ and T-Max). For that kind of photography, I wouldn't hesitate to push any of them a stop, in some circumstances two stops.
If you're talking about "street photography" as that term is usually understood, there are black and white films available in 4x5 that will yield a shutter speed that is plenty fast enough, and one would normally use zone focusing. Also, there are important practitioners of street photography, such as Bruce Davidson, who reject the approach of catching subjects unawares.
As a focal length, 120mm should work well. Just looking at Ilford and Kodak, there's one 4x5 film stock rated ISO 320 (Tri-X), and two rated at ISO 400 (HP5+ and T-Max). For that kind of photography, I wouldn't hesitate to push any of them a stop, in some circumstances two stops.
I guess with a freezer chock-full of Acros-100, I hadn't considered alternatives.
What exactly are the objections to capturing subjects unawares given that we're constantly being monitored?
What exactly are the objections to capturing subjects unawares given that we're constantly being monitored?
Sounds like you've never been confronted by someone on the street who objects to being photographed without permission :) Been there, done that. It can be a very unpleasant experience, especially if others join in. In the current environment, I would also regard taking photographs of kids without consent as off limits. You may have a legal right to do it, but parents and older siblings have a right to go up one side of you and down the other, possibly on the way to demanding your film.
Look at a book like Davidson's Subway or Brooklyn Gang, thinking about whether the subjects had consented. In 4x5, Davidson's East 100th Street is an eye-opener. Davidson has talked quite a lot about those photographs, which were shot with a 4x5 camera on a tripod.
I think that a lot of the people making street photographs on the sly are mostly demonstrating their own insecurity and fear of interacting with strangers. In post #9, you mention making photographs "at a distance". That isn't what street photography is about. A "street photographer" with a long lens is a sure mark of someone who shouldn't be practicing the genre. Your 120mm should be fine. If you go significantly wider, one result will be that you have to be that much closer to your subject. You can quickly be in a situation where you are invading your subject's space. Might be fine if you're working with the subject, probably not so fine if you're in their face unilaterally.
I have proper parts to make several point & shoot cameras, but I realized that they can be a little bulky (as they don't fold flat), so can be as big as a toaster while carrying in a bag, so settled on a folding press camera instead... A little heavier, but you can change lenses and have a proper GG and more choices for film back options...
Steve K
Sounds like you've never been confronted by someone on the street who objects to being photographed without permission :) Been there, done that. It can be a very unpleasant experience, especially if others join in. In the current environment, I would also regard taking photographs of kids without consent as off limits. You may have a legal right to do it, but parents and older siblings have a right to go up one side of you and down the other, possibly on the way to demanding your film.
Look at a book like Davidson's Subway or Brooklyn Gang, thinking about whether the subjects had consented. In 4x5, Davidson's East 100th Street is an eye-opener. Davidson has talked quite a lot about those photographs, which were shot with a 4x5 camera on a tripod.
I think that a lot of the people making street photographs on the sly are mostly demonstrating their own insecurity and fear of interacting with strangers. In post #9, you mention making photographs "at a distance". That isn't what street photography is about. A "street photographer" with a long lens is a sure mark of someone who shouldn't be practicing the genre. Your 120mm should be fine. If you go significantly wider, one result will be that you have to be that much closer to your subject. You can quickly be in a situation where you are invading your subject's space. Might be fine if you're working with the subject, probably not so fine if you're in their face unilaterally.
Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with everything you stated.
Your commentary would most certainly put an end to journalism in all its forms.....and anyone demanding my property does so at their own peril. I have no desire for this thread to become political...but I will not stand down especially when I'm exercising my constitutional rights.
(Oh, and I have been confronted by an angry person taking umbrage with my photography....to put it plainly... they scurried away after I stood my ground.)
Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with everything you stated.
Your commentary would most certainly put an end to journalism in all its forms.....and anyone demanding my property does so at their own peril. I have no desire for this thread to become political...but I will not stand down especially when I'm exercising my constitutional rights.
(Oh, and I have been confronted by an angry person taking umbrage with my photography....to put it plainly... they scurried away after I stood my ground.)
Hey, if you think that that approach to street photography will work for you, go for it :)
Bernard_L
1-Sep-2021, 00:29
The viewfinder is made by Voigtlander.
The camera is fixed at infinity. The rangefinder is used to confirm near-field which can be as close as 4-meters depending on f-stop.
Perhaps I should adjust my lens position to its hyperfocal position? Does anyone know what spacing is required to achieve hyperfocal at say f/8? Or can this location only be accurately determined via testing?
Thank you for the explanation. And congratulations for your workmanship.
As concerns hyperfocal setting. I give below a numerical example rather than abstract equation; you can easily change the numbers if you wish. First you need to decide what is the tolerable amount of departure from ideal focusing; that is defined by the circle of confusion, the diameter of a point source at the limit of acceptable focusing. From :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion#Circle_of_confusion_diameter_limit_based_on_d/1500
for 4'x5" the conventional COC diameter is 0.11mm. Adopting your value of f/8 for the aperture, this means that at hyperfocal setting, the lens is racked forward (from infinity focusing) by:
d = 0.11mm x 8 = 0.88mm. With the 120mm focal length of your lens, this corresponds to focusing distance:
D = 120x120/0.88 = 16400mm = 16.4m
and the near limit of the hyperfocal range is half that, 8.2m.
If you would adopt f/16 instead of f/8, the lens should be at 1.76mm from the infinity setting, and your hyperfocal range would extend from 4.1m to infinity.
What needs to be determined accurately by testing is the infinity focus setting, which is the basis for the rest. This might help:
http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-123.html
I use a DOF Simulator nearly daily
https://dofsimulator.net/en/
It has options from tiny to 11X14"
I prefer a wire Sports Finder as it is very quick, and has been used on many cameras since the 1900's
I use a DOF Simulator nearly daily
https://dofsimulator.net/en/
It has options from tiny to 11X14"
I prefer a wire Sports Finder as it is very quick, and has been used on many cameras since the 1900's
Exactly. Street photography is done with zone focusing based on apparent depth of field. It's probably where the expression "f/8 and be there" comes from, although as David Coleman says in this video a lot of people would choose f/11. Zone focusing is a fundamental reason why manual 35mm lenses have depth of field scales. This video explains zone focusing and how it is different from hyperfocal focusing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA1DASWrR38
Some very good information here. All of which I'll take under advisement when I start the design of my next 4x5.
Snapped this pic the other day. Velvia 100 at f/16, 1/60s. Handheld.
Lens still needs some shimming...but plenty of DOF.
219318
maltfalc
4-Sep-2021, 12:07
Street photography is done with
a camera and a street. all the other condescending, insulting nonsense about how you're supposed to focus and what focal length is appropriate and who you can or can't photograph with or without permission is entirely a matter of personal preference. use whatever equipment and techniques work for you.
entirely a matter of personal preference. use whatever equipment and techniques work for you.
Which is precisely what I said to him: "Hey, if you think that that approach to street photography will work for you, go for it."
What's your problem?
I expressed a personal view, based on my own experience. I talked about Bruce Davidson's approach because he's a highly credible practitioner who has spoken on a number of occasions about how he works. If one knows the conditions in the NY City Subway when Davidson made his Subway portfolio, one needn't even read what he said about his working method to figure out that he had consent. It's either that or he was crazy. If you don't believe me, read what Davidson has said about the safety of his camera gear on that project, let alone his personal safety.
The same can be said for Brooklyn Gang. Does anybody seriously think that Davidson was photographing urban gang members without their consent? Surely it's obvious that he needed the engagement of the gang just to get the project off the ground. I mentioned East 100th Street because it was a 4x5 project, and Davidson has talked about why he chose to use his camera on a tripod. I think that would-be street photographers can learn a lot from his reasons, even if they choose to go down a different path.
Davidson is by no means alone in this. It's obvious, just from looking at the images and considering the circumstances under which they must have been taken, that Robert Frank had consent for at least some of his most famous photographs. How do I know that? Well, you don't just barge into a funeral and stick a camera into people's faces. Or is that also just a matter of "personal preference"?
Interestingly, the New York City camera store that is probably the most historically important in the city is holding a seminar next week on street photography. The description of what the seminar will cover ends with "and importantly street photography etiquette". Gee, I wonder what that might be. One thing's for sure. It doesn't mean (from post #14) "I will not stand down especially when I'm exercising my constitutional rights. (Oh, and I have been confronted by an angry person taking umbrage with my photography....to put it plainly... they scurried away after I stood my ground.)"
I expressed a view, knowing full well that it runs counter to what one tends to read on Internet forums. The attitude shown in the above quote is remarkably common. Never mind that in a lot of urban areas it's an invitation to get roughed up, with your 4x5 camera on the ground in pieces.
Sorry, I didn't know that talking about another approach, using a street photographer as important as Bruce Davidson as an example - an old adage about flies, vinegar and honey comes to mind - constitutes "condescending, insulting nonsense".
Do try to wake up on the right side of bed tomorrow.
Seeing people on the street now (after last years lockdown), is a welcome sight...
See, and be seen... ;-)
Steve K
Shooting people on the street is not my bag, but if someone is walking into my shot, I will fire when they reach the exact right point...
The worst thing I heard of is photo stalkers in the Tokyo subways that will stalk someone, get them into a corner, and "attack" them with a motor drive & multiple flash pops just to see their expressions of terror... That's really bad!!!
Steve K
Shot this the other day at a local ship festival.... my scanner is in need of calibration.... too much red saturation.
Shot this the other day at a local ship festival.... my scanner is in need of calibration.... too much red saturation.
Hi trog,
Let me guess. Richmond Maritime Festival, held two weekends ago at Britannia Shipyard Park. Close?
I would characterise that as urban landscape. If that's what you mean by street photography, we're using terminology differently and nothing that I've said is relevant.
The way that I use the term, I'd be a lot closer, and I'd be chatting with the Salty's staff and offering them a digital file for their Instagram and Facebook accounts, with the objective of getting them to roll up that awning and co-operate in a photo. Not better or worse, just different in terms of subject.
The screen capture below is what they put on Instagram that weekend (Lobster and Grilled Cheese). Interesting, given British Columbia's local seafood, that there's a market for lobster brought in from Nova Scotia.
Cheers
219321
A few more of village life:
219322
219323
219324
Hi Trog, I would like to feed my point of view into this thread without sounding condescending or hectoring, rather from my perspective of years and professional experience. I have a few 'sayings' to keep my feet on the ground. 'All different, all equal' 'Less is more', and 'I see you'. A photographer whose work I hugely admire is Joseph Koudelka who could not have taken his Romany people photographs without their consent. On the other hand a people photograph that took the world by storm, 'Man standing in front of a tank in Tianamen Sq' was shot with a long lens and the subject knew nothing about it.
Reportage is the word that best describes Story Telling photography. Be it fashion, people, cars, food, etc, etc, anything in situ, on location, shot on any format. It's not the medium, it's the message thats important.
Keep shooting, stay safe.
Hugo Zhang
5-Sep-2021, 05:13
I like your design choices. After a few field shoots with my camera, I'm leaning towards another build focused on a wider angle lens. I had hoped that my DIY would be a good choice for street photography. I had antipated that the 120mm would allow me to capture reasonable shots at a distance without influencing the subjects.
However I'm finding that the camera (being rather unusual) is still attracting unwanted attention.
And without a helicoid, my best shots have been realized at f/16 (DOF 9M-inf) ... which on a sunny day calls for a shutter speed of 1/60. A challenge for hand held shooting. Moving to f/8 isn't as desirable as near field focus moves up to 15-meters.
Of course a helicoid solves all these issues, at the expense of a marginally larger camera.
Perhaps I should adjust my lens position to its hyperfocal position? Does anyone know what spacing is required to achieve hyperfocal at say f/8? Or can this location only be accurately determined via testing?
Have you thought about using a monopad?
Have you thought about using a monopad?
Hello Hugo,
Given how light this camera is, I can get away with a pretty light carbon-fiber tripod.
plywood
12-Sep-2021, 09:31
Neat looking camera. After picking up a bunch of 4x5 film holders for almost nothing at a garage sale years ago I’ve made several 4x5 (and cropped, depending on the lens) with found lenses. From single element plastic, stopped way down, f32-64 to other oddball lenses like a front cell focusing 130mm f7.7 Kodak Anastigmat (will *just* cover with some falloff).
Being super cheap only using photo paper as a negative which is convenient as the shutter can be a sliding black card due to the very slow speed of the material and very small apertures.
Another in the village life series.
219647
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.