Hello, new here and I need some advice: 4x5 vs 8x10

[msbarnes]

New here!

OK so I looove portraits and I'm wanting to jump into large format for this purpose, but I'm not entirely sure where to start. My dilemma isn't on which specific camera to get or how to develop the film but whether I should jump into 8x10 or start with 4x5. The latter is more cost-effective but it might not give me that look. I'm a hobbyist and I won't be using large format ALL the time and so the cost of film is less important to me and I can probably start with Xray film to get used to it.

The reason for me starting with 8x10 is because the images that I have seen are simply more stunning. It has nothing to do with the enlargements as I don't print that large and I definately appreciate the benefits of 120 over 35mm. Part of the reason why 8x10 portaits look "better" might be because those photographers are just better, but I am unsure. I definitely don't see as many good 4x5 portraits as I do 8x10.

Another issue is the cameras. I want one that is metal, sturdy, and somewhat compact/portable. I don't care about movements but I do want a viewfinder (a rangefinder is unimportant to me) and for it to fold up. All I want is a normal lens (~$300mm-360mm I believe) too.

With 4x5 I know that there is Graflex, Linhof, and several Japanese cameras in between. What are my 8x10 options? My budget is roughly $1k, maybe $1.5k tops but I'm not looking into spending much if any more than that. Is this doable? If it isn't then the choice is easy and I will stick with 4x5 or compromise portability/compactness in 8x10.

Any thoughts/suggestions/opinions/advice?

[Leigh]

I shoot both formats. I really prefer 8x10 when circumstances permit.

However, there is one huge difference... the range of lenses available.
The limiting factor is the diameter of the Image Circle (IC).

Many lenses are available with ICs large enough to cover 4x5 (163mm minimum IC).
Far fewer are available with an IC twice that size.

From a budgetary standpoint, 8x10 lenses are longer, which usually means more $$$.

Another consideration is the maximum bellows extension. This applies to all cameras and all lenses.

When focused at infinity, the distance from the film to the lensboard is approximately equal to the lens focal length*.
When focused for 1:1 reproduction (image size = subject size), the distance is about two times the lens focal length.

- Leigh

*nb - The distance from film to lensboard when focused at infinity is the Flange Focal Length (FFL).
With telephoto designs, the FFL is much less than the Optical Focal Length.
At any distance the IC of a telephoto lens is much smaller than that of a regular lens of the same optical focal length.

[Otto Seaman]

I don't think you'll find a compact metal 8x10 with any sort of viewfinder for a $1000. Just the notion that you'd want a viewfinder for an 8x10 shouts out that you probably ought to slow down and try to learn the basics with a reasonable 4x5 before not being able to afford 8x10.

[Leigh]

I do want a viewfinder and for it to fold up. All I want is a normal lens...
With 4x5 I know that there is Graflex, Linhof, and several Japanese cameras in between. What are my 8x10 options?

OK. A metal folder with a viewfinder (I missed that comment before).

Graflex or comparable 4x5 press camera.

No 8x10 options that I've encountered in almost 60 years of shooting, but such might exist.

- Leigh

[Serge S]

When I started I felt the same as you. Wanted the 8x10 look for portraits and was not concerned with movements and wanted just a one lens setup. I ended up with a 5x7 with a 4x5 back (along with the 5x7), it's not totally the look I wanted but a good introduction to LF. I've gotten some nice images. I guess what I'm saying is don 't give short shrift to 4x5 you can get striking portraits. Just look around at the work posted here.
I still want to get an 8x10 at some point. Even got the 12 inch commercial ektar sitting ready to go...when that time presents itself.
Good luck with your new adventure
Serge

[Douglas]

My viewfinder is an 8x10 matte board with a 5x7 cut out.
I hold it up , look through it and frame the scene. If I don't like what I am seeing , I walk around until I find the right spot. Then I set up my 5x7 in that location.
I prefer the 5x7 aspect ratio and it's large enough to make contact prints.

If your choice is 4x5 or 8x10 , start with 4x5 and learn first , then move up to 8x10 after you know what your doing.

[AuditorOne]

My personal advice to you is to start with 4x5, not because it is better or worse then any of the other formats, but it is less expensive both for equipment and supplies while you are learning.

[John Kasaian]

You can always put a 4x5 back on an 8x10 camera, make you mistakes on cheaper 4x5 film then switch backs. If you'll be working in a studio then portability won't be an issue so you can get a Calumet Green Monster or maybe an Ansco, either of which should be well within your price range. Nix the viewfinder idea though.

[Brian Ellis]

In a small nutshell 8x10 is much more fun for me than 4x5 just because of the larger screen. It's really cool to compose on a screen the same size as the print you'll be making (assuming you contact print as I mostly did with 8x10 back in my darkroom days). I can't say I've ever seen that noticeable a technical difference between the two formats with enlarged prints the size I typically make (11x14 to 16x20 or so).

It's hard to say which you should start with. As others having pointed out, 4x5 is good for choice of films, cost of films, ease of use, maybe cost of equipment depending on exactly what camera and lens you'd be buying. OTOH, if you think you'll end up with 8x10 there's something to be said for starting with the format you plan to ultimately use. On balance, if it were me I'd probably go with 8x10 rather than 4x5. Buy used carefully and you can sell the gear for what you paid for it if you don't like it.

I'm not clear whether the $1000 -$1500 you mention is just for the camera or for everything (camera, lens, tripod, etc.). If it's for everything then 8x10 might just not be feasible unless you go for one of the old metal monorails such as a Calumet but even that would be pushing things at your budget if it's for everything. If it's just for the camera you're probably looking at either an older metal monorail or an old wood field camera such as Agfa Ansco, Korona, Burke and James, and the like.

[Alan Gales]

Welcome to the forum, msbarnes. Check out the home page here for a wealth of information. As I told you on Apug, E. and I and quite a few other Apug members are members here also.

When you say you want a viewfinder but don't need a rangefinder are you referring to the ground glass?

For a cheap metal 8x10 you could get a Calumet C1 like John suggests, or a Cambo, Toyo, or Horseman monorail. None of these would be considered compact/portable for backpacking.