After shooting 8x10 what did you switch to?

[Robert Skeoch]

I've been shooting LF for 20 plus years but only switched to 8x10 last spring. I'm curisous what you switched to after shooting 8x10 for a while. I've thought about 11x14 but it seems like too much effort/cost for a slight increase in size. To move up to 16x20 seems more logical (logical might not be the right word here) but the format doesn't seem all that popular. Any thing bigger than 16x20 seems like a lot of work and huge costs. Just interested what format's you 8x10 photographers have moved on to?

[Michael Kadillak]

As an 8x10 shooter, I found the banquet formats to be my ace in the hole. 7x17, 8x20, 12x20 or other similar proportions just might get you another way to express yourself and diversify from the old rectangular standard.

How about a 4x10 back for your 8x10 camera? 8x10 will most likely always be around and you can cut it down yourself. Film holders might be an issue, but it sounds like many on this forum have amassed much experience that you could utilize.

Cheers!

[Roberts]

No need to make 4x10 film holder. Just use a 8x10 holder but with a dark slide cut into half so that you can expose the film by two times.

[Diane Maher]

Hopefully, only to a newer 8x10. I've done everything from Disc to 8x10 and I find that I like the nice big view through the 8x10. Anything heavier than 8x10 isn't worth the trouble (or weight) to me.

[Bruce E. Rathbun]

I second the advice from Michael. Like you I debated the 16x20 move. After a few months of research the amount of overhead needed for the 16x20 format was out of my reach. I opted for an 11x14 giving me a larger negative. I also moved to an 8x20 conversion back for the 8x10. That panoramic back turned out to be the best investment that I have ever made. The panoramic format is now my main camera. Maybe you could hang an 8x20 back on the 8x10. The 4x10 darkslide would not be the same as a 4x10 camera though it will give you a good idea. Good luck with whatever you go with.

-Bruce

[Dean Cookson]

Well, I've only had my 8x10 for about 9 months so far, so I haven't switched yet. But...

One of the reasons I picked the Canham, 8x10 woodfield was because there are 7x17 and 8x20 backs available for it. We'll see which I pick in a few hundred more sheets of 8x10.

[CXC]

After having an 8x10 for a while, I bought a Korona 12x20, along with a 7x17 reducing back.

The Korona is so big and gimpy that it's gathering dust in the closet right now. I need a REALLY good reason to be bothered to take it out, and inspiration has been a little thin lately.

I think 11x14 would be perfect, for me anyways. That's the size I generally like to put up on the wall, and I've largely lost my taste for panoramic images.

But after working my way up, literally from APS to 8x10, though every possible step, I thought I wouldn't be satisfied till I had the largest practical ULF, which I defined as 12x20, so I skipped directly there, to avoid the intermediate stops. Now I kinda wish I had an 11x14. Also it would fit in a (big) backpack, while the 12x20 requires a cart.

Anybody with an 11x14 they want to trade for a 12x20 with 7x17 back? Preferably near SF? Lemme know off line...

[John Kasaian]

Rob,
I still shoot my 8x10 a lot. I ventured into 12x20(hey, one came along that I could afford so I took the ball and ran with it!) and I love it, but taking it out in the field is like an exercise in logistics, it it only gets to go outside on special assignment(besides I only have two film holders to feed it!) 11x14 is a delightful format---quite pleasing to my eyes and IMHO the largest size contact print that "looks" right to me in most rooms. The trouble I had with 11x14 is that film holders are more costly than Ivana Trump and the 11x14 camera I could afford was...well...big and clunky. It was a great camera for a studio but was every bit as difficult to maneuver in the field as my 12x20 so....

Thats my story anyway. I've got this fantasy that early some morning I'll find an 11x14 'dorff field camera with a 19" Dagor and a trunk load of film holders with a "buy it now" price of 200 bucks or so, but that hasn't happened yet.

BTW, 12x20 and 8x20 rock! Unless you can find a 10" Cirkut, I'd consider one of these if they come with a film holder or two(or better yet three) Fun stuff!

[Brian Ellis]

AFter carrying my 8x10 outfit around for a couple years I moved on to 4x5.

[Christian Olivet]

I photograph with 8x10 and could not think of moving on to something else. Don't need to, too much fun. Also 8x10 is extremely convenient compared to the big boys. So I think that if I could afford a big camera on top of my 8x10 I would not hessitate for a split second and go for a 12x20, 7x17 or 8x20.I think I will leave the 16x20 to a much more passionate and strong person.