Shoot iPhone, DSLR, 35mm, 645, 6x6, 6x9, 4x5 and 8x10. Been shooting more 35mm lately after not shooting small film for a few years.
Shoot iPhone, DSLR, 35mm, 645, 6x6, 6x9, 4x5 and 8x10. Been shooting more 35mm lately after not shooting small film for a few years.
Rolleicord to 11x14. Choice is often image/mobility driven.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
I sometimes scout out a location using an iPhone-7, but never print them out.
My film cameras now are limited to a Zone VI in 4x5 and a Kodak 2D in 8x10.
I have been thinking about a ULF pinhole rig. . . . but maybe not.
Drew Bedo
www.quietlightphoto.com
http://www.artsyhome.com/author/drew-bedo
There are only three types of mounting flanges; too big, too small and wrong thread!
Mostly 4x5 HP5 for black and white and always MF digital for color. When the occasion arises, I photograph 8x10 HP5.
For travel when weight matters, MF digital color and 120 HP5 for black and white.
Last edited by neil poulsen; 8-Mar-2021 at 08:44.
6x4.5 (as of Monday), 6x6, 6x7, 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 (though I don't use the latter 2 as much as I'd like). My recent acquisition is a dual format Mamiya 6.
FWIW, 4X5 for creative stuff; 6X6 MF on a TLR "for fun"; and 35mm as my sketchbook. But of course there's the iPhone, the DSLR for scanning and when you have to have "it" with no "do-overs" or "misses". I may be okay with "misses" and the like, but the family is less forgiving.
Depending the specific circumstances, I use a variety of formats, some LF film and some digital. I'll often carry two kits in the vehicle, a 5x7 outfit and a weather-resistant Olympus bag.
I use large format when I have a free afternoon and want to take my time on a few images taken in a more contemplative manner, 4x5 for color negatives, scanned, 5x7 for BW, also scanned although I still have enlargers for both formats and a wet darkroom.
The 11x14 field camera kit is ready to go as well, refurbished with new bellows and good film holders. I'm waiting for the oil well to come in so that I can afford the film.
But, I use Micro 4/3 and Pentax full-frame for much other work when there's no time for the LF film approach or when the situation has a great image, but one not suitable for LF.
As an extreme example to illustrate the point, I've done a fair bit of photography, including some pretty spectacular landscapes, while flying our Cessna 336 light twin-engine Skymaster up among the mountains and glaciers of Alaska. There's no way that, as the pilot, I can use any sort of LF camera while flying, assuming that I can even fit an LF camera between the control column and the small inward-opening window for the pilot. A compact AF/AE camera with a twisting LCD screen is the only way to reliably get that sort of image and get it safely back on the ground. On one such trip, I had to fly a 10 mile track back and forth several times until I could get the angle and the shaft of sunlight on the cloud-shaded glacier just right. It's now a signature image. I shot many frames that day to be sure that I got one where everything clicked just right. That was doable with an Olympus, but surely not with LF.
Truth be told, with good gear and careful post-processing, even Micro 4/3 format produces excellent gallery quality large prints if you don't need to enlarge beyond 24'x32' and your viewers do not have their nose touching the print and using a magnifier in the gallery. I've hung a fair number of university gallery shows over the years, many populated with M4/3 shots, and have never heard complaints about bad print quality. Any quality problems are the fault of the photographer, me.
I love the BW tonal quality that careful LF produces and digital still can't touch. There are images that benefit from the care and thoughtfulness that the slower LF process mandates. But, there are images and situations that are not really feasible with LF film and never have been, but which work smoothly with digital.
So, in the end, it's about making the image and thus using the right tool for the image at hand.
To me cameras/formats are like fishing poles or power saws.....none of them are exactly right for everything but, all are exactly right for something. (I phone to 8x10 for this guy).
4x5, 6x12, 6x9, 6x4.5, 24x36.
Most used is MF (6x4.5) as it is large enough to actually see something of it without a loupe, reasonably to scan. Good selection of film in 120 format. I can use slide film and have a nice number of slides without breaking the bank. Gear is a nice size, not too big, not too small. And there is a large selection of different types of gear. From fully automatic auto-focus to the most basic antiques.
I'd like to use 4x5 more. For me a contact print of a 4x5 would be nice already. But it is so much stuff to take along and set up that when I see something, by the time I'm out of the car, took all the setup out, lugged it to a place I can all set it up.... it is nightfall. Also being limited to just b&w 100 iso is a pity. It is a great format but only to be used if you can dedicate all your time to it.
These days I'm a bit more drawn to 24x36 as it is easy to take along on trips for the job. Just a camera, a little zoom and you are set.
Expert in non-working solutions.
DSLR DX, DSLR FX, iPad, iPhone, 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, 4x5, 4x10, 8x10
If there is such a thing, I have too many cameras.
Bookmarks