How many 55+ using 14x17/16x20/20x24 ?

[Richard K.]

OK, maybe I'm bored, waiting for spring, maybe I'm cold, but I AM curious. I kind of asked this before but maybe I wasn't explicit enough and maybe you don't want to admit your age, but I (and probably others) would really like to know! How many of you 55+ are using 14x17/16x20/20x24 cameras? :)

-Richard, still cold but at least the sun is out in Toronto

[Daniel Grenier]

Cabin fever already? It's kind of early in the season don't you think? Anyway I'm 56 and shoot 7x17 - a baby ULF, I know but do I make the cut? Hope you find something better to do soon, Richard :cool:

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Richard,

I'm not yet 55, but I plan to take up the 14x17 format this year. And, I plan to hike and photograph in the mountains with it.

I chose the 14x17 format over the even bigger sizes for several reasons. The obvious reason is that all the gear is smaller and lighter (relative terms in this context) than 16x20 or 20x24. It's not so much the weight of the camera. The camera I'm assembling is a super-sized version of my 7x17 Franken-ARCA. So, I expect the 14x17 version to tip the scales at around 17 - 18 lbs. Not ultralight, but manageable in the field for one person. A 16x20 version would only be a pound or two more.

One less obvious reason why I chose 14x17 is that it has long been a standard size in the medical industry (it's the standard size for chest x-rays). That means Fidelity used to make film holders in this size. It also means there are is a large selection of x-ray films available in this size at very reasonable prices. I plan to stick with conventional films for now - and already have a well stocked freezer of various emulsions in this size. But, it's nice to know there is something else available should I want to experiment, or should the conventional films in this size become impossible to get at some point in the future. Also, thanks to the medical industry things like stainless steel film hangers and developing tanks, film sleeves, etc. are readily available new in the 14x17 size.

I happened to get a good deal on some 14x17 Fidelity film holders, and that's what started me down this path. I got six very well-built, robust, durable holders (including two that had never been used) for less than what it would have cost to buy two new custom made 14x17 wooden holders. However, there is no free lunch. While more affordable, the Fidelity holders are also quite a bit heavier than wooden holders (nearly 6.5 lb. each vs. about 3.5-4 lb. each for wooden holders). That extra weight starts to add up fast. So, I may eventually look to add two or three wooden holders for longer hikes to supplement the six Fidelity holders that would then remain closer to the vehicle.

It also helps that I already had multiple lenses for my 7x17 that would also cover 14x17. A couple of my longer lenses will cover 16x20, but I don't really have any wide, or even normal lenses that would cover 16x20, let alone 20x24. Again, cost is a factor. I have a six lens set of lenses, ranging from 305mm - 42" (1065mm) that cover 14x17 with room to spare. Four of the six are in factory mounted modern Copal shutters. The longer two are barrel mounted process lenses (760mm f14 APO Ronar CL and 42" Red Dot Artar). All are quite compact and lightweight for their combination of focal length and coverage. Although, when talking about a 42" lens, compact and lightweight are definitely relative terms - that one will stay close to the truck. The best part is all six lenses combined cost me over $1500 less than a single Super Symmar XXL would have set me back. Point is, lens options, size/weight and cost all go up rapidly once you get above 14x17.

Anyway, that's more than you ask for, but you're not the only one suffering from cabin fever. I plan to eventually write one, or more articles, on the 14x17 format. IMHO it seems to offer the best combination of big negative and gear that's not TOO big or TOO expensive (not that anything above 8x10 can really be considered light or cheap).

And while I've enjoyed the 7x17 format, I find it doesn't work as well as the more square formats for many of the subjects I like to photograph. It's not so much the subjects as it is the way I see them and like to photograph them. I guess I'm just set in my ways after so many years of shooting 4x5 - which was my ONLY format during the most productive decade of my photographic career - so far.

Kerry

P.S. It's also been quite cold and sunny here in Oregon all week. Quite a change from our usual 45 and rainy winter weather.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Richard at 57 I just finished ( October 07') building my camera. It is only an 8x20 and I'm looking for a backpack for it. Right now I have it in a rolling duffel and with the three lenses three film holders extension rail cloth and all of the essentials it comes in at about 37 lbs. My hand built tripod with the geared majestic head is 10 lbs. If I go out with one lens some holders and tripod I'm at about 30 lbs. Doable to say the least. I decided to build with the left over Walnut an 11x14 but I have thought about the 14x17 also! I forgot the 8x20 weights 14lbs with the extension.

Jim

[walter23]

OK, maybe I'm bored, waiting for spring, maybe I'm cold, but I AM curious. I kind of asked this before but maybe I wasn't explicit enough and maybe you don't want to admit your age, but I (and probably others) would really like to know! How many of you 55+ are using 14x17/16x20/20x24 cameras? :)

-Richard, still cold but at least the sun is out in Toronto


I'm guessing 95%. Who the hell else can afford it? ;)

[John Kasaian]

OK, maybe I'm bored, waiting for spring, maybe I'm cold, but I AM curious. I kind of asked this before but maybe I wasn't explicit enough and maybe you don't want to admit your age, but I (and probably others) would really like to know! How many of you 55+ are using 14x17/16x20/20x24 cameras? :)

-Richard, still cold but at least the sun is out in Toronto

Staring down the barrel at 55 (in March) and still have a 12x20:cool: Does that count?

[Nathan Potter]

Daniel, didn't I read somewhere that White Lake Ontario has the coldest recorded temperature in north America? Maybe not the best place for ULF in the winter.

Nate Potter

[Dave Wooten]

60 and am using Wisner 14 x 17.