Pointers on 5x7

[Noah B]

Hey all, I'm thinking about selling my 8x10 setup and in the future acquiring a 5x7. My whole reasoning for the 8x10 in the first place was to make contact prints and I feel like I've fulfilled that original interest. I've switched cameras frequently in the past few years but I always go back to the 35mm aspect ratio and feel most comfortable with it. So my question for you 5x7 people, what do you like about it? What do you shoot with it? I'm the type of photographer who likes to walk around looking for things, and my 810 setup isn't built for that kind of work. I really don't like driving somewhere and setting up camera, then driving to another place to do the same thing. I like the ability to walk around, and also the price of 8x10 is getting to be an issue. I've used 4x5 in the past and didn't like the size of the GG and negatives, and I'm thinking 5x7 might be that middle ground of portability and image quality I'm looking for. Any input on the 5x7 is appreciated!

[Steve Smith]

I have nothing to offer but am interested in the replies you get. I am currently building a 5x4 camera but I have a set of rectangular bellows which would be perfect for a horizontal only 5x7 camera (most of the CAD is drawn and CNC files written already!). I have also been given a couple of 5x7 holders.

I would be interested to know what film is available in 5x7 compared with 5x4. I also like the idea of using 5x7 paper as a negative and contact printing and also using 5x7 film to contact print to albumen. I think 5x4 is just a bit too small for contacts.


Steve.

[E. von Hoegh]

Hey all, I'm thinking about selling my 8x10 setup and in the future acquiring a 5x7. My whole reasoning for the 8x10 in the first place was to make contact prints and I feel like I've fulfilled that original interest. I've switched cameras frequently in the past few years but I always go back to the 35mm aspect ratio and feel most comfortable with it. So my question for you 5x7 people, what do you like about it? What do you shoot with it? I'm the type of photographer who likes to walk around looking for things, and my 810 setup isn't built for that kind of work. I really don't like driving somewhere and setting up camera, then driving to another place to do the same thing. I like the ability to walk around, and also the price of 8x10 is getting to be an issue. I've used 4x5 in the past and didn't like the size of the GG and negatives, and I'm thinking 5x7 might be that middle ground of portability and image quality I'm looking for. Any input on the 5x7 is appreciated!

I don't have much experience with 5x7, but many people like it for just the reasons you mentioned.

[Oren Grad]

I like contact prints in any and all sizes. But for my taste, whole plate is the size at which contact prints no longer shout "look how small I am!" I use both formats among others, but I prefer WP as my main, general-purpose format.

You can assemble a very compact and lightweight 5x7 walking-around kit with a camera like the Nagaoka. It's a bit harder with WP, but with a carefully chosen kit the savings in size/weight compared to 8x10 can still be very substantial. I can take my WP Century, a handful of old Eastman wooden holders and a small lens in Copal 1, and the kit ends up being not a whole lot heavier than what I'll carry for 5x7. On the other hand, 5x7 equipment and film are certainly much easier to lay your hands on if you want to be able to get them without advance planning.

Where the esthetic (too small) and logistical (too large/heavy, too much of a nuisance to buy) break-points are for you, only you can decide.

[mdm]

A 5x7 contact is just perfect, I make them all the time. 4x5 is a little small. 8x10 is too boxy. Nowdays I find 35mm/6x9 just a tiny bit long and 5x7 just right. I have a Nagaoka which is as light as a light weight 4x5. I got it so I could go back to walking around with the camera over my shoulder like I did with 4x5. Just yesterday I got a berlebach with built in leveling ball to replcae a very bent and worn Induro/410 geared head. I would say it makes for a perfect combination, the wide upper legs are very comfortable on the shoulder and the ball saves weight and gives plenty of movement. I find that photographing to make a 5x7 contact print takes thought, you need to simplify and pare down compositions. But you can always scan and sharpen to make digital negatives for highly detailed compositions.
Film is ok for B&W, FP4 and HP5 are stock items, Delta 100 is available from time to time in a special order or at least in the ULF order window. TriX is often in stock at B&H, Portra 160 is often in stock too but very expensive and only available in 50 sheet boxes. A 5x7 with a 4x5 reducing back will allow you to do 4x5 colour less expensivly and to use film that is not easily available such as tmax 400 and acros.
Its really a good size to develop in a tray because its not too floppy and big nor small and stiff.
5x7 scans exceptionally well on a v700 with a betterscanning holder, even dry but especially wet mounted, and allows you to make very good prints without investing heavily in drum scanners etc.
Some very good lenses are available inexpensivly to cover 5x7, a 210 Sironar N is inexpensive and very hard to better and a 210mm tessar is lovely and cheap.
I fit my 5x7, holders and 2 lenses with lunch and rain gear in a small inexpensive 28l bacpack so could go anywhere I could comfortably walk or ride a bike in a day. You can pack a modest 5x7 kit anywhere you can take a 4x5 or DSLR.
Since I got a 5x7 I have not done more than a sheet or two of 4x5 (except colour and instant film), I tried 8x10 with a back and home built camera but was not enthusiastic, but 11x14 is really very similar to 5x7, since the holder cuts about 1/2 inch off the long side of the film making making it 10.5x14. On balance I think an 10x14 digital negative from a 5x7 neg has some significant adavntages over an 11x14 camera negative.
So I would say go for 5x7. An modern one will be portable and fine, but a 2D is heavy to walk around with and a B&J sits on the portability fence between modern and old.

[Oren Grad]

I have a Nagaoka which is as light as a light weight 4x5.... Some very good lenses are available inexpensivly to cover 5x7, a 210 Sironar N is inexpensive and very hard to better...

FWIW, my own favorite camera/lens set for walking around with 5x7 is a Nagaoka with a 210 Sironar-N.

[Ken Lee]

There's an ongoing thread on this forum with lots of 5x7 work on it: In Praise of 5x7 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?57170-In-Praise-of-5x7-Post-em-!).

If you're looking for some input, have a peek at some "output" :cool:

[false_Aesthetic]

Brah, one of the most important things I've found with 5x7 is to take the lens cap off.

[cdholden]

Noah,
I like it for all the reasons you mention, as well as Oren's. While his limit may be WP, 5x7 is my "smallest contact print that still looks big enough to be a worthwhile contact print".
I'll be in your neighborhood for a day or two next month (not sure exactly what dates yet). Send me a PM or an email if you want to take mine for a test drive while I'm there. I've got plenty of holders and film. If you have a darkroom, I'd be happy to oblige.
Chris

[Joel Truckenbrod]

As with any format there is an element of compromise involved, but I do happen to agree with your "middle ground" summation. Personally, it fits my needs very well - better than either 4x5 or 8x10, for essentially the same reasons that you mentioned (with the exception of aspect ratio, which I'm a bit indifferent towards). All in all, the image quality to weight ratio is extremely good and it's also pretty affordable given the large number of lenses that will cover 5x7. I personally use a Shen Hao FCL57-A (https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=1966) and find it to be no problem for hiking double-digit milages on rugged terrain.

I'd say the greatest downside at the moment is the dwindling film selection. I purchased 1000 sheets of Delta 100 for a project I'm working on, and I have no idea what will be available (if anything) 3 years down the road when I wrap the project up. Personally, I'd weigh that in to my purchasing decision and probably buy a bunch of film up front now and freeze it. Best of luck.

[austin granger]

Here is another thread from awhile back that might be of interest:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?89687-4x5-quot-to-5x7-quot-is-it-worth-changing

[Jim Noel]

Hey all, I'm thinking about selling my 8x10 setup and in the future acquiring a 5x7. My whole reasoning for the 8x10 in the first place was to make contact prints and I feel like I've fulfilled that original interest. I've switched cameras frequently in the past few years but I always go back to the 35mm aspect ratio and feel most comfortable with it. So my question for you 5x7 people, what do you like about it? What do you shoot with it? I'm the type of photographer who likes to walk around looking for things, and my 810 setup isn't built for that kind of work. I really don't like driving somewhere and setting up camera, then driving to another place to do the same thing. I like the ability to walk around, and also the price of 8x10 is getting to be an issue. I've used 4x5 in the past and didn't like the size of the GG and negatives, and I'm thinking 5x7 might be that middle ground of portability and image quality I'm looking for. Any input on the 5x7 is appreciated!

I have had at least one 5x7 camera,a Deardorff, for more than 30 years.
Why?
I like the longer format. A horizontal image actually looks horizontal and a vertical looks vertical.
The contact prints are large large enough to look good on a wall, and the negative is small enough to enlarge if I so choose.
The equipment is not as heavy or bulky as an 8x10.
Film is almost twice as largein area as 4x5, but not as costly as 8x10.

[Jim Jones]

I bought a B&J 5x7 flatbed with Ektar f/7.7 203mm in 1974 and used 5x7 film until my darkroom and 5x7 Elwood enlarger turned up in the 1980s. Then I switched to 4x5 film in fhe B&J and other cameras. In those days 5x7 cameras, film holders, and hangers were cheap. The B&J didn't weigh much more than many 4x5s, and had a generous bellows extension. The 5.25 inch square lens boards were easy to fabricate and would accomodate lenses too large for some 4x5 cameras. Several scanners accomodate the little 4x5 negatives better than 5x7. I wouldn't want to go back to 5x7 film this late in life.

[Old-N-Feeble]

Is your work method wet or hybrid? If you wet process you could shoot 8x10 and crop to 6.7x10... assuming you have an 8x10 enlarger. If you scan to print and your camera has a few inches of shift (rear shift is easier, IMO) then you could stitch up to 8x16 or so. If you already have a 5x7 enlarger then maybe 5x7 is indeed the way to go.

[Noah B]

Thanks for all the input gents! Part of my transition is I got a Fuji X100 a couple weeks ago and I absolutely love it. I'm starting grad school soon for photography and I'm planning on switching to mostly digital. I want to get a 5x7 eventually, process B&W film, and scan it to make digital prints. Scanning the 8x10 film was quite the task on the V700, and doing horizontal portraits just didn't add up visually for me (althought I do love Judith Joy Ross' work).

[Old-N-Feeble]

Why did you "have to" shoot 8x10 portraits horizontally?

[Noah B]

I didn't, just saying that it was awkward trying to frame it using the full body head to toe.

[premortho]

The format I liked the best for full length portraits was Kodak's 3A size...3.5X5.25. But no film available now so I use a 5X7 because I prefer the format shot as a vertical. Since I only shoot B&W, I have'nt had any film problems. I also make paper negatives and use x-ray film as well. I use a Seneca Black Beauty outdoors, and Burke&James Commercial View in what I laughingly call a studio. Good luck on your quest. Lots of terrific lenses available for 5X7, all the way from very soft to razor sharp are around.

[ROL]

It's juuuuust right. No getting around that 5X7 is compromise format for many.

4X5: A significantly larger negative than 4X5, larger and brighter screen, eminently enlargeable, large enough for contacts (for some).

8X10: Smaller, lighter, more portable than 8X10, enlargeability probably as great except for gigantic prints, more depth of field, more lens choices, and more film choices (particularly, if you're willing to cut down 8X10).

Easier to shoot walking around? I wouldn't necessarily put that on my list as that seems more the province of 120 or 35. One expert once claimed to me that 5X7 was for "car shooters", covering a two page magazine spread. See this (http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/index.php?p=pages&title=cropping-a-negative) for more on 5X7 composition.

As regards film, ultimately, anything larger than 4X5 is becoming less and less available.

[ROL]

Brah, one of the most important things I've found with 5x7 is to take the lens cap off.

How do you compose and focus with the lens cap on. Either that part isn't important to you (and I have seen work by many in which that is obviously the case :eek:), or you use the cap as a shutter?!?

[John Kasaian]

If your 8x10 accomidates sliders (like some 'dorff's and Agfas) you can get two 5x8s on a sheet of film.