Originally Posted by
Bernice Loui
With all this debate over 4x5 -vs- 8x10 again, why not 5x7?
8x10 has significantly limited choices in optics, significantly increased cost, challenges with camera movement during exposure, increased film cost, physically larger-heavier than smaller formats, challenges with depth of focus and more.
As for optics, the Fuji A240 appears to be the choice by many, yet IMO having owned and used both Fuji A240mm & A180mm, both did not impress me image quality wise. Do consider the host of vintage optics (Cooke, Kodak, Goerz and others) that are available and have a long history with being used on 8x10 and other formats. Really Good wide angle 8x10 optics will be modern-large-expensive like Schneider's XL series.
Really "big" prints, how big is really big? Projected Cinema once came from 35mm film projected on to very sizable screens.
View camera has a learning curve, larger the camera makes this learning curve more difficult. Be prepared to burn a significant amount of sheet film before being comfy with the entire process of using any view camera. It is completely different than using a modern digital imaging camera in many ways.
IMO, 8x10 (and larger) is best and idea for contact prints.
As for digital... Recent experience with Canon digital has been interesting yet, in ways bland and binary-contrived. It appears modern optics + digital camera system appears to be engineered-manipulated for producing images that are high contrast, overly sharpened, look good in a display and such. It has crowd appeal, yet IMO lacking in feel, depth and image complexity content. Digital is instant-easy, yet the image they produce still come up lacking in many ways.
Bernice
Bookmarks