Opinions on upgrading from 4x5 to 8x10

[MAubrey]

@OP, my two cents.

If you're interested in analogue print-making, formats larger than 5x7 become more useful when you have limited access (or no access) to an enlarger.

[Drew Wiley]

Enlarging 8x10's is simply the best kind of enlarging as far as I'm concerned. Contact printing can be rewarding, but having big negs worthy of big prints or wonderfully detailed and nuanced smaller prints just adds a whole other dimension of possibilities. You do realistically need more darkroom space.

[MAubrey]

Enlarging 8x10's is simply the best kind of enlarging as far as I'm concerned. Contact printing can be rewarding, but having big negs worthy of big prints or wonderfully detailed and nuanced smaller prints just adds a whole other dimension of possibilities. You do realistically need more darkroom space.

Absolutely. My point is simply if you have an enlarger for 4x5, then a million things are instantly simpler, weigh less, and easier to transport. The only reason I shoot 11x14 is because I don't have an enlarger at all and I want to print. If I did have an enlarger, I'd be shooting a lot more 4x5 and 5x7 than I do. Scanning negatives takes the fun out of things.

[Jim Noel]

I started with a 4x5 SPeed Graphic about 75 years ago. When working in a camera store in junior high school I fell in love with 5x7 resulting in the purchase of a 57 Deardorff in 1940 which I still have and use. I don't remember when I decided I must have an 8x10, but I have owned several. As I got into my 70's I moved to a lighter 8x10. About this time I acquired a 7x17. This is the camera I loved most and hated to get rid of, but at 85 I sold it and replaced with a 5x12. Throughout my life I have used each of the formats for different purposes, and still do. I'll be 90 in a few months and hope to still be using each of these cameras as appropriate. If I have to begin cutting down the last to go will be the 5x7,just after the 5x12.
I prefer the larger sizes because most of my prints are alternatively printed. I still have both the 4x5 and 5x7 enlargers, but neither gets turned on very often.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I started with a 4x5 SPeed Graphic about 75 years ago. When working in a camera store in junior high school I fell in love with 5x7 resulting in the purchase of a 57 Deardorff in 1940 which I still have and use. I don't remember when I decided I must have an 8x10, but I have owned several. As I got into my 70's I moved to a lighter 8x10. About this time I acquired a 7x17. This is the camera I loved most and hated to get rid of, but at 85 I sold it and replaced with a 5x12. Throughout my life I have used each of the formats for different purposes, and still do. I'll be 90 in a few months and hope to still be using each of these cameras as appropriate. If I have to begin cutting down the last to go will be the 5x7,just after the 5x12.
I prefer the larger sizes because most of my prints are alternatively printed. I still have both the 4x5 and 5x7 enlargers, but neither gets turned on very often.

Jim, you are my inspiration to keep the ULF going! Keep at it my friend!

[jnantz]

Hi all,

I have been shooting LF for about a year - a Linhof Master Classic. It's a beautiful camera.
I'm tempted to move up to 8x10. I think the lure of looking through such large ground glass has me under its spell!

What's your opinion on the upgrade, especially now as things become more and more expensive?
Lens, film, processing, etc.

I would love to hear anyone's thoughts who made the jump and had the same sentiments as me.

Thank you!

hi v.kapoor:

it is a question with a lot of answers.
and more questions..
8x10 is a lot of fun to use, there really is nothing like
a giant negative ( except for a bigger negative but that's a different thread )
the first couple of questions has to do with the extra stuff you need after
you get an 8x10 body, cause that's pretty much it, the box ..
lenses can cost a bit, unless you dont' mind "vintage" which can be a little less expensive .
the tripod is a bit bigger and head ( separate usually ) .. and film holders ..
granted these things might be available on the used market or here in the classifides
( or other classifides ) but maybe not the stuff you "yearn for" or maybe it is ?
not sure what kind of photographs you make but if you travel with a camera, sometimes
it can be big pain to haul all this bigger stuff around, maybe not ?
and the paranoia that the film wasn't exposed right ( if its color maybe that was a lot of $$
if it was expired film, less $$ if other "stuff" ... ) there's the processing it can be not easy to
develop 8x10 panchromatic film .. deep tanks and hangers, shuffle in a tray, in a tube
send out .. and then there is the non panchromatic stuff which makes it a little more affordable ..
photo paper instead of film makes great negatives and it is cheap, xray film too ... and hand coated
paper from bottled or hand made or alternative process emulsions ..
nothing's "cheep" you already know with 4x5, but even less cheep in 8x10 ..
that all said, its not hard to cobble togehter a 8x10 camera and lens for less than a few hundred dollars
( and a holder or 2 ) a tripod might cost a few bucks ( surveyors trips and a bolt are usually not too much $$ )
and xray film and paper negatives can be dirt cheep which makes it all worth the innitial hassle of
buying big to begin with.
have fun !
john

[Tin Can]

john

been a while since i read your links

excellent 😎

i am inspired

[Jim Graves]

OK ... we haven't heard from the OP, v.kapoor, for a couple of weeks now ... where are you located?

Maybe we can hook you up with an 8x10 and let you have a go with one of our cameras.

Jim in Sacramento

[Peter Collins]

Jim Noel--
WOW!!

[v.kapoor]

Hey all,

Man! This thread has really taken off. I love all these viewpoints. Thanks for everyone's insight!

Jim Graves- I live in Los Angeles.