PDA

View Full Version : Best MF Film Camera for LF Landscape Photographer?



John Rodriguez
31-Dec-2012, 15:34
I've been shooting 4x5 for a couple of years now, and for the most part enjoy it. However, there are some shortcomings I'd like to solve if possible and am wondering if a 6x7 SLR is the answer.

I started shooting DSLRs 8 years ago. After being bummed out on the lack of resolution on larger prints and not being able to create the near/far tilt shots I'd seen over the years I switched to a Canon full frame body to use their tilt shift lenses. Shortly after that I tried 4x5 and have been with it since.

One major shortcoming I run into is the length of time it takes to setup a shot. There are times when I'll miss a shot because by the time I'm ready to expose the lighting has changed. I'm thinking it may be possible to speed up the process by going to a MF SLR style camera. While I mess around with B/W sometimes, I'm really a color photographer, so I can live with the loss of individual sheet development control. Also, I'd be fine with maxing out print sizes around 30x24", and thankfully my drum scanning bill would go down.

Specifically, I think that if I can find a camera with the following I'd like to try it:

- At least a couple of tilt shift options. I can make do with whatever they are. Really all I need is a WA tilt shift and a standard shift. I typically don't use movements with tele lenses.
- Shutter controlled by body. I figure I can pick up a bunch of speed here. No need to swap shutter cables between lenses. No need to pull dark slides (or forget to). No need to shut and cock the shutter before shooting.

From what I can tell my only option is an RZ67 due to the tilt-shift requirement.

A coupe of questions:

- Are there other 6x7 cameras with tilt/shift options I'm not aware of?
- Is my expectation of gaining some speed realistic?

lbenac
31-Dec-2012, 15:36
The only other I know is shift only - The Pentax 75mm Shift for the Pentax 67 system.

Cheers,

Luc

brian mcweeney
31-Dec-2012, 15:54
The Fuji 680 comes to mind, but it's almost the size of a 4x5 field camera!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuji_GX680

John Rodriguez
31-Dec-2012, 15:59
The Fuji 680 comes to mind, but it's almost the size of a 4x5 field camera!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuji_GX680

WOW!!! That may be just the ticket. Size isn't an issue, although the fact that it's offered with a neck strap is hilarious.

SpeedGraphicMan
31-Dec-2012, 16:00
Miniature Speed or Crown Graphic!

Sometimes called a "Baby" or Century Graphic.
The Century has more front movements then the Mini Speed Graphic.

I have one and I *LOVE* it! I use it with a 6x7 rollfilm adapter or with 6x9 sheet film.

Check out this blog for an idea of what I mean.
http://aqua-city.blogspot.com/2010/11/speed-baby.html

lbenac
31-Dec-2012, 16:01
WOW!!! That may be just the ticket. Size isn't an issue, although the fact that it's offered with a neck strap is hilarious.

Yes it probably should have been called 680 Gunship or Gatling. That is a big dude!

rdenney
31-Dec-2012, 16:02
Hartblei modified an Arsenal (Kiev) Arsat/Mir 26 45mm f/3.5 lens with their "super rotator" tilt-shift barrel. It's limited by coverage, and the performance of that lens is not stellar. But 45mm is decently wide for 6x6 format. It can be used with adapters on Mamiya and Pentax 645 cameras, or in its native mount on Kiev 60, Pentacon Six, and Exakta 66 cameras. They also put the Mir-38 65mm lens into a super rotator mount, but that lens is also not that great.

Arsenal also made an Arsat 55mm PCS (shift only) f/4.5 lens, which is excellent indeed--at least as good and perhaps better than the Pentax 75mm shift lens.

If you adapt all those to a Pentax 645 (easy), then you could have 45mm tilt-shift (if you can find one), 55mm shift, 65mm tilt-shift (also scarce these days), and 75mm shift. Frankly, I think you'll get better results from the newer Canon TSE lenses on 24x36 format.

That's about it, unless you get a medium-format press camera with movements like a Linhof Super 23 Technika, Fuji 680, or Baby Graphic. That won't really be any easier to use than your 4x5 camera.

I have an article about the Hartblei 45mm lens (in shift only version) here: http://www.rickdenney.com/hartblei.htm

Rick "stick with 4x5" Denney

Brian C. Miller
31-Dec-2012, 16:08
John, what kind of 4x5 camera do you have now? Is it a monorail or a field/press camera?

I used a Pentax 6x7 for years, and it wasn't much faster for me than using a Graflex 4x5. Big heavy camera goes on the tripod, and then try to figure out what's really happening the lens is stopped down. Sure, I can get tied up with all the movements sometimes on the 4x5, but never to the point of losing a shot. Of course, I've lost shots with the SLR, too.

The thing is, there isn't that much of a difference in using either a shift/tilt lens or a field camera. You stop with both to fiddle with the movements. Both weigh the same and rest on the same heavy tripod. The only time that the SLR is faster is doing IR brackets, because I don't have to mess with the film holder. But composition time really is nearly the same.

Try this: if you have a press camera, load it up with Tri-X or TMax 400 or Delta 400 or HP5, and then go and spend some time with it hand-held. See how it feels, and take a look at the results.


Added: I owned a Fuji GX680 for a little while, and then I donated the thing to Vaughn's school. It adds nothing to photographing in the field. I hope it's still running well for the students. Fabulous lens, but it weighs more than my Pentax brass 6x7, Super Graphic, or Toyo 45AX. I decided that I was not going to put up with that much bulk and weight.

Ivan J. Eberle
31-Dec-2012, 16:12
Your modest print size requirement suggests that a 645 format camera might be more than adequate, The 35mm lens for my Pentax 645N is nothing short of astounding and doesn't require tilts for 3' - infinity depth. With 5000 dpi or greater scans from films like Ektar, printing to 30" is entirely satisfactory.

John Rodriguez
31-Dec-2012, 16:21
John, what kind of 4x5 camera do you have now? Is it a monorail or a field/press camera?

I used a Pentax 6x7 for years, and it wasn't much faster for me than using a Graflex 4x5. Big heavy camera goes on the tripod, and then try to figure out what's really happening the lens is stopped down. Sure, I can get tied up with all the movements sometimes on the 4x5, but never to the point of losing a shot. Of course, I've lost shots with the SLR, too.

The thing is, there isn't that much of a difference in using either a shift/tilt lens or a field camera. You stop with both to fiddle with the movements. Both weigh the same and rest on the same heavy tripod. The only time that the SLR is faster is doing IR brackets, because I don't have to mess with the film holder. But composition time really is nearly the same.

Try this: if you have a press camera, load it up with Tri-X or TMax 400 or Delta 400 or HP5, and then go and spend some time with it hand-held. See how it feels, and take a look at the results.

Toyo 45A. Most shots I can get setup in time, but not always, especially when confronted with fast moving clouds. Seconds count.

Areas where I think I could save time -

- Mount on tripod, unfold, lock everything down, mount lens, hook up release cable, setup dark cloth, get out loupe - VS - Mount on tripod, mount lens
- Get under hood, compose, focus, remove hood, close shutter, set exposure, load holder, pull slide, shoot - VS - Compose, focus, meter, set exposure, shoot

Brian C. Miller
31-Dec-2012, 17:06
OK, Toyo models are not fast to set up. My Super Graphic is far quicker. You might want to keep it in a box with a lens mounted, and then just whip it out for the shot. When you need to be very responsive to the scene, I recommend any MF camera that you can hand-hold. Don't bother with tilt-shift, just get the right shot. Lots of great photographs have been made without using shift-tilt lenses.

Have you tried just using the Toyo focusing hood? It works for me without too much hassle, but of course it's not easy to use it with a loupe. Using the hood without a loupe and rocking the focus into position works quite well if you aren't shooting wide open. Since you specified clouds, I'm guessing that you are giving just a little bit of tilt for the foreground. Give it the tilt while you're setting up, and then just focus. Also, you might consider putting some tape on the bed, with some focus markers for your lenses. Use a viewfinder that attaches to the accessory shoe on top, and you won't need to use the GG at all.

andreios
31-Dec-2012, 17:21
Didn't the Rollei SL66 offer some degree of tilt? I know it's 6x6 only but I think it might be a sweet camera..

Noah B
31-Dec-2012, 17:49
One thing to consider would be a very lightweight 4x5 field camera like the Ebony SW45. You could pop a lens on that sucker on a light tripod and throw it over your shoulder. It's got some movements which would help out for what it is, I think there are shen hao versions of it as well.

domaz
31-Dec-2012, 18:00
I use a Kodak Medalist II as my walk-around MF camera, it's quite a fun and quick camera to use. To be honest though I am beginning to wonder about the wisdom of using a MF camera for landscape shots. The problem is in order to get good depth of field you have to stop down quite a bit, which means using a tripod. And if a tripod is involved I mine as well use an LF camera.

Dan Fromm
31-Dec-2012, 18:06
Miniature Speed or Crown Graphic!

Sometimes called a "Baby" or Century Graphic.
The Century has more front movements then the Mini Speed Graphic.

You exaggerate.

I shoot 2x3 Graphics (2x3 Pacemaker Speed, Century, and I have a couple of 2x3 Crowns on the shelf). Their usable movements, 19 mm of front rise excepted, are nil with most lenses.

Rise/fall? As I said, 19 mm rise as long as the front standard is outside the box. Less with the standard in the box, the wire frame finder gets in the way. I've removed my Century's wire frame finder. Fall? Well, if the front standard is on the outer bed rails, the bed is dropped, the front standard is tilted all the way back, and the lens focal length and focused distance are right. Not generally useful or controllable.

Tilt? None. Yes, the front standard tilts backwards. This is useless in most situations, was intended to make it possible to use short lenses with the front standard at the rear of the dropped bed. There's exactly enough tilt to make the front standard parallel to the film plane when it is on the dropped bed. Whether the lens' axis can be centered in the gate depends on the lens' focal length and on how close it is focused. Dropped bed plus less than full back tilt will give front tilt, but in practice it is almost always unusable.

Shift? The manual says that the front standard can be shifted right and left. And the manual's right. What it doesn't say that for front shift to be used the front standard has to be in front of the bed struts. Yes, its there, but try to use it.

Swing? A tiny tiny bit.

Speedy setup? Not when shot from tripod and focused using the ground glass.

Don't get me wrong. I like my little Graphics. They're fine cameras. And they are very limited.

Jeff Keller
31-Dec-2012, 18:14
If you use a technical camera such as the Horseman VHR with the rotating back they can be quick to use but have limited wide angle capability.

You might want to check the lenses for the GX680. I'm not sure all of them can be shifted.

If you like wide angle views, Noah's suggestion for the Ebony SW45 might be the best solution. The flange to film distance is about as short as it gets. I don't know of any viewer/roll film holder sliders that fit it, but if you got one adapted to it, the short flange to film distance would be a plus.

Jeff Keller

David A. Goldfarb
31-Dec-2012, 18:16
Toyo 45A. Most shots I can get setup in time, but not always, especially when confronted with fast moving clouds. Seconds count.

Areas where I think I could save time -

- Mount on tripod, unfold, lock everything down, mount lens, hook up release cable, setup dark cloth, get out loupe - VS - Mount on tripod, mount lens
- Get under hood, compose, focus, remove hood, close shutter, set exposure, load holder, pull slide, shoot - VS - Compose, focus, meter, set exposure, shoot

Part of working with large format is to practice setting up and putting away the camera so it doesn't take so long, and in the process, you figure out how to make everything work faster, when you need to work faster. One of the reasons I like my Technika, is that I can work fast when I need to, shooting it like a big rangefinder camera, but I also have all the capabilities of a view camera, when I have time to use them.

Use a quick release system to mount the camera on a tripod.

Have a lens that closes with the camera and has infinity stops, so you can just open the camera, pull out the front standard and have it focused at infinity. If infinity stops aren't an option, then just mark the infinity position for each lens on the camera bed, so you can set up quickly.

Make a focus scale on the bed, so you can estimate focus for quick shots without movements.

Add a finder for composition. Old-style Linhof zoom finders aren't too expensive, and they should mount on the shoe on top of a 45a, if I'm not mistaken. The 45a is essentially a modified press camera, so you could even handhold it when it's feasible to do so, with or without a grip.

If you want to shoot press-camera style, you can leave a holder in the camera or use Grafmatics that hold six sheets.

With any camera that doesn't have a meter, it's good to be aware of the lighting conditions, meter and set the camera before you see something you want to photograph, so that if you have to get the shot right away, you're in the ballpark. If you have time, you can meter the shot individually, or if you want to determine the contrast range of the scene, you can even do it after you take the shot.

John Rodriguez
31-Dec-2012, 18:27
I previously had a 45CF, which was faster to setup, especially when whatever lens I planned on using was folded into the camera. When Im shooting often, I'm about as fast as possible. However, no matter how well you know the routine, it's not as fast as setting up an SLR. There are still a lot more steps, there's no way around that. What I'm hoping to find out is if there are any steps with a MF that slow the process down that I'm not aware of.

Ivan J. Eberle
31-Dec-2012, 18:41
David's point about technical/press folders being quick to set up if you've got a lens that will fit inside with it folded up is precisely why I've got a Meridian 45CE. Fits either a Nikon SW 90 f/8 on a flat board or a Rodenstock Sironar 210mm f/5.6 on a custom 3/16" recessed board. Not as fast in rapidly changing light as an SLR but nearly so. The big difference for me is that a handheld hyperfocal wide angle shot is much easier to hit focus on the near with an SLR than 4a5 (and especially with my 35mm on the P645N). If there is a sweet spot for 645 or 2-1/4, this is it.

ROL
31-Dec-2012, 18:42
- Are there other 6x7 cameras with tilt/shift options I'm not aware of?

Indirectly, I will offer that you gain substantial depth of field with a smaller (120) format. Unless architectural perpendicularity and linearity is your goal, a 67 with a good wide angle lens and proper placement will give nice results for the majority of shooting situations. In other words, you probably won't need tilt/shift movements, nor will they be missed.



- Is my expectation of gaining some speed realistic?

Absolutely. And wind shake becomes much less of a problem.


Although I am now mostly an LF shooter, I LOVE my Mamiya 7II for all the above reasons, and many more.

JosephBurke
31-Dec-2012, 20:07
I have a nice Fuji 680 sitting here on the shelf.........

thomasfallon
1-Jan-2013, 08:44
I have a GX 680. Love it. You get basic view camera movements on every lens. Rotating back makes for easy changes from h to v and the camera stays balanced on the tripod. All the lenses focus close. Great as a macro camera. 190 soft focus is a great lens. Lenses from 50mm to 500mm. You can do Polaroids either to check something are just as little originals. It is not lighter than 4x5, but it is quick to set up. You can still find most of the lenses and accessories new. For an excellent review of the camera, see Danny Burk's website.

John Rodriguez
1-Jan-2013, 09:34
I have a GX 680. Love it. You get basic view camera movements on every lens. Rotating back makes for easy changes from h to v and the camera stays balanced on the tripod. All the lenses focus close. Great as a macro camera. 190 soft focus is a great lens. Lenses from 50mm to 500mm. You can do Polaroids either to check something are just as little originals. It is not lighter than 4x5, but it is quick to set up. You can still find most of the lenses and accessories new. For an excellent review of the camera, see Danny Burk's website.

Thanks Thomas. Are you using the angle view finder? Any issues achieving critical focus without a loupe, especially with tilts? I'm not worried about weight, as long as I can still fit it in my bag. It doesn't look like it would take up any more room with equivalent lenses versus what I currently carry: a 45A, 90mm, 150mm, 250mm and 400mm tele with 7 holders.

speedfreak
1-Jan-2013, 10:22
I've been going through the same dilemma recently. I looked at the GX680 pretty extensively. It seems the biggest hurdle to overcome has to do with the proprietary battery. You'd need to find the AA battery holder (which can be ~$100), modify one of the NiCd batteries, or buy an expensive adapter that uses Nikon digital batteries. The lenses are very reasonably priced (look at KEH.com) and are apparently very good.
Ultimintly I decided against it. If I'm going to carry the heft and bulk of a 4x5, and still have to apply the the movements required for a scene, I might as well get a full 4x5 sheet out of it!
I ended up going with a Fuji GW690ii. It's simple (no batteries), rugged, has superb optics, focuses quickly with the rangefinder, travels well, and produces a neg half the size of 4x5. Since I'm using a flatbed scanner, 6x9 should scan well with the betterscanning carrier, and with some careful setup I can get 6x17 with two shots. After some time of use, I may have to get the GSW690 to use as a bit wider landscape/architecture camera.

Bernice Loui
1-Jan-2013, 11:01
Use a GX680 for any amount of time and it become more like a monorail camera with specific trade offs. GX680 was originally designed as a studio camera and sort of on location camera. Using wide angle lenses with any significant movement requires their bag bellows. Beyond the battery problem, the GX680 is limited to GX680 specific optics. Then there is the question of which view finder to use.

My impression is the system is too limiting.


Bernice



I've been going through the same dilemma recently. I looked at the GX680 pretty extensively. It seems the biggest hurdle to overcome has to do with the proprietary battery. You'd need to find the AA battery holder (which can be ~$100), modify one of the NiCd batteries, or buy an expensive adapter that uses Nikon digital batteries. The lenses are very reasonably priced (look at KEH.com) and are apparently very good.
Ultimintly I decided against it. If I'm going to carry the heft and bulk of a 4x5, and still have to apply the the movements required for a scene, I might as well get a full 4x5 sheet out of it!
I ended up going with a Fuji GW690ii. It's simple (no batteries), rugged, has superb optics, focuses quickly with the rangefinder, travels well, and produces a neg half the size of 4x5. Since I'm using a flatbed scanner, 6x9 should scan well with the betterscanning carrier, and with some careful setup I can get 6x17 with two shots. After some time of use, I may have to get the GSW690 to use as a bit wider landscape/architecture camera.

Bernice Loui
1-Jan-2013, 11:24
Toyo 45A. Most shots I can get setup in time, but not always, especially when confronted with fast moving clouds. Seconds count.


Areas where I think I could save time -

*Consider a mono rail camera

- Mount on tripod, unfold,

*Monorail camera, no need to unfold. A tripod quick release makes for a near instant connection once the tripod is set up.

-lock everything down,

*Unlock the front/rear standards on the mono rail camera and it is ready to go.

-mount lens

*most often used lens is already on the camera.

-hook up release cable

*Leave a short cable release on the len's shutter. This also reduces wear on the cable release threaded fittings.

-setup dark cloth

*Add Velcro on the camera's rear standard and focus cloth. This prevents slippage and makes the focus cloth less of a problem. If the focus cloth is not too big, it can be stored with the camera already attached and ready to use.

-get out loupe

*Keep the loupe and light meter together and ready to use. Hang the loupe on a longish string on the camera. This keeps it from getting lost during the process of composing and focusing.

- Get under hood, compose, focus,

*The process...

-remove hood/focus cloth.

*No need to remove if the focus cloth is in place. Just drape it over the camera. This also helps reduce the risk of light leaks that may not be apparent.

-close shutter, set exposure,

-load holder, pull slide, shoot.

*Done..

- VS - Compose, focus, meter, set exposure, shoot.

This is the basic difference between using a view camera -vs- a non-view camera.

Practice will help make the set up process quicker. Get this process down to where it is pretty much a involuntary habit and less of a critical thinking process. Consider trying a monorail camera with lens on camera and tripod quick release and ... in place of a field folder. The hassle of setting up a field camera is why I have stuck to monorail cameras, unless there is significant hiking and traveling involved. Even so, the 6x9 Arca Swiss monorail is a viable solution in place of using a field camera.

With the "Compose, focus, meter, set exposure, shoot." there is great temptation to simply "shoot" rather than taking a moment to consider what the final resulting image may be. Slowing down just the right amount can help make better images in the long run.

The nature of using a view camera and the types of images produce are more of a crafted and conceived product rather than just responding or anticipating the moment.


Bernice

cgrab
2-Jan-2013, 03:00
There are assorted 6x9 Linhofs available on the used market. I doubt, however, that they would be much faster to operate than their bigger siblings, especially when it comes to tilt. From my experience with tilt on 24x36, it is difficult to get satisfactory results without a tripod. So I would recommend something like Linhof viewfinder, which allows you to find rapidly the exact place where to set up said tripod, which has speeded up my setting up considerably.

Christoph

David Watts
2-Jan-2013, 04:24
John, consider a Linhof Technika 70 if you can find one with the matching cam for the three lenses (which are good). It has a good viewfinder and rangefinder, shift and tilt on the front standard and the normal, flexible Linhof rear standard. Can be used with the GG if you need to use movements, or the viewfinder if not. Quick to set up.

David

thomasfallon
2-Jan-2013, 06:30
You might want to check the lenses for the GX680. I'm not sure all of them can be shifted.


Jeff Keller

The 50mm can only be shifted about 9mm. The others all have full movements.

Ari
2-Jan-2013, 12:49
Part of working with large format is to practice setting up and putting away the camera so it doesn't take so long, and in the process, you figure out how to make everything work faster, when you need to work faster. One of the reasons I like my Technika, is that I can work fast when I need to, shooting it like a big rangefinder camera, but I also have all the capabilities of a view camera, when I have time to use them.

Use a quick release system to mount the camera on a tripod.

Have a lens that closes with the camera and has infinity stops, so you can just open the camera, pull out the front standard and have it focused at infinity. If infinity stops aren't an option, then just mark the infinity position for each lens on the camera bed, so you can set up quickly.

Make a focus scale on the bed, so you can estimate focus for quick shots without movements.

Add a finder for composition. Old-style Linhof zoom finders aren't too expensive, and they should mount on the shoe on top of a 45a, if I'm not mistaken. The 45a is essentially a modified press camera, so you could even handhold it when it's feasible to do so, with or without a grip.

If you want to shoot press-camera style, you can leave a holder in the camera or use Grafmatics that hold six sheets.

With any camera that doesn't have a meter, it's good to be aware of the lighting conditions, meter and set the camera before you see something you want to photograph, so that if you have to get the shot right away, you're in the ballpark. If you have time, you can meter the shot individually, or if you want to determine the contrast range of the scene, you can even do it after you take the shot.


Areas where I think I could save time -

*Consider a mono rail camera

- Mount on tripod, unfold,

*Monorail camera, no need to unfold. A tripod quick release makes for a near instant connection once the tripod is set up.

-lock everything down,

*Unlock the front/rear standards on the mono rail camera and it is ready to go.

-mount lens

*most often used lens is already on the camera.

-hook up release cable

*Leave a short cable release on the len's shutter. This also reduces wear on the cable release threaded fittings.

-setup dark cloth

*Add Velcro on the camera's rear standard and focus cloth. This prevents slippage and makes the focus cloth less of a problem. If the focus cloth is not too big, it can be stored with the camera already attached and ready to use.

-get out loupe

*Keep the loupe and light meter together and ready to use. Hang the loupe on a longish string on the camera. This keeps it from getting lost during the process of composing and focusing.

- Get under hood, compose, focus,

*The process...

-remove hood/focus cloth.

*No need to remove if the focus cloth is in place. Just drape it over the camera. This also helps reduce the risk of light leaks that may not be apparent.

-close shutter, set exposure,

-load holder, pull slide, shoot.

*Done..

- VS - Compose, focus, meter, set exposure, shoot.

This is the basic difference between using a view camera -vs- a non-view camera.

Practice will help make the set up process quicker. Get this process down to where it is pretty much a involuntary habit and less of a critical thinking process. Consider trying a monorail camera with lens on camera and tripod quick release and ... in place of a field folder. The hassle of setting up a field camera is why I have stuck to monorail cameras, unless there is significant hiking and traveling involved. Even so, the 6x9 Arca Swiss monorail is a viable solution in place of using a field camera.

With the "Compose, focus, meter, set exposure, shoot." there is great temptation to simply "shoot" rather than taking a moment to consider what the final resulting image may be. Slowing down just the right amount can help make better images in the long run.

The nature of using a view camera and the types of images produce are more of a crafted and conceived product rather than just responding or anticipating the moment.


Bernice

I'm with David and Bernice on this one.
Rather than look for some other piece of equipment that will also have its limitations, spend more time honing your LF skills.
The two posts above give some excellent advice, and it's free.
I would add a Grafmatic to be able to bracket several shots in quick succession, but perhaps you're looking for a magic bullet.

Roger Hesketh
2-Jan-2013, 15:18
If you only need front movements I would recommend a Sanderson Hand and Stand camera with a roll film back. It has all the front movements you will ever need it is light. It's no heavier than a DSLR and not much bigger. You can put any lens you like on it. Their are quite a lot of them about. You can get a really nice one for a couple of hundred quid. You can use it like a press camera in the hand or you can put it on a tripod. I have never seen it done but I do not see any reason why you could not fit a Kalart rangefinder to one if you should so wish. This may seem like an odd suggestion but this camera was designed to just the job that you say you want to do. They may be old but they work just as well as they ever did.

brianam
2-Jan-2013, 15:48
maybe I'd be oversimplifying the OP's question, but wanting a "faster than LF camera to setup" *with* tilt-shift controls seems to be at odds to me... if you have time to get a camera on a tripod, focused, and T/S controls dialed-in, it only takes a *little* longer to get an LF setup. Right?

Agree with ROL who mentioned carrying Mamiya 7II. I've been quite happy carrying an M7II and LF in the same bag. M7 gets the quick shot, 5x7 comes out second--when the light isn't moving too fast.
Don't choose one system over another, just carry both. :)

John Rodriguez
2-Jan-2013, 20:45
maybe I'd be oversimplifying the OP's question, but wanting a "faster than LF camera to setup" *with* tilt-shift controls seems to be at odds to me... if you have time to get a camera on a tripod, focused, and T/S controls dialed-in, it only takes a *little* longer to get an LF setup. Right?


Not really. Using a 5D with a tilt/shift was much faster then 4x5, and that was before live view. Even adding in the time to use a dedicated spot meter it would still be a lot faster.

All that matters is what will get me the print I want. "IF" I can speed up the process considerably but still get 30x24 images I'm really happy with then it's a no brainer. Especially if it gives me a wider array of film options and lower film/developing/scanning costs as well. Ah, if only an IQ180 was the price of a D800 :)

Noeyedear
3-Jan-2013, 02:32
Ok I know you will not be getting tilt shift, but I think 612 is a good choice. I had a Linhof 612 and two lenses, I sold them some time ago and I now wish I had not. There is rise built in or drop if you turn it upside down. Superbly well made and now a good range of lenses. I've never had anything Linhof which does not deliver what you expect. In fact I'm waiting for the courier today to bring me my 5x7 Technika bougth on Ebay.
Of course there are the MF Linhof Technikas that have all the movements as well. I had one of them a few years back, paid £50. for it with a range of lenses and cams sold it for £450. within a week. First one I had ever seen, £50. sounded worth a go, I was right.
Kevin.

Noeyedear
3-Jan-2013, 02:37
I use a TS on a Canon handheld, I have to I'm in a helicopter. I drop the the lens about 8mm (24mm mkII) then shoot when the buildings and horizon look right. I've never done a side by side test, I do suspect it's quicker than using a LF :-)

maybe I'd be oversimplifying the OP's question, but wanting a "faster than LF camera to setup" *with* tilt-shift controls seems to be at odds to me... if you have time to get a camera on a tripod, focused, and T/S controls dialed-in, it only takes a *little* longer to get an LF setup. Right?

Agree with ROL who mentioned carrying Mamiya 7II. I've been quite happy carrying an M7II and LF in the same bag. M7 gets the quick shot, 5x7 comes out second--when the light isn't moving too fast.
Don't choose one system over another, just carry both. :)

Drew Bedo
3-Jan-2013, 06:30
I started shooting DSLRs 8 years ago. After being bummed out on the lack of resolution on larger prints and not being able to create the near/far tilt shots I'd seen over the years I switched to a Canon full frame body to use their tilt shift lenses. Shortly after that I tried 4x5 and have been with it since.

Eight years is a loooong time in digital years. And the current crop of High-Pixel DSLRs is out of contention? Both Canon and Nikon have bodies with over 20 MP full size sensors and tilt-shift lenses. The option for multishot stitching is also much easier now as well.

If leaving LF truely serves your creative vision and process, the current DSLR world is worth another look.

cheers

rdenney
3-Jan-2013, 06:56
For me, the problem with the Canon tilt-shift solution is the sheer cost. For a high-production commercial model, it would be sensible. But I make few images, and even fewer that need big prints. The Canon solution requires a $3000 body, a $2500 17mm TSE lens, a $2100 24mm TSE lens, at $1200 TSE lenses at 45 and 90mm, to provide a reasonably comprehensive capability for movements. That adds up to a cool ten grand--at least five times what a very nice and complete 4x5 solution with the same equivalent lenses might cost these days. If I delivered 1000 images a year for which I was paid, that capital cost would only be a few dollars per paying image. That would be no problem to justify. But if I make only 10 images a year, those costs become enormous.

And even with that setup, there is a limit to how big the prints can be with respect to 4x5. I suspect very few commercial situations require prints that large, at least these days.

Sure, folks will say that the scanner adds to the cost of the large-format solution, but it doesn't for me. I have a lifetime of old stuff that I still mine. Again, that may not be the commercial model.

I do have a Canon 5D with a 24mm TSE (Mark I, half the price of the Mark II). It does pretty well, and I have used it many times hand-held and it does allow working very fast at times. But that lens cannot deliver what my 65 or 90mm Super Angulons can do without even breathing hard, even without considering the differences in camera bodies, film, and formats. When the Mark II and the 17mm lenses came out, I had to consider my options, and that's when I returned to large format with much more commitment. I just cannot maintain a quality model with digital stuff any more--it has outpriced me.

Rick "who misses movements when they are not there" Denney

John Rodriguez
3-Jan-2013, 11:11
I started shooting DSLRs 8 years ago. After being bummed out on the lack of resolution on larger prints and not being able to create the near/far tilt shots I'd seen over the years I switched to a Canon full frame body to use their tilt shift lenses. Shortly after that I tried 4x5 and have been with it since.

Eight years is a loooong time in digital years. And the current crop of High-Pixel DSLRs is out of contention? Both Canon and Nikon have bodies with over 20 MP full size sensors and tilt-shift lenses. The option for multishot stitching is also much easier now as well.

If leaving LF truely serves your creative vision and process, the current DSLR world is worth another look.

cheers

Interestingly I ran another DSLR print test last night with two photos taken with a recently new-to-me D700 and an 85mm f/2 AIS. Both shots were taken off a tripod at base ISO using mirror lock-up and live-view to confirm focus. One shot was of a distant partially snow covered peak and clouds basking in alpenglow. The other was of some plants and rocks about 6 feet from the camera. Files we're worked on but only had very light selective sharpening to avoid any artifacts and printed at 21" on the long edge.

The print from the 6 foot away image of the plants/rocks looked great. Getting nose close to the print didn't reveal any issues. I could probably print this even a little bit bigger, I'll be doing some cropped test prints on letter size paper to see.

The print of the far-away mountain peak however showed a weakness I've always run into with digital: some far away objects that don't resolve 100% tend to get blotchy looking. I always make sure those objects don't get sharpened, but there's just something about the sensor that gives these objects a weird geometrical blotchy shape, and it really only appears on rock formations. Overall the print was OK, but I wouldn't go any bigger with it without finding a solution. Perhaps using a grain simulator, as film tends to perform much more gracefully in similar situations.

Still, it may be worth renting a D800 and 24/45 TSE for a weekend to get an idea of how they'll perform. The upside of a DSLR is it's possible to fit in the same bag with a 4x5, so I wouldn't necessarily need to give up the latter.

Jeff Keller
3-Jan-2013, 11:43
If you use a Canon camera you should also consider the Olympus OM 24mm f3.5 shift lens which can be mounted using a simple adapter. It doesn't have tilt but is reported to be sharper than the Canon lens. I'm very happy with the Olympus lens but I haven't used a Canon 24 TSE lens to make a direct comparison.

The Canon 17mm TSE is a great lens but it doesn't seem as sharp as a Nikon 14-24 or Olypus 24mm shift lens. I use all of these. I depend upon a tripod and live view to get accurate focusing ... so faster than a view camera but not DSLR point and shoot fast. Also exposure with a shift lens isn't accurate using the DSLR meter while the lens is shifted.

Jeff Keller

(thanks to those commenting on the Fuji 680. I revisited it trying to remember why I lost interest in it a year or two ago ... I think it was the somewhat limited wide angle range.)

Jim Andrada
4-Jan-2013, 05:26
Just thought I'd add that the big SLR's like the Mamiya RZ or RB are not ideal as hand held cameras. They weigh a ton - my RB is heavier than my Super Graphic I think - feels like it anyhow. (2 tons with the 500mm non-mirror lens on it!)

And mirror slap is an issue as well. I do use the RB's handheld occasionally but it's a lot of exercise. More often I use it on a monopod and it's really best on a tripod so you can use the mirror lock up and let things settle for a few seconds before tripping the shutter.

I absolutely love the cameras but for quick handheld work I prefer the Super Graphic with a grafmatic holder - and a monopod attached.

John Rodriguez
4-Jan-2013, 08:07
Feeling impetuous...there's a D800e and 45mm pc-e sitting in my shopping cart and I'm really tempted to hit buy.

Kodachrome25
4-Jan-2013, 10:13
I have made more income off of landscapes shot with my 501CM than any camera I use and definitely more than dust prone 4x5 thus far. As far as lack of movements, it has been a wash since invariably there will be some area in a 4x5 image that goes noticeably out of focus when Schiempflug is achieved unless one hits the diffraction zones of the lens in terms of using a small aperture. If I had to give up one of the two formats in shooting landscapes, it would be 4x5 since the Blad has proven it self 100% trouble free from day one. I have over 50,000 cycles on my D800 already, great camera but I much prefer to sell people traditional darkroom based prints for fine art. Commercial is another story and that is where the D800 comes in....

But...I still keeping working with LF because I want to make prints up to 40x50 now...so it goes...

Lenny Eiger
4-Jan-2013, 12:03
I think a lightweight camera like the Wista is the way to go. Leave it on the tripod, never take it off. Use primarily one lens, leave it on the camera. Leave the loupe and light meter on lanyards around your neck while shooting. A backpack can hold a lightweight dark cloth and a few holders. Train yourself to set up and take the shot within 60 seconds. Most should use less swings and tilts, they aren't really necessary for a lot of shots, at least until they are sort of automatic and you don't have to think about it. Forget filters, they don't do much that you can't do in Photoshop.

Close down to 45 or so to get the depth of field and enjoy it. That's where the smaller cameras are going to fail. F22 is just not that much depth... Of course, there are those that don't like depth of field, and then you can use whatever camera you want...

60 seconds..... that's my 2 cents...

Lenny

Susie Frith
4-Jan-2013, 12:08
Hi John,

If you're happy to go down to 6x6 the the Rolleiflex SL66 has up to 8 deg of front tilt, which with the Planar 80mm lens will give from about 4 feet to infinity focus at f/2.8 (according to the instruction book). Of course the tilt will work with all lenses. The focussing is easy, and it handles really well (if you like the left-hand focus, right hand wind which I find easier than the Hasselblad helix).

I have owned several Linhofs over the years from MF to 10x8, Technikas and monorails. I have had an ST4, an ST5 and two Tech70's and a TK23, but find the MF cameras really tricky to use with tilts and swings, although the Technikardan 23 is much easier than the Technikas. It is really only from 5x4 that the movements are easy to use - the screen is just too small otherwise.

Best wishes,

Susie

Susie

Drew Wiley
4-Jan-2013, 12:16
For grab shots I sometimes use a Pentax 6x7. It will work handheld at 1/125th or above.
Slower and you have to use it on a tripod with mirror-lockup. I did some handheld shots up on the summit of Haleakala on Maui a couple yrs ago where the wind was so intense even a tripod was out of the question, and any view camera would have become a kite. Dead sharp, at least for that neg size. Get better results technically with a 6x9 back on my 4x5
due to movements, but nowhere near as nice as true LF sheet film. Medium format is always a compromise.

John Rodriguez
4-Jan-2013, 12:55
Couldn't help myself, I hit buy on a D800E. Adorama has Nikon USA refurbs on sale for $2650 with free shipping if anyone else wants to test one out.

It would be interesting to run something similar to Tim's OnLandscape Big Camera Comparison test using the D800E. The A900 used in that test seemed to be at least equal (albeit different) to the Mamiya 7 Portra drum scans. While it won't touch 4x5, I have a feeling D800 prints versus drum scanned 6x9s will be close.

Thanks for the feedback everyone. My 4x5 isn't going anywhere...yet. We'll see what testing reveals.

Drew Wiley
4-Jan-2013, 13:53
Given proper technique with a good rollfilm back (not a sloppy one), VC movements, modern lenses, and high-acutance film, you're probably not going to get anywhere near
6x9 quality. But the crux is that once you resort to digital capture, either in-camera or drum scanning, you're forced into digital output, so have an inherent limitation there. I'm
extremely skeptical of all these half-assed tests out there that ignore a lot of pertinent
variables. I'll be enlarging some 6x9 Ektar soon, and have already done some 6x7. Pain in
the butt compared to sheet film.

John Rodriguez
4-Jan-2013, 13:58
Did you look at this test Drew - http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2011/12/big-camera-comparison/? I agree, most of the tests I've ever seen are flawed, but Tim's seemed solid to me.

In the end, all that matters is that I have a ~30x24 print I'm proud to show, whatever get's me there the easiest wins. Only doing your own print tests will tell you that.

Drew Wiley
4-Jan-2013, 14:19
24 X 30 : neither. No way. No how. Not unless you believe in that "normal viewing distance" nonsense discussed on another thread at the moment. ... that is, if you expect something remotely comparable to LF results. Sure, you might land an attractive inkjet
to hang over the sofa, because you can tweak the contrast level in PS. I've seen 35mm
film blown up to 30X40 and sold in galleries. But any of this kind of thing would be Godzilla vs Bambi if side-by-side with 4x5 film. 6x9 is a fussier subject, because it's obviously somewhere inbetween. A lot of this I'll leave to the "film vs digital" diatribes. But size matters, and so do movements - VC plane of focus control if a very big deal. When a few
of these guys can make prints half as sharp as I routinely expect, I'll start believing them.
In the meantime, I'll take such "tests" with a grain of salt ....

John Rodriguez
4-Jan-2013, 14:27
So you've done testing of your own?

Drew Wiley
4-Jan-2013, 14:27
Yeah ... I just backtracked to the link, John. I've read it before. More full of holes than a
block of swiss cheese. Obviously some relevant info, but hardly an objective set of tests.
Number crunching and real-world printing are not the same thing. Kinda the difference between simulating fission on a computer program and dropping a real A-bomb. One set
of methodology carries more authority than the other. And then there's still an H-bomb
out there (8x10).

venchka
4-Jan-2013, 15:18
Or something completely different...
If your 4x5 camera will accept it, what about one of the really neat convertible 6x6, 6x7, 6x9 & 6x12 roll film holders? You eliminate 4x5 holders and their weight and bulk. You retain all of your movements and lenses.

Wayne

Jac@stafford.net
4-Jan-2013, 15:31
Permit me to interject an antiquity - Zeiss Super Ikonta 6x9.

Drew Wiley
4-Jan-2013, 16:25
Wayne - I already referred to rollfilm backs. But they're all over the map in terms of quality.
Given a precise film plane in one and careful focus, combined with the best modern lenses,
and the fact of movements like tilt will give a significant focus edge on conventional MF
gear, where the only option to depth of field is to stop down further and further. I'd much
rather use full-sized sheet film; but there are those instances where traveling with roll film
is more convenient. Alas, most of comparisons with smaller DLSR gear, either use a worst case rollfilm scenario, or in the case of the aforementioned link, a species of film which
ain't exactly the sharpest. And almost universally, such test ignore both movements and
methods to correctly control film plane. Reminds me of all the Powerpoint presentations
MBA's use in the business world - you can prove anything.

Jac@stafford.net
5-Jan-2013, 14:20
Horseman SW-6x12 Pro. That's large on at least one side. :)

I got a Grandagon 35mm lens for it. Used it for only one paying job. It is WAY too wide for my purposes, especially landscapes.

Mark Tweed
5-Jan-2013, 15:17
More about the 2X3 Graphic/Century. They really are fine, scaled down view cameras, I have the Century which I modified to add the movements I typically use. The focusing on my Century is smooth and precise allowing for critical sharpness on the ground glass when using a quality loupe (mine is a Rodenstock). For my uses in landscape photography, if I employ movements, 90% of the time it's a modest amount of forward tilt, or rarely I'll add a little rise. The 2X3 Graphic/Century provides this in spades with the simple modification of reversing the front standard. So instead of offering copious amounts of rear tilt, you now have equally generous front tilt. The amount of rise remains the same. Of course without a rotatable back, all of this works neatly for the horizontal format, which again, is 90% of what I shoot in the field. For the vertical format, the swing movement provides the tilt. The shift Dan Fromm referred to is indeed minimal and the front standard has to been moved far enough ahead of the angled bed struts to make use of the maximum amount. Added swing movements can be accomplished by ever so slightly rounding/grinding the outside edges of the twin clamping plates beneath the front standard. No, it's not a butter smooth movement but it can positioned by hand and then secured with the front standard locking lever. The removable, snap-open fold-shut ground glass hood provides sufficient shading to use the loupe, but I have carried a down-sized black cloth that attaches securely to the camera with an integrated velcro system.

To assure film flatness, ultra-critical for any medium format camera, I use the superbly manufactured Horseman rollfilm backs, I have both the 6X7 and the 6X9. They attach securely and quickly with the Century's graflok back. So the process of focusing with the ground glass back in place and then swiftly changing it out with the Horseman film back takes but a few seconds.

The selection of lenses for this format is abundant. I carry a f8 65mm Super Angulon, a fast f2.8 95mm Rodenstock Heligon (Planar design) or a 105mm Fujinon (Plasmat) for my normal lens, a tiny modern 165mm Ilex Tessar and for a long lens I use a 240mm Linhof select Schneider Tele-Xenar. To make for an even lighter package, I'll take along a late vintage f6.8 65mm Angulon in place of the Super Angulon. With careful focusing, all of these lenses provide crisp, sharp negatives.

My Century is the version without the integrated rangefinder making for a light, compact package. I've added 3 cylinder bubble levels to the body so squaring it up on the tripod is a quick process. The normal lens stores easily on the body when folded up. I then pack the camera, the 65mm wide and 165mm along with a Horseman back, the loupe, a miniscule Metered Light spotmeter and necessary filters and lens hoods in a Lowe Nova Mini case that's about the size of a 6 pack of beer. The padded bag smaller than most digital slr camera cases.

I've been very happy with this system, it provides the same basic movements I employ with my 4X5 in landscape photography but in a much smaller package. And the film costs are dramatically reduced.


Mark

toyotadesigner
7-Jan-2013, 15:13
- Is my expectation of gaining some speed realistic?

If you prefer to compose scenes, no. If you can wait or return, no. If you plan your images, no.

But if you want speed to capture moments, get the D800e with a bunch of zoom, t&s and prime lenses.

I am using a Fuji GW 690 III, a GSW 690 III and a Plaubel 69w proshift - all with 6x9 slide film. If I want to achieve the same quality as with my Arca Swiss, set up time is almost identical, because all of them require to open a case/bag, setting up the tripod, leveling with a gear head and metering the scene with an external light meter.

If I need a fast camera to capture fast moving or changing situations, I use my Nikon F4s or my Contax G2 system.

Somehow and somewhere we all miss opportunities. The early train, the best girl, the fastest car, the best vacation... that's life!

Oh, just pops into my mind: If you never want to miss a chance, use an iPhone and join flickr & co. 86921

Kodachrome25
7-Jan-2013, 15:28
Or something completely different...
If your 4x5 camera will accept it, what about one of the really neat convertible 6x6, 6x7, 6x9 & 6x12 roll film holders? You eliminate 4x5 holders and their weight and bulk. You retain all of your movements and lenses.

I use a pair of 6x12 backs for half the shots I make with my 4x5, absolutely love them. I would not call them smaller or lighter though, they hold 6 shots as do the three film holders they take the room of. But...you can reload them in the field without a changing tent making them pretty productive.

Kodachrome25
7-Jan-2013, 15:34
If you prefer to compose scenes, no. If you can wait or return, no. If you plan your images, no.

But if you want speed to capture moments, get the D800e with a bunch of zoom, t&s and prime lenses.

I am using a Fuji GW 690 III, a GSW 690 III and a Plaubel 69w proshift - all with 6x9 slide film. If I want to achieve the same quality as with my Arca Swiss, set up time is almost identical, because all of them require to open a case/bag, setting up the tripod, leveling with a gear head and metering the scene with an external light meter.

If I need a fast camera to capture fast moving or changing situations, I use my Nikon F4s or my Contax G2 system.

Somehow and somewhere we all miss opportunities. The early train, the best girl, the fastest car, the best vacation... that's life!

Oh, just pops into my mind: If you never want to miss a chance, use an iPhone and join flickr & co. 86921

It's not a one size fits all world sir, I am a lot faster with a 501CM than I am with my 4x5 and the resulting shots can be just as dynamic and technically excellent with either format. Ever try to mount a 4x5 to a Kenyon gyro and then get the shot from a helicopter...?...didn't think so...And those shots were used in POP ads at 50x50 and looked stell-ar my friend.

Noah A
7-Jan-2013, 16:17
I think the D800e is a good choice if you don't care about making darkroom prints, which I don't. The image quality is outstanding and it can work multiple ways--with a good tripod you can take your time, use live view and get extremely good results. Not up to 4x5 quality at large print sizes, but very good indeed and great at 24x36in. If you need to handhold, shoot fast, use long glass, shoot aerials, etc., it can do those things too.

It's sort of my "job" camera, while my 4x5 remains my tool of choice for my important projects and, well, better jobs. Of course I would have preferred to stay with an all-film workflow, but digital makes a lot of sense for a lot of assignments when there is no time or budget to shoot film. It also makes a good digital polaroid, though of course it's overkill to use it only for that purpose.

John Rodriguez
15-Jan-2013, 22:41
Got the D800e on Friday. Took some photos and made some test prints. 30x20 looks fantastic. 36x24 looks gallery good at nose length.

I'm blown away, especially considering I'm using an old 85mm f/2 AIS, not exactly well known for being a blazingly sharp lens (at f/11 no less).

toyotadesigner
16-Jan-2013, 00:25
It's not a one size fits all world sir, I am a lot faster with a 501CM than I am with my 4x5 and the resulting shots can be just as dynamic and technically excellent with either format. Ever try to mount a 4x5 to a Kenyon gyro and then get the shot from a helicopter...?...didn't think so...And those shots were used in POP ads at 50x50 and looked stell-ar my friend.

Agreed. Just wanted to point out the OPs initial situation. Of course you need more tools in your box for different situations, and if you are creative you can even use a 4x5 for sports events or a D800 for architecture.

toyotadesigner
16-Jan-2013, 00:28
I'm blown away, especially considering I'm using an old 85mm f/2 AIS, not exactly well known for being a blazingly sharp lens (at f/11 no less).

Congratulations! Don't be mislead by the 'old' lenses - they deliver fantastic results with modern cameras. Enjoy your new tool!