I would like to address the movements issue. When I shoot 4x5, I use wide lenses and lots of movements. I am good at it and have found it pretty much impossible to really duplicate that with single shot digital and a ts lens because I cannot see well enough to set up the shot. What drove me to digital was that no amount of zone processing and other manipulations could capture the dynamic range posed by an church interior with stained glass windows. With an indexed pano-head, I can fairly quickly shoot a 6x6 matrix of shots, with three bracketed exposure at each point. I use an old Nikon 55mm Micro lens, which is about as distortion free and sharp as it gets. When I am done, I have an image with 20k x 20k or better good pixels and with enough dynamic range to balance the stained glass with the interior. If I remember to shoot a Color Checker as well, I can balance the color quite accurately. I do not need movements because I have so many extra pixels that I can fix the distortions and still have plenty left. Plus there is nothing magic about shift - you still get a distorted point of view. I always to try to get in the choir loft so I shoot dead on with ether film or digital.
This does not work if things are moving, but then neither does LF in a dim church at f32 or f45. I am also weighting the pleasure of film against the results. I got into 4x5 because of the quality, and the quality is still there for things that move when there is enough light to capture them with one shot but it has to be one shot. Outdoor shots with wind blown clouds or people, for example.
So, for this use, LF cannot compete with even pretty low end digital - 24MP is more than enough on the sensor, and it also does not need huge dynamic range. Just careful work on a tripod and on the computer when you are done. Even if i was stitching 4x5 - which I have done - trying to shoot bracketed exposures with film and stack them digitally is a nightmare.
What I am trying to work out for myself is whether it more trouble than joy to keep using 4x5 in the places where it is better than digital? Is the hassle keeping me from shooting when I would have with digital? As several have pointed out, does asking the question imply the answer? Is it just that LF gear is so much more satisfying than digital gear? The feel of leather bellows on a wooden camera sure beats slightly sticky rubber on a DSLR.
Bookmarks