PDA

View Full Version : Where to start - which camera?



soboyle
3-Jul-2012, 12:50
I want to try my hand at large format photography.
Need advice on what might be a good 4x5 or 5x7 starter camera, something that will not break the bank, will be good for use in the field for landscape work, and something I will not outgrow or want to replace immediately.
A tall order I think.
Other thoughts are that I may want to add a 6x17 back at some future time.
A lens will come next, but I need to see if a camera is in the budget first.

Other thoughts are, I will be scanning the film and printing digitally.
I may want to add a scanning back at some point.

Thanks.

BrianShaw
3-Jul-2012, 13:04
consider something like htis:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?92481-FS-ya-ya-another-Daniel-Stone-FS-thread-You-betcha!-CC-401-monorail!!!

I am not Dan's sales agent and get no commission from this offering, but it could be just the thing for someone interested in getting started. You look, you ask questions, an dyou decide. Dan will be surely be honest with you if you ask more details regarding condition and capabilities. At that price an affordable lens will be, ummm, quite affordable. You need a lens sooner than later.

Don't know if this has Graflok back to support 6x17 but no matter you can do panoramic by masking the GG and cropping the film sheet. Re: scanniong back: I'd have to ask, "are you really sure you want to do that?"

Brian Ellis
3-Jul-2012, 13:23
Something for the field that won't break the bank (unless you have a very small bank and if you do LF photography may not be for you considering the cost of film and processing if you don't DIY): Tachihara, Shen Hao, Chamonix (in no particular order) are three good choices among wood field cameras that are currently being manufactured and cost less than $1,000. All can be found used (more Tachiharas than the other two since Tachiharas have been around longer) along with wood field cameras that are available on the used market but no longer being made such as Wisners and Zone VI. Canhams are fine cameras too but much more expensive. I don't know about adding a digital back to any of them, that isn't something I've ever wanted to do considering the cost and the quality of DSLRs being what it is today and getting better each year. Also don't know about adding a 6x17 back.

Frank Petronio
3-Jul-2012, 17:39
The opposite of a wooden field camera might be a professional metal monorail with unlimited movements and expansion capability. Because most hobbyists decide that saving weight and bulk is so important, they often overlook these types of cameras. True they are heavier and bulkier but they have many pluses as well - not the least of which is that you can buy a professional level Sinar F for about $350 these days. Spending $500-plus gets you a superior, high quality, upper-level monorail camera. Somebody has a top of the line 4x5 Toyo G listed on this board for under $500.

Companies that make or made good quality monorails include Sinar, Toyo, Arca-Swiss, Linhof, Horseman, and Cambo. And Daniel's inexpensive old Calumet ;-p

Of course the best thing is to try both the wooden field cameras and the metal monorails and understand the trade-offs with each kind. For learning it may be nicer to have a solid platform with full movements that doesn't break the bank.

In fact, if anything, I would spend the most money on a really solid, great tripod and put cheap cameras on that! Most bang for the buck IMHO.

Brian C. Miller
3-Jul-2012, 18:13
consider something like htis:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?92481-FS-ya-ya-another-Daniel-Stone-FS-thread-You-betcha!-CC-401-monorail!!!"

He just registered, and can't see the For Sale forum for 30 days.


In fact, if anything, I would spend the most money on a really solid, great tripod and put cheap cameras on that! Most bang for the buck IMHO.

+1, but used, heavy tripods can also be bought cheaply. I use a Bogen 3036, which I purchased used over 12 years ago. It's still running like a champ, and it has no problems with my 8x10 cameras.

Soboyle, there are lots of cameras that can be bought cheaply and used for years for general landscape work. I am still using my Graflex Super Graphic. Ansel Adams did use an Orbit 4x5, which can be purchased for under $100. I bought mine years back for $150. It has a carrying handle on the top, and it's not especially heavy.

By and large you don't need a lot of movements for landscape work. Just a little bit of front tilt, and the foreground pops into focus, no problem.

Alan Gales
3-Jul-2012, 18:16
Yeah, I always got a kick out of the guys who would buy the most expensive camera and lenses and then mount them on a Kmart tripod.

Kimberly Anderson
3-Jul-2012, 18:19
Speed Graphic.

John Kasaian
3-Jul-2012, 18:33
Right now, the best bang for your buck seems to be the Calumet CC-401-ish monorails. They're going formuch less than Speeders. Add a used 215mm from Keh and some filmholders and you in da' biz.
There are threads on first camera recommendations out the wazoo here, do a search and read about first cameras to your heart's content!:)

BrianShaw
3-Jul-2012, 20:13
He just registered, and can't see the For Sale forum for 30 days.

If he or she is interested, he or she can ask and one of us Brians will surely help him or her out.

Corran
3-Jul-2012, 21:02
I've done landscapes with a big monorail. It sucked, unless only feet from the car. You need to decide if you're going to hike a ways to get your shot or just be a car shooter. Personally I like to suggest Crown Graphics for starter field cameras. You can get one with lens for $200 or less in so-so condition, or $400 in nice shape, at least if I'm hip to the current prices. Personally I have the Chamonix because it's exceedingly rigid, has tons of movements and bellows, and takes easily-found Technika-style boards that are cheap and plentiful.

I've seen many nice kits with lenses of 90/150/210 focal length and a decent wooden field camera for $1500 or less on eBay and on the forums.

I started by getting a Toyo GII for $250 on eBay on a whim. After lugging it around various places for about 3 months I was hooked on the film but not on the weight. I use it indoors for portraiture sometimes (not worth it to sell!) and occasionally landscapes with a 47mm, close to the car.

joselsgil
3-Jul-2012, 21:33
soboyle,

One overlooked item in your question is. Where do you live?? USA, Europe, Asia, South Pacific, Australia, South America? Prices and availability varies from region to region.

Two23
4-Jul-2012, 11:05
I'd suggest 4x5--lots of film variety, easier to scan, easier to find a processor. A used Shen Hao would be a great camera and do what you want. For a lens, something like a 120mm maybe. Tripod, good tripod head with quick release, maybe four film holders, a focus loupe, and I think that would do it. Meter with another camera or a used incident light meter. Use a black t-shirt for dark cloth.


Kent in SD

John Koehrer
4-Jul-2012, 12:23
6X17 back = ~6/3/4" if that's important it rules out 4X5. Older Korona like 5X7's can be had for the similar $$ with patience.

Jay DeFehr
4-Jul-2012, 14:36
I wouldn't even consider 5x7 for film that will be scanned, unless there was a specific reason 4x5 would be inadequate, then I would reexamine that reason. A 4x5 outfit will be superior in every sense except being a smaller format. If you want to do the 6x17 thing, get a 6x9 back for a 4x5 and stitch two frames together in post. There aren't many films left in 5x7, especially if you want to shoot color. Everything is more abundant, cheaper, and with more options from which to choose, in 4x5, compared to 5x7.

If you want something you're not likely to outgrow very soon, skip the press cameras (Crown and Speed Graphics), and, at the very least, move up to a technical camera like the Linhof Technika. Now that I have a metal monorail, I'd never consider going back to a wooden flatbed, but I don't traipse around in the woods all day chasing the light, either. If you want to save weight, think in terms of total kit weight. It's a lot easier to save weight in a tripod than in a camera, and I'd opt for a lighter tripod and heavier camera than the other way around.

Good luck, and have fun!

Frank Petronio
4-Jul-2012, 18:44
I wouldn't even consider 5x7 for film that will be scanned, unless there was a specific reason 4x5 would be inadequate, then I would reexamine that reason. A 4x5 outfit will be superior in every sense except being a smaller format. If you want to do the 6x17 thing, get a 6x9 back for a 4x5 and stitch two frames together in post. There aren't many films left in 5x7, especially if you want to shoot color. Everything is more abundant, cheaper, and with more options from which to choose, in 4x5, compared to 5x7.

If you want something you're not likely to outgrow very soon, skip the press cameras (Crown and Speed Graphics), and, at the very least, move up to a technical camera like the Linhof Technika. Now that I have a metal monorail, I'd never consider going back to a wooden flatbed, but I don't traipse around in the woods all day chasing the light, either. If you want to save weight, think in terms of total kit weight. It's a lot easier to save weight in a tripod than in a camera, and I'd opt for a lighter tripod and heavier camera than the other way around.

Good luck, and have fun!

I almost agree with you Jay, that Sinar is working wonders on your cognitive thought process.

Except you lost me on the light tripod thing. My opinion is you do large format with good, robust professional equipment and if that gets too heavy to lug, drop down to a quality roll film camera or digital rather than compromising.

Or choose to make better pictures so that lugging the beast is worth it.... I just don't see how wandering aimlessly through the woods with any 4x5, hoping to stumble upon some perfect Ansel Adams scene bathed in perfect light, as being all that productive for good photos. It usually results in a lot of boring pictures. If you want to introduce spontaneity and serendipity into your work you'd be a lot better off with a spontaneous camera, like a Lecia, Fuji 6x9, Mamiya 7, Canikon full-frame digital, etc.

Everyone wants the perfect blend of everything but it's impossible. Make a decision about what you want to do and do it right....

Jay DeFehr
4-Jul-2012, 19:35
I agree, Frank, but within the realm of robust professional equipment there is a range of options. A good, carbon fiber tripod doesn't represent a compromise, except a financial one, and since tripods are bigger and heavier than 4x5 cameras, it's easier to save more weight there than by trying to find the lightest camera, which in most cases really does involve compromise in several areas.

I'm with you on the woods thing, too, but to each his own.

Ivan J. Eberle
4-Jul-2012, 19:41
+1 for a Graflex Super Graphic or another metal folding field camera with synthetic bellows. Even 60 year old cameras can be perfectly functional. I sold one with a 135mm Raptar lens (flawless glass and consistently accurate shutter) for $400 here last year and similar deals abound once you've been here on LFF for 30 days.
Cameras may be 1/3 or 1/4 of what you'll spend in the first year in film + processing alone. Buy the best condition gear you can find; ask for light-tight guarantee or money-back in writing. Bellows can be expensive to replace and there's a glut of really nice gear in the LF marketplace yet.

Jim Jones
5-Jul-2012, 05:42
No single type or size of camera fits all photographers any more than any single type or size of wrench fits all kinds of other nuts. My first camera larger than 4x5 was a 5x7 flatbed bought almost 40 years ago and is still used where it is the most appropriate. That size was a better choice at the time, with cameras and film holders and hangers being cheaper than the increasingly popular 4x5. It might accept 6x17 holders, or 5x7 film can be cropped to that format. Often monorail or press cameras are more suitable. Over time almost anyone can accumulate a variety of LF cameras at modest cost. One battery of lenses can be adapted to fit all of them. One or maybe two tripods will fit all of them now and for the foreseeable future.

soboyle
5-Jul-2012, 06:14
Many thanks for the answers.
What I've gleaned from the answers is that I need to do more homework to decide which camera will work for me.
Most of my work will be in the field. I will be shooting landscapes and buildings, so I do need enough movement to correct verticals and horizontals. I should have mentioned that before. I tend to shoot near my car, so weight is not critical, although the lighter the better.

For a sample of the kind of work I tend to do see this link here (flash)
http://www.oboylephoto.com/railline5/index.html
or this for non-flash
http://www.oboylephoto.com/railline4/index.html

I tend to shoot at about 35-50mm in 35mm, so a 135mm lens would probably be my first lens of choice.
I need to see what the total cost of a 4x5 would be. What are the other incidentals that are necessary? Film Holders. Focus Loupe? I already have an excellent light meter. Film loading bag. Lens boards. I have an excellent Gitzo CF tripod.

BrianShaw
5-Jul-2012, 06:21
What are the other incidentals that are necessary?

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/matos-begin.html

Frank Petronio
5-Jul-2012, 07:07
A 135 should suit you well but note that most of the popular ones (Rodenstock 135 Sironar-N or Schneider APO Symmar or Fuji/Nikkors) have relatively small image circles so you can not make huge movements with landscape subjects. In practice this is rarely a problem, the reality is you might get half an inch of rise but not several inches.

One could argue about getting a more expensive versions like the Rodenstock Sironr-S or Schneider APO Symmar-L to have large image circles. If you are confident that a 135 lens will suit you - and I get that it would - you might budget more for the lens knowing you will probably swap cameras around once you learn some preferences.

Frank Petronio
5-Jul-2012, 07:32
Also, just as a general comment, there is a lovely and very professional Toyo 45G for sale in the classifieds for $425. That is a great, versatile monorail with extra lensboards and a bag bellows that will last a lifetime and be capable of shooting almost anything in large format, from extreme lenses to close-ups to the most demanding professional situations. There is usually something equally good listed at any given time. If you can't see the listing yet, look for "bdkphoto" amongst the member listings (I have no association).

Most people would pick up a 1980s-1990s vintage 210/5.6 Schneider Symmar-S MC in a Copal 1 shutter for about $250 to use with a camera like that.

You could also pick up a ~$400 (usually much less than that) Graflex Crown Graphic (with a good, sharp 135/4.7 lens included) to use as a lightweight field camera that can even be handheld, with its rangefinder focusing (in addition to ground glass focusing of course).

Together both would cost less than the popular Chinese wooden cameras that are so trendy and often recommended, mindlessly in my opinion.

Perhaps the light wooden Chamonix or Shen-Hao are good compromise cameras but how would you ever know what you're missing?

Corran
5-Jul-2012, 09:30
My Chamonix 4x5 is every bit as rigid as my Toyo GII. Movements aren't as precise and you don't have as much front rise. That's about the only compromise for the 15 pounds of savings on weight.

Oh, and I can use my 720mm lens on the Toyo, but not on the Chamonix, but I just bought a top-hat extension to rectify that :)

*BTW, I think both camera systems have merit. Which is why I have one of each. But for landscapes, give me a wooden field camera, every time.

Jim Jones
5-Jul-2012, 14:56
Scanning 4x5 film eases the requirement for wide coverage lenses and in-camera perspective control. A lot can be done with a high resolution 16 or 48 bit image in an image editor.