Tachihara 8x10 and what lens for architecture?

[kamchow]

frank & jason - post #8 was posted as i composed #9. hence i didn't see it in time. will take note of what jason wrote. thanks.

[Greg Blank]

Unless you plan on being 1/4 mile away or more from the building a 300mm is not a good choice -IMOP- its considered a normal focal length on par with a 50mm on 35mm cameras. The Tachihara would not be my choice for any architectural work. I have one "8x10" and the movements limit what can be done. I ground off the stop that limits the tilt of the front standard so I can shoot deeper DOF Landscapes . You will need a bag bellows, Tachiharas at least the one I have have a glued on non changable bellows. I have a 240mm lens for the 8x10 and its not wide enough for what you intend...IMOP. I think maybe a 165mm could be wide enough but that is the limit of bellows compression with the Tach. My 4x5 Gandolfi on the other hand has as much or more movement as any mono rail camera. For Architectural almost nothing beats a mono rail camera.

[sanchi heuser]

Just imagine a triangle:
bottom horizontal line is the ground (or a line parellel to the ground),
a vertical line in a right angle to the horizontal is your building
and an angular line is connecting the ends of hor. and vert. line.

Now imagine your lens is on the horizontal line opposite to the vertical and it's adjusted vertical.

Every lens has an angle of coverage, e.g. a Nikon-W 300 has 80° at f 22,
see this chart: http://www.largeformatphotography.in.../LF8x10in.html
Now take the half of it, 40° and you have the angle between the
angular and horizontal line.
The right angle is of course 90°, and the third angle (between angular and
vertical is then 50°
Calculation: 180° - 40° - 90° = 50°
(In every triangle the angles sum up to 180°)

Now you can calculate the distance from the building with
a given height (point on vertical line)
to your lens (point on horizontal line)
with any given angle of coverage.

Let's say the height of the building is 60 meter,
just draw a point on the vertical exactly 120 millimeter from the bottom
(2mm = 1 meter in reality)
Then take an angle meter and mark an angle of 50°.
Draw a line in that angle from the top of the building down to the horizontal.
Where that line crosses the horizontal, there' s your approximately distance point to the building ( 2 millimeter = 1 meter in reality).
Voila!


Another thing what I wanted to say is, that wide angle lenses for 8x10" are not cheap, and you might consider, as others said before, to go 4x5.
You have the advantage to get use of lenses with e.g. 115° angle
(Schneider Super-Angulon XL 72mm though also not cheap ).
A greater range of focal lengths and better availibilty of used lenses on the market
and of course cheaper prices especially for wide angle lenses.
Enlargements from 4x5 are fine and if you have a good drum scan, which you can get for a reasonable price today, you can get quite large prints if you want.
For alternative prints one can get superb digital negatives.

Well, if you decide that you definitely wants to go 8x10, which is really
a great thing to work with, you need lot of money and patience to get the suitable
wide angle lenses - and I think you need wide angle lenses for architecture
in many situations.

Andi

[kamchow]

andi/sanchi - when you're right, you're right!

i think my heart (b*lls) ruled my head earlier.

well to be honest, in the last few hours, i looked at costs of the (very) wide lenses, cost of printing etc for a 8x10 system - and long-story-short - nope, i just cannot justify it.

so, 4x5 it is.

oh, and thanks for the maths lesson professor!

looks like a calumet 4x5 is as good a place to start as any.
and something in the 65mm to 75mm lens range.

thanks to everyone for "kicking my head in" !

[Michael Jones]

The 190 WF Ektar is what I used for most 8x10 exterior shots. Lost of view and movements that did not require a bag bellows. It's the functional equivalent a 90mm on 4x5. For interiors, you may want to go wider, say a 165 super angulon, but you will likely want bag bellows for movements.

BTW, I'm selling a 190 WF Ektar on a sinar board that would bolt right in...

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=79120


Please feel free to ask to Moderators to delete if you think is this inappropriate.


Good luck.

Mike

[sanchi heuser]

Oh no I'm no professor, only a simple trucker without any education

[kamchow]

m. jones - unfortunately i'm continents away. and shipping costs are high. plus insurance. sorry.

[ic-racer]

I'd suggest a 300mm if you have never shot 8x10. After a couple boxes of film you will have your own idea as to what works and what does not.

You will either 1) be satisfied with the Tachihara and that lens or
2) Sell them both to get a monrail and Super Angulon 210

[Andrew Plume]

andi/sanchi - when you're right, you're right!

i think my heart (b*lls) ruled my head earlier.

well to be honest, in the last few hours, i looked at costs of the (very) wide lenses, cost of printing etc for a 8x10 system - and long-story-short - nope, i just cannot justify it.

so, 4x5 it is.

oh, and thanks for the maths lesson professor!

looks like a calumet 4x5 is as good a place to start as any.
and something in the 65mm to 75mm lens range.

thanks to everyone for "kicking my head in" !

to me, you've made the right decision here - I have a 10x8 Tachi and as far as I'm concerned, it certainly couldn't be classified as an 'architectural camera', landscapes and portraits and general work yes but not architectural

anyhow best of luck

regards

andrew

[Brian Ellis]

I used a Tachihara 4x5 for architectural work and found it more than adequate. The 8x10 Tachiharas have movements very similar to those of a Deardorff and Deardorffs were the camera of choice for professional architectural photographers for decades. So you've made a fine choice of cameras IMHO. But I can't answer your question because there are too many variables (distance from the building being the main one).