Bag for field camera?

[fiddle]

This was my solution.
F-stop ICU pro and a 40L pack of your choice.
Chamonix f2, filters, light meter, 6 holders, 3 lenses, a bunch of odds and ends.
Used it at RMNP 2 years in a row, works very well.
Works as carry on as well on planes, minus the tripod.. threw that in my checked bad nicely padded.

[jimi2]

Well my Wandrd 31 liter backpack came yesterday. It’s a bit of a weird design compared to what I’m used to - it seems like the best access is to open lay it on its face and open the back as opposed to the other way around. But I got the camera cube, and that holds my camera with two lenses, so no guess I can just slide that out from the side and use the rest of the pack for film holders and other stuff. Definitely an improvement over cramming all my gear into a messenger style bag like I did last week.

[jimi2]

switched to 6X9 roll film back for long-haul backpacking trips (up to 100mi). Of course, one can still throw in a few full-sized film holders too, when carrying roll film holders, just in case a certain subject look suitable for significantly greater enlargement. My lightweight 4X5 is a little Ebony folder; my normal day use 4X5, a Sinar Norma.

When you shoot with a roll film back, is it still feasible to use a lot of movements? I’m experimenting with selective focus stuff, throwing parts of the image out of focus with movements…I think it actually might work with the smaller format as well since my Chamonix has a great mechanical range of movements, and I’d only be using the center of the image circle obviously. I’m really used to shooting digitally and taking lots of frames, so throwing a few 120 rolls in the pack with a roll film back could be appealing.

[Drew Wiley]

Of course you can use all the movements native to your specific camera. The biggest problem going to roll film holders is that wide-angle lenses of shorter focal length might scrunch up (over-compress) your bellows. Some cameras have interchangeable bellows. My little Ebony 4X5 folder has what they call a Universal bellows, meaning the back half a normal pleated bellows, and the front half more like a bag bellows. It works well from nearly 400mm of extension down to around 80 mm before a recessed lensboard becomes mandatory. Other cameras they made were intended for mostly wide-angle photography and had highly compressible bag bellows. I never shoot shorter than a 100 mm lens with 6X9 backs anyway. When I need a highly modular camera system with a significant selection of interchangeable bellows I use my Sinar gear.

For selective focus you wouldn't want very short focal length lenses anyway. The biggest problem with roll film backs is simply getting adjusted to critical loupe focus on a smaller area, and understanding how to insert the roll film holder without tweaking what you have focussed on the ground glass out of plane. I use Horsesman Graflok-style holders. Insertion-style roll-film holders can be just too heavy for many lightweight field cameras, and might tug at the film plane or otherwise deflect the back of the camera. It takes a little practice.

[jimi2]

Yeah, I picked up a bag bellows for my Chamonix, so I should be good there. But good point about the insertion holders. I used to have a 6x7 one for my Toyo monorail - I need to locate it. I’d like to get a Cambo 6x9 of that style, but I’m not sure how securely the Chamonix’s back would hold it. Seems like it would be quicker and easier than removing the back every time….

[jimi2]

I was previously thinking about a wider lens, like a 58mm, so that could be an ultra wide for 4x5 or a more moderate wide for the 6x9 setup. I just have a 90 and a 150 right now, so wider would be good either way. And if I’m shooting roll film I could actually afford to shoot some color. It had been over 15 years since I shot any film, and everything’s a lot more expensive now.

[Drew Wiley]

Lenses are all over the map in price. Many excellent used ones are still a relative bargain. But there's also something weird going on over on EBay, with ridiculous asking prices on certain well-known lenses. Wides suitable for roll-film applications might force you to look into the topic Horsesman lenses, which are not likely to be high priced. I've never used them; but there are no doubt past threads on them, and you could ask a vendor like Kumar. But short focal length engineered for digital MF use tend to have quite limited image circles as well as high pricing.

Roll film is up in price too, obviously, but still quite affordable to shoot. Roll film backs are relatively slow to operate, just like view camera work in general, so should alleviate the temptation people get with digital cameras to go around machine-gunning. I love the results I get with 6X9 frames in terms of a good compromise between reasonably high detail and portability. But I do all my printing optically with enlargers, never via scanning.

[Daniel Unkefer]

SONY DSC by Nokton48, on Flickr

Plaubel Peco Junior with 100mm f5.6 Symmar and Makina Pop Up Hood. Numerous 120 6.5x9cm Makina Roll Backs, and a few 6.5x9cm Makina Film/Plate Holders. And the Magnifying Hood. Lenses offered with the camera in the catalog I have. Top left 47mm F8 Super Angulon Compur, 65mm F6.8 Angulon Compur, 135mm F5.6 Symmar Compur, 150mm F9 Apo Ronar Compur, 150mm F5.6 Symmar Compur, 135mm F3.8 Xenar Compur, 180mm F5.6 Symmar Compur, and 210mm F5.6 Symmar Compur. All boards light trapped final step coming up is painting the rear lensboards with flat black Krylon applied with brush. Camera body fully light trapped and ready for test rolls and plates. All of this fits into one of my olde Domke F2 Press bags. It's kinda heavy, if I thin out the lenses to three or four fave ones, then I'm golden. With a Leitz Tiltall tripod over my other shoulder I can carry this around for a while without straining my back.

From my decades my experience with B&W, single coated lenses are usually AOK in every way. Use a good hood, and sometimes using coated and noncoated lenses, you will get flare with both, both disappoint with flare. So, to me a lot of it is simply marketing hokum. All of the lenses were relatively cheap, $75-$300 each at very most. Which is why I have nearly a hundred retro classic LF lenses in my collection. Some as cheap as $25

This stuff goes in my second Zone VI Small Monorail Bag. Seller on Ebay described it as "Marshmallow Bag" LOL. My first one has dropped into a few freshwater streams here and there. Stuff stayed dry

[Daniel Unkefer]

4x5 Sinar Norma Soft Bag by Nokton48, on Flickr

I have road tested this large Zone VI Monorail Bag, with my 4x5" Sinar Norma plus as much of whatever else that would fit into it, sometimes commercial architectural assignments, often day long landscape trips around Ohio. At least ten years, maybe fifteen years of very hard use. Never did any damage to Norma #1. I did add a Domke Post Office Shoulder Strap which helps a lot.
Actually I am getting this out to fill it up, and start using it again, after 25 years hiatus.

[Chuck Pere]

I use the Zone VI field camera bags for my large and medium format camera systems. I prefer the latest larger bag style. Mostly use a now unavailable Tamrac shoulder harness to carry the bag on my back. Or I'll strap them to a backpack frame. With the harness I can hang the bag off my tripod and work out of it. I do like the white color because if you do set it on the ground it's easier to see if anything is crawling on it.