Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 66

Thread: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,490

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Canham MQC 5x7 and Fujinon-W 180mm

  2. #42

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Quote Originally Posted by djdister View Post
    Canham MQC 5x7 and Fujinon-W 180mm
    5x7 Rittreck and 180mm Fujinon NW or Sironar N MC

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,901

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Hello Doremus,

    How different we work
    Good illustration of how different image makers apply their art, craft, technique and more.


    Being one of those non-cropper folk, images made are always right to the film holder guides as they are used as part of image framing.
    Choice of focal length is strictly driven by foreground -vs- background -vs- overall composition as to how the overall composition of all
    items in the image organized into a given composition. Lighting also figures greatly into this as Photography is much about light, shape,
    form, texture (one of the prime reasons for LF) and all that.

    It could be the favoritism towards a normal to wider or shorter than normal lens is partly due to the way we see foreground to background object and perspective wise. Or the way one sees the world relative to human vision is easiest to translate to a print 2D image. As images made using either extremes of wide angle or telephoto, these image perspectives are not as easy to visualize. IMO, the extremes of these focal lengths are more difficult to visualize and apply effectively. For the 5x7 view camera, focal lengths from 72mm to 600mm and a number of Sorta Focus lenses are easily available for image making.. yet the most often used remains slightly longer than normal, slightly shorter than normal applied to the full film holder frame no crop, with variations of every item in the image in focus to very selective focus.



    Bernice



    Quote Originally Posted by Doremus Scudder View Post
    Bernice,

    I choose slightly wider than "normal" because I crop my images when enlarging. Having a slightly wider lens allows me the option of cropping down to "normal" or not, but also allows me to get those shots that are just a bit wider than normal. So, for 4x5, I'll always carry the 135mm instead of the 150mm. If I have a choice on longer, I'll go with the 180mm instead of the 210mm, etc. Really, though, I like a large selection of lenses so I can get as close as possible to my visualized image with minimum cropping. It does seem, though, that I end up using the 135mm focal length most.

    Plus, all my photographs end up having aspect ratios that are determined by the subject and composition, not the film format. I'm happy with anything from square to slim panoramas; whatever complements the subject and the message best.

    Those that contact print and don't crop probably have another strategy.

    Best,

    Doremus

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,908

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    5x7 Deardorff and 10 3/4" Dagor. Always packed and ready to go. This has been my standby since about 1960.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    SooooCal/LA USA
    Posts
    2,802

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Tool for the job... Have several camera system kits in cases , bags, or photo packs... Grab the kit best for different situations...

    One "crossover" feature is all cameras have an adapter board so lenses from different cameras can interchange, but just have to remember to pack other lenses, meters, filters, film in specialty holders etc... Cameras go from light/heavy, wood, metal, flatbed, technical, press, monorail, studio etc... Some kits like to shoot outside, some up close, some with long/short lenses, some a large studio rig with heavy lenses etc...

    No one perfect camera, except one you use and bond with you can set totally by feel...

    Steve K

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    74

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    I am still looking for a nice Deardorff 4x5 Special.....Had one...sold it...regret it every day!

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Oregon now (formerly Austria)
    Posts
    3,397

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Hello Doremus,

    How different we work
    Good illustration of how different image makers apply their art, craft, technique and more.

    Being one of those non-cropper folk, images made are always right to the film holder guides as they are used as part of image framing.
    Choice of focal length is strictly driven by foreground -vs- background -vs- overall composition as to how the overall composition of all
    items in the image organized into a given composition. Lighting also figures greatly into this as Photography is much about light, shape,
    form, texture (one of the prime reasons for LF) and all that.

    It could be the favoritism towards a normal to wider or shorter than normal lens is partly due to the way we see foreground to background object and perspective wise. Or the way one sees the world relative to human vision is easiest to translate to a print 2D image. As images made using either extremes of wide angle or telephoto, these image perspectives are not as easy to visualize. IMO, the extremes of these focal lengths are more difficult to visualize and apply effectively. For the 5x7 view camera, focal lengths from 72mm to 600mm and a number of Sorta Focus lenses are easily available for image making.. yet the most often used remains slightly longer than normal, slightly shorter than normal applied to the full film holder frame no crop, with variations of every item in the image in focus to very selective focus.

    Bernice
    Bernice,

    Interesting discussion!

    I agree that focal lengths that more closely approximate the angle of view of the eye are, in essence, more "natural." Very wide and very narrow angles of view from short and long lenses respectively change the relationship of foreground size to background size in ways that telegraph to us that the resulting image is somehow "different" from normal, if we define normal as the perspective we naturally expect so see with the naked eye.

    However, vision and visual perception have a complicated relationship, and what we perceive is really a compound image resulting from our scanning the scene in front of us and constructing a mental representation of what the eyes register. This imagined image that we perceive is influences to a great extent by how we actually see, i.e., that angle of view that our eyes naturally have. It is the first way we learn to perceive and, therefore, the most "natural."

    Nevertheless, we can learn to visualize with different angles of view, especially after being exposed to them by using (and getting used to) wider and longer lenses, but also by viewing images made with extreme focal lengths and, like the artists of the Renaissance, by studying and drawing perspective projections of scenes using different angles of view.

    Once we've trained our minds to expand the way we visualize, working with multiple angles of view in our expressive palette becomes second nature and just as "natural" as what we call "normal" perspective. And, the expressive possibilities of using more extreme angles of view can be added to our toolkit.

    There are also more purely practical reasons to use extreme focal lengths. Getting everything into the frame in close quarters requires a wide angle of view. That's why shorter focal lengths are the standard for things like interior architectural photography. Conversely, zooming in on and isolating a distant object - something our eyes do very well - is difficult with standard focal lengths. Longer lenses step in here to frame what we need and get rid of what we don't.

    Although my most used focal length (for 4x5) is the slightly-wider-that-normal 135mm, I carry, and use, lenses out to the extremes (75mm - 450mm for 4x5). When I'm photographing in the slot canyons of the Southwest, my kit is weighted to the wide: 75mm, 90mm, 135mm. When I'm in the wide open spaces, I'll switch out the 75mm for the 300mm or the 450mm.

    That said, each of us has an idiosyncratic, often subconscious, preference for some angles of view; ones that communicate best what we're trying to say with our work. I guess mine tends toward the wide

    Best,

    Doremus

  8. #48
    Bertha DeCool Bertha DeCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Cape Cod, MA, US
    Posts
    51

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Running focal length preference count so far appears to be..

    ~Slightly longer focal length than "normal" focal length for a given format size.

    ~Slightly shorter lens focal length than "normal" or moderate wide for a given format size.

    focal length lenses used for the majority of image made or the lens that is often on the camera.
    Question is, has this preference been driven by the way any given image maker sees and produces images accordingly?


    Bernice
    Circumstances have had a recent influence on equipment choice and preference. I was looking for a way to move up from 4x5 where I had settled because the 120 square format camera didn't suit how I see, but 4x5 didn't suit my current living circumstances in that I have no room for a suitable darkroom and contact prints were unsatisfactory.
    Circumstances landed a Kodak 2D 5x7 in my lap, opening up the ability to contact print in my home, but not with the preferred aspect ratio of 4x5. Further circumstances dictated an inability to convert to 8x10 (cost and well, cost) for that preferred aspect ratio, so I've compromised in that I've accepted the 5x7's wider image and am by necessity learning to work within that frame since I'm only able to contact print.

    What doesn't change (for me anyway) is a preference for a longer focal length. What/how I see has historically and consistently benefited from foreshortening and mostly tends to need to be brought closer, whereas how I render it is more easily adapted, ie learning to incorporate more information for a wider or taller rectangle. My wide angle and "normal" lenses are really only seeing use when I'm shooting something outside of my norm, esp the WA.

    On a side note, included in the "inheritance" that handed my the 5x7 was a very fancy 36cm Nicola Perscheid that offers a very nice luminous soft-focus @ f4.5 and f5.6 but which goes against what I've been practicing for 40-some years, ie tack sharp images. Learning this lens's capabilities has been another shift in perspective, learning how to take advantage of its inherent characteristics.

    So to break down what I've learned, you can indeed teach an old dog new tricks, but only if the dog is willing. Interesting dialog, thanks for the question.

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Oregon now (formerly Austria)
    Posts
    3,397

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertha DeCool View Post
    ... so I've compromised in that I've accepted the 5x7's wider image and am by necessity learning to work within that frame since I'm only able to contact print. ...
    Scissors?

    I think if I were contact printing, I'd go 11x14 and then end up trimming each image on my Rotatrim to the exact borders and aspect ratios I wanted for each image.

    Doremus

  10. #50
    Bertha DeCool Bertha DeCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Cape Cod, MA, US
    Posts
    51

    Re: What's your Go To LF body & lens?

    Quote Originally Posted by Doremus Scudder View Post
    Scissors?

    I think if I were contact printing, I'd go 11x14 and then end up trimming each image on my Rotatrim to the exact borders and aspect ratios I wanted for each image.

    Doremus
    Doremus,

    A odd combination of long term habit, mild OCD and I suppose masochism compels me to print film edge.
    I will also impose my will on toilet paper orientation in the homes of others (it comes off the top, damnit) and then straighten out the pictures on their wall.

    And volume is 31 or 33 or 35, never 32 or 34. I don't trust even numbers. This is how I stay sane.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •