Why not 8x10?

[genotypewriter]

Other than weight, size of the camera, and cost of film, are there any good reasons to shoot 4x5 over 8x10?

Astia

Do you need a beard to shoot 8x10?

Nope... having reached puberty should be adequate!

[ImSoNegative]

If you watch the sales section, you will note that the larger the formal, the more likely the ad will say hardly used or unused. If you start with 8x10, you will find it harder to shoot the 2-300 sheets of film necessary to develop some competence.

good point

[John NYC]

Why not get a 4x5 for the times you want travel convenience, color film availability, optical enlarging ease, fantastic lens selection across all focal ranges, etc. And then also get an 11x14 and use it only for B&W contact prints.

[joselsgil]

Still trying to get the stones up to make the jump to LF from digital. Other than weight, size of the camera, and cost of film, are there any good reasons to shoot 4x5 over 8x10? Does it matter if I never plan to print bigger than 20x30 (and generally much smaller)? Do you need a beard to shoot 8x10?

My apologies if this is a worn out question, my search of the forum didn't turn up anything. Thanks in advance!!

If you plan on making 20x30 enlargements, you will need an 8x10 enlarger should you go with the 8x10 camera. Or you can have a commercial lab make the prints for you. With a 4x5 camera, you can find 4x5 enlarger for a few bucks.

If you go with an 8x10 camera, you can make some really nice contact prints and you don't even need an enlarger to do that.

One disadvantage of 8x10 over 4x5 is the cost of film holders.
Film cost can be offset with the 8x10 format by using X-Ray film. 100 sheets will run you around $40 bucks. 4X5 format has an advantage if you plan on using color film as there is a larger variety of films and processing the film is easier and less costly than 8x10.

You do not need a beard, but it helps as people will then take your work much more seriously. It gives you the homeless, tortured artist look. An eye patch can be worn, but that is just optional.

[pasiasty]

Other than weight, size of the camera, and cost of film

But this matters. Even if money aren't an issue, weight and size determine possible usage - e.g. I can't imagine hand-held 8x10 while all that Graflex-like cameras are almost pocket size. Another question is development - you can put 4x5 into simple Jobo tank, bigger formats require a drum or trays.

Re beard - what about 5x7? I've just started with this, but I'm shaved, so I'm afraid if it's right...

[Former Member 27732]

If using a 4x5 view camera forces you to slow down and think about what you're doing, the 8x10 format does so to an even greater degree.

Spot on.
I thought going from 4x5 to 8x10 would be a natural progression, but found the 4x5 felt more like a point & shoot after using the 8x10. Not that I'm complaining. The big camera really does force you to think more before making the decision to use it. If you are starting in LF, go with 4x5 first - options are so much greater. And if 4x5 doesn't work for you, I doubt 8x10 will.

/Frank

[Brian Ellis]

No reason not to but things to consider in addition to those you mentioned:

Film choices

Availability of film in the future (with many more 4x5 users than 8x10, 4x5 will probably be around longer and with more choices than 8x10)

Finding a lab that can process 8x10 and cost of having it processed if you don't do it yourself (I've never used a lab but I assume they charge more for 8x10 than 4x5)

All other things except focal length being equal, less depth of field with 8x10 lenses.

Possible difficulty of using long lenses (how long are your arms?)

Not possible to carry as many 8x10 film holders as 4x5 (at least it wasn't for me with my f/64 backpack, the most 8x10 holders I could carry was 4, I could carry as many as about 20 4x5s in the same backpack). This is obviously irrelevant if you work only in a studio.

Some scanners that will do 4x5 won't do 8x10 and if you work in a darkroom you'll obviously need an 8x10 enlarger. It and ancillary equipment (e.g. trays) take up more space than 4x5.

These are off the top of my head, there may be others. These aren't reasons not to use 8x10, just things to consider. I used both 4x5 and 8x10 but I enjoyed 8x10 more than 4x5. After using 8x10 a 4x5 camera seemed like what it used to be called in the old days, a miniature camera.

If you think you'd prefer 8x10 after considering all the downsides that are relevant to you, I don't see any reason to start with 4x5, just go ahead and try 8x10. If you buy used you probably can sell the gear if you don't like it about as easily as you can sell 4x5 though the market will be smaller.

[John Kasaian]

Which format do you really want to shoot?
Thats the one you should be shooting.

[Steve Barber]

Still trying to get the stones up to make the jump to LF from digital. Other than weight, size of the camera, and cost of film, are there any good reasons to shoot 4x5 over 8x10? Does it matter if I never plan to print bigger than 20x30 (and generally much smaller)? Do you need a beard to shoot 8x10?

My apologies if this is a worn out question, my search of the forum didn't turn up anything. Thanks in advance!!

As to 8x10, if it were not for the weight, size of the camera and the cost of the film, I would have nothing else.

Well, that is not quite true. It ignores the fact that I do not have an enlarger for 8x10 and my little darkroom, while fine for 4x5 and smaller, is never going to have the capability to enlarge an 8x10 negative. And, of course, while mentioning the size of the camera, it makes no mention nor gives any recognition of the added weight and bulk of the lenses, film holders, tripod and tripod head that will also be required.

To paraphrase the 1st rule of gun fighting, as promulgated by Uncle Sam's Misguided Children, if you would take a picture; first, have a camera.

As with everything else, there is a trade-off here. If you had a 4x5 kit that met your needs, figure on 3 to 4 times the weight and bulk for an 8x10 with similar capabilities. That is a massive increase in logistical difficulties and guarantees that, when you need your 8x10, you will, probably, not have it with you.

Start with a 4x5, you will find it much more useful. Later, if you find you have to have it, you can add an 8x10 for whatever it is that you think it will do that none of your other cameras can.

[Steve Barber]

I forgot, 20x30 what? Inches? A 4x5 with good lenses is perfectly capable of prints that size if you have an enlarger and comparable lenses that are up to the job.