Going to Yosemite but can't take my 4x5 or 8x10. What to do?

[Bernice Loui]

Based on comparisons between Hasselblad Zeiss & Schneider zooms (IMO, big-heavy and only ok), Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikkor, Fujinon view camera lenses the lenses on the Fuji GSW & GW are VERY good. Better than 6x6 Hasselblad due to film size (6x9 or 6x8 in Japan only) and also easily equaling the Zeiss Planar performance for the GW then better than the Zeiss Distagon with the GSW due to the Biogon family wide angle lens -vs- retrofocus lens formula of the Zeiss Distagon.. These are the same reasons why never Hasselblad again, too much $ for what that system has to offer. Only advantage of the Hasselblad and similar is reflex viewing and focal plane shutter in the F series Hasselblad bodies.

Often dis-liked about the GW and GSW, they are fully manual cameras with non-standard ergonomics which IMO is a non-issue.


Bernice

Have you been pleased with the image quality of the Fuji? I see that the Linhof has Schneider lenses.

Brian

[Vaughn]

Vaughn - you inverted one neg...

yeah -- that is why I generally do not make carbon prints of Yosemite icons. Being a transfer process (although double transfer is possible), all images are reversed. Might be nice for images of window reflections, like a reflection of Half Dome off a hotel window.

And while I do not generally do portraits, the carbon prints do have an appeal to the sitter, being reversed yields the image they see of themself in a mirror.

I had Bridal Vail Fall shift drastically while focusing on it with the 8x10. It was right there on the GG and then it wasn't. I pull the darkcloth off my head, looked straight up, and there it was. Fortunately it was February and not a lot of water...and it shifted back off relatively quickly. Being under some of the great oaks of the Valley tucked in here and there, and having strong gusts of wind show up with chunks of oak cracking off and falling 30 feet or more all around let's you know you're alive. The Redwoods and a 60 mph windstorm was interesting...never did set up the university's 4x5 rail camera I had checked out...oh, my...1979 perhaps. Those limbs I heard falling almost 300 feet.

But if you are out there enough, you'll experience the exploding trees, the unexplainable rockfall, white-outs with lightning strikes, and other minor magical moments. And even live through them, perhaps. And my limited experiences are relatively minor.

I took a 4x5 twice to NZ...3-months hitchhiking and 6-months bicycling. but dang -- I don't even remember if they x-rayed carry-on back then, 1986 (my bike in a box counted as one of my two allowable pieces baggage). And a 5x7 to Chile a couple years ago. It all depends on what is important.

I checked out a Fuji "Texas Leica" to our students and used it a few times myself. For MF, it is right behind my Rolleis.

[Drew Wiley]

I was out with one of my 6x9 Texas Leicas this afternoon, with color film in it. Didn't know if was going to start raining again or not. It was ideal for a quick outing and working fast before daylight diminished. We're at the peak of our "Fall" color here - yep, it's typically in January here locally on the central coast. Want to keep my 4x5 folder and certain loaded film holders set aside impending a hopeful road trip in the near future. I really need to start working out my knees on the hills again with an actual reasonably heavy backpack, but it's just sooooo dang muddy everywhere around the ridges right now. I miss the non-gooey granite soil of the Sierras.

[John Kasaian]

We were in Fish Camp today. It resembled being in Colorado since the fire killed most of the trees up there and they didn't have much bark, bringing to mind Aspens since the trunks were so pale against the snow.

[bmikiten]

Had the same challenge when touring New Zealand a few years ago; no 4x5 or 8x10 due to flight and transport logistics.
Answer: Fuji GSW680 Texas Leica fed with Ilford Delta 3200 film. The negative is big enough to deliver minimal grain and the film is fast enough to permit hand held shooting at reasonable shutter speeds.

Lake Wanaka, Gravel Bar
Gelatin-silver photograph on Ilford Classic VC FB photographic paper, image size 16.3cm X 21.5cm, from a 68 format Ilford Delta 3200 negative exposed in a Fuji GSW680 camera.

That's the direction I'm leaning as well. I appreciate the comments. I'd probably shoot Tri-x and HP5+ as I'm used to using those with Pyro.

Thanks

Brian

[Greg Y]

IMO, the Fuji GSW690 is WAY under appreciated as one of the best medium format fixed lens cameras made and FAR better camera than most would know or understand.


Bernice

& if space is a big consideration for travel... the Plaubel Makina 67/670 is a fine choice too.

[Fred L]

If weight were a major issue, gear wise, I'd probably pack my Mamiya 6 and a couple of lenses (50 and 75). Light, folding camera and very nice 6x6 negs to print from. A Hasselblad would be next. Missed the opportunity to buy a wide Texas Leica and still regret it...

[Drew Wiley]

120 films. Delta 3200 has its own look, wonderful at times, but in real-world applications, it's only really one stop faster than TMax400, which holds far more detail, and handles high contrast way way better, especially in the shadows. And I don't know how well D3200 does with airline screening, if that is involved. Triassic-X and HP5 will be distinctly grainy in something as small as 120 format, though in different ways. If I'm using my Texas Leica on mountain scenes, if most of the scene is in the distance, handholding even TMax 100 shots is realistic, and delivers even more detail. But when it's howling wind and sleet, and impossible to even keep a tripod from blowing away, it's nice to have some TMY400 along too. I've gotten some classic 6X9 shots in wind so high that hardly even I could stand up.

For me, the more linear shape of 6X9 is more versatile than 6X7; and compared to a 645 rectangle cropped from 6x6, is twice the surface area, so half the magnification enlargement-wise. It truly makes a difference in the print at a certain point of enlargement, if one must travel highly portable and can't bring along a 4X5. I could have bought a very nice M7 or new Fuji GF 670 quite reasonably, at least compared to today's asking prices; but for less than the same amount acquired both a Texas Leica and my long-coveted P67 300 EDIF lens - the Mercedes Benz of MF teles. The GF looks just too fragile and fussy for severe weather, and the M7 doesn't give me quite as much film real estate as I like; and I have the P67 system anyway for that given format, with its far larger selection of lenses. Given just afternoon breaks at the moment, getting out in nice light between downpours, the Fuji 6X9 RF is a dream tool for quickie work.

[SergeyT]

Mine is not converted to 120 - I re-spool 120 to 620 reels and it’s no problem. I will not change the camera just to enable 120 film usage.

Converting\modifying a camera like that would be a crime.
One can use any 120 film roll back to quickly and painlessly respool forward. The respooling back will be all "manual" still.

[abruzzi]

And I don't know how well D3200 does with airline screening, if that is involved.

Anecdotal, but I visited St. Petersburg and Moscow a few years ago. I was able to get my film handchecked flying out there, but good luck asking a Russian security guy to hand check anything. Also, there were more xray machines than I had ever seen there. Practically every building had one. So when I went out in the morning, I carried a little extra film as possible. I had some D3200 and Fuji Superia 1600. At minimum they were xrayed 4 times--train station in Moscow, train station in St. Petersburg, and the twice at the airport in Moscow (once at the door and once at security.) And I couldn't detect anything. But I'd still avoid x-rays if I could.