Easiest way into large format

Tom Pinchenzo

Tom Pinchenzo

Messages
1,024
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
I’m in the early stages of thinking about large format. Maybe I need to get it out of my system! I’d be interested to hear people’s views on the best route would be? What systems would you recommend looking into? Initial thoughts are a used intrepid 4x5. Or would you recommend something other than a field camera? Press camera? I’d like to use it for portraits and landscapes. Any thoughts greatly appreciated!
 
Do you develop your own? I always wondered how you sent sheet film off for development... Not sure if that needs any extra bits. But if you self dev, you also need all those bits too.
 
"Best" is highly subjective in the large format field. There is a very wide range of weights, with the Intrepid as a clear winner. Different cameras handle differently, and different people will prefer different things.

Field cameras are portable, press cameras may be heavy (or heavier, anyway), and monorails are cumbersome outside the studio.

Bellows extension is a factor, as most LF lenses are not telephoto design. This means that if the focal length is Xmm, then you need to rack the bellows to Xmm just to focus on infinity, more to get closer. The Intrepid and many other inexpensive cameras may limit you if you want a lens longer than 300-350mm. Cameras like the Canham DLC are "triple extension" meaning the bellows have a length 3x that of the standard focal length for the format which for 5x4 is 150mm.

You'll have to factor in processing and negative storage as extra requirements.

As a fairly general rule, the first LF camera you buy won't be the last.

One very memorable piece of advice from "The Dumpy Pocket Book for Photographers" by Denys Davies ran:

"If you're setting out to buy the perfect camera, save your shoeleather. There's no such thing. Instead, get the cheapest camera you can, and use it for a year. Then you will know what you really need".
 
Last edited:
All posts above made while I was tapping. One other suggestion is to see if anyone could loan you one to see if it's for you.
 
StephenM said:
"If you're setting out to buy the perfect camera, save your shoeleather. There's no such thing. Instead, get the cheapest camera you can, and use it for a year. Then you will know what you really need".
Click to expand...

Applies to digital as much as film. V. Good advice.
 
Harlequin565 said:
Applies to digital as much as film. V. Good advice.
Click to expand...

The dust jacket (or perhaps just inside) made the bold claim that all you really need to know about photography was contained therein. Nearly 60 years after first reading it, I still think the claim correct. 5/- well spent.
 
I bought my first large format from Chroma last year. I opted for the more portable Snapshot and really like it. I use a wide angle 75mm lens so can use hyperfocal focusing. I’ e bought a direct viewfinder for framing so don’t need to use the ground glass and a dark cloth. The best thing was it was a good way to try out the format knowing that the lens and film holders could be used on any other 4x5 camera, with a standard back; only an additional lens board would be needed. I’ve since added a Chroma field camera to the collection. Just watch film prices. Fompan 100 is a good value starter film, especially if you process your own.09F65EBC-0436-495A-A765-E4A5AA091522.jpeg
 
sirch said:
This just popped up in my tubes and you should probably watch it as a health warning first
Click to expand...

Jason does make me chuckle. One of the few less-fake YouTubers out there (IMO of course) and long may it continue.
 
Also, 8x10 seems a step too far! Who looks at a 4x5 negative and thinks 'I want more detail!'
 
Fyldephoto said:
I bought my first large format from Chroma last year. I opted for the more portable Snapshot and really like it. I use a wide angle 75mm lens so can use hyperfocal focusing. I’ e bought a direct viewfinder for framing so don’t need to use the ground glass and a dark cloth. The best thing was it was a good way to try out the format knowing that the lens and film holders could be used on any other 4x5 camera, with a standard back; only an additional lens board would be needed. I’ve since added a Chroma field camera to the collection. Just watch film prices. Fompan 100 is a good value starter film, especially if you process your own.View attachment 310995
Click to expand...
sirch said:
I think "system" is over-egging it a bit, self assembly bag of bits is probably a bit closer to the mark, lens, shutter, lens board, body, ground glass, dark slides. You could get a Chroma from

@stevelmx5 -
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/chroma-lasercut-acrylic-4x5-field-camera.636352/page-51
but as a toe-in-the-water option it might be worth looking for a complete set-up with lens and dark slides on ebay.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the recommendations, much appreciated.

With regards to trying out large format, it's definitely step up on medium format, mainly in the slower approach, but the SnapShot is a good step into the format as it's less intimidating than a field/monorail camera. I took mine out at lunchtime the other day to test out a LomoGraflok unit, and it was great having a walkaround option. If I can help with any questions. let me know. Cheers
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
Also, 8x10 seems a step too far! Who looks at a 4x5 negative and thinks 'I want more detail!'
Click to expand...

I think that there's more to it than that though (but having 5x7 and 10x8 cameras, i would, wouldn't I?). On the most superficial level, you just don't get bigger dust on 10x8 than you get on 5x4.

Off the top of my head, I'd recommend looking at "The Film Developing Cookbook" which I think is where one of the best expositions can be found of why bigger is better.
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
Also, 8x10 seems a step too far! Who looks at a 4x5 negative and thinks 'I want more detail!'
Click to expand...
Very, very few people do it because they want to blow something up to billboard size, I suspect Kennedy had it when he said "we do these things not because they are easy but because they are hard" :)
 
It’s not the easiest way into LF that I would advise you to think about , perhaps consider the easiest way to get yourself out of it before you start:exit: :LOL::LOL:
 
sirch said:
Very, very few people do it because they want to blow something up to billboard size, I suspect Kennedy had it when he said "we do these things not because they are easy but because they are hard" :)
Click to expand...
Or George Mallory on why he wanted to climb mt Everest: “because it’s there”
 
I've just done this, looked for a cheap and easy (easy???) option and went for the intrepid 5x4 bought new. As a warning, buying the camera, lens, darkslides, all the stuff to get you shooting is only about half the expense, you then need the processing kit and chemicals, and a way to get your image onto the PC (assuming you're not wet printing?). My initial budget was £1k, so far my spend is £760 with just a scanner to buy, so assuming I go far the faffing option, I'm pretty much on budget. If I go for a scanner capable of 5x4 in 1 shot, that's £750 on its own.

Having spent that, it would be nice to be able to go outside and use it :/
 
sirch said:
Very, very few people do it because they want to blow something up to billboard size, I suspect Kennedy had it when he said "we do these things not because they are easy but because they are hard" :)
Click to expand...
“We don’t do these things because they are easy but because they are expensive” applied to the space programme as much as it does with analogue photography :p
 
flook999 said:
I've just done this, looked for a cheap and easy (easy???) option and went for the intrepid 5x4 bought new. As a warning, buying the camera, lens, darkslides, all the stuff to get you shooting is only about half the expense, you then need the processing kit and chemicals, and a way to get your image onto the PC (assuming you're not wet printing?). My initial budget was £1k, so far my spend is £760 with just a scanner to buy, so assuming I go far the faffing option, I'm pretty much on budget. If I go for a scanner capable of 5x4 in 1 shot, that's £750 on its own.

Having spent that, it would be nice to be able to go outside and use it :/
Click to expand...

The scanning aspect is what dissuades me mostly at present. I'd like to get a 5x4 camera at some point as I really like the images that large format can produce, but until I can scan the images easily (and can afford to!) I'm probably going to have to wait, although I know I can part-scan and then stich on my V550 if push comes to shove. Another part of me says I should really try and make the most of the cameras I already have - some of which don't get much use. I'm not sure introducing another system will help with that... :)
 
We all know the advantages of 5X4 esp for cropping but AFAIK no one has shown a comparison for the same shot comparing the results from a 6X7, 6X6 or even 6X4.5 for say an A4\A3 print. OK obviously the quality of a 5X4 print would be better but is it enough to switch from MF cameras.
 
I think the best route would be 4x5. I had a likewise "thought" about large format, but it wasn't just the cameras. It's the developing and scanning as others have mentioned. I wasn't entirely sure why I wanted 4x5 but when it came down to it, it was about detail. And I get plenty of detail in my 6x7. One thing I did do though was get a 6x17 camera. Not quite sure what people "classify" this as, but as it takes 120 film, the dev & scan is much easier. The V550 will take 6x17 on the glass and produces some amazing negatives. With a roll paper feed printer, I can take advantage of big prints too.
 
FishyFish said:
The scanning aspect is what dissuades me mostly at present. I'd like to get a 5x4 camera at some point as I really like the images that large format can produce, but until I can scan the images easily (and can afford to!) I'm probably going to have to wait, although I know I can part-scan and then stich on my V550 if push comes to shove. Another part of me says I should really try and make the most of the cameras I already have - some of which don't get much use. I'm not sure introducing another system will help with that... :)
Click to expand...
Hmm, yeah, the scanning issue/cost is one I hadn't thought of...
 
Unless you're going all out large format, the cost of a 4x5 flatbed scanner is, as far as I'm concerned, not reconcilable. I did try, I work for myself via a ltd co, so the scanner would be an expense, which straight away saves 40% in real terms, but even then you're talking close to £500. A v600 and stick comes in at well under half that, so has to be the way to go. You do then introduce a level of faff, but in truth, thats what LF photography is.

I went into this eyes open, I've had a bit of a laugh on here about what I've let myself in for after not shooting film for 20 years, but even now I'm not sure this decisionwould have beenmade without the influence of the stir crazy mindset caused by lockdown.

On the plus side, if it turns out not to be for me, I'll have scratched the itch and will recover most of my expenses via fleabay
 
The thing I really wanted from 4x5 which hasn't been mentioned yet, apart from the challenge and the double-takes of passers by*, was/is the movements. Obviously there are tilt/shift lenses but the view camera just seemed so much more versatile and I am also not convinced tilt/shift would be easy to get right on small formats.


*sometimes its nice when someone comes for a chat about the "Victorian" camera but you do need to leave your self-consciousness at home :)
 
LF is not like any other type of film photography.

Neg size and detail are but a very small part of the format that differs from roll film.

The whole experience from how one chooses a subject through to the development of each individual sheet of film cannot be compared to smaller formats.

LF sits in a niche on its own and contrary to many beliefs, is not in anyway the elite way to capture film photographs , indeed it has many drawbacks..... it is simply a different way!

Anyone who thinks that it’s little more than ´going larger’ are likely to find difficulties and frustration in adjusting to the necessary practices involved when shooting LF

Patience and slowness being obligatory attributes before even opening the camera from its folded state!
 
Last edited:
..and anyone thinking of film cameras and formats is what do you want to shoot e.g. surely there can't be a better type camera than a LF for buildings for all the corrections it can do.
 
And back we are with "there's no such thing as the perfect camera". Perhaps modified to end with "for everything". I've found a motorised half frame camera (Canon Dial) perfect for some things, and that's a bit of a far cry from large format.

As Brian said, what you want to photograph determines what camera you should use, all other things being equal.
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
Hmm, yeah, the scanning issue/cost is one I hadn't thought of...
Click to expand...
Use a digital camera. I scan all my negatives from with a Sony a6000 and a 30mm macro lens. It is far better than a a flatbed. I had a Epson v550 and the 35mm scans were pretty poor, with the macro lens they approach what I’ve got from 645 negatives. Plus if you want to get a huge scan you can get in close and take multiple photos and stitch it together for a huge “scan”
 
Ben johns said:
Use a digital camera. I scan all my negatives from with a Sony a6000 and a 30mm macro lens. It is far better than a a flatbed. I had a Epson v550 and the 35mm scans were pretty poor, with the macro lens they approach what I’ve got from 645 negatives. Plus if you want to get a huge scan you can get in close and take multiple photos and stitch it together for a huge “scan”
Click to expand...
interesting....
 
StephenM said:
And back we are with "there's no such thing as the perfect camera". Perhaps modified to end with "for everything". I've found a motorised half frame camera (Canon Dial) perfect for some things, and that's a bit of a far cry from large format.

As Brian said, what you want to photograph determines what camera you should use, all other things being equal.
Click to expand...
Are there any LF cameras that have roll film backs, like 6x9? That would give the flexibility of a technical camera but with 120?
 
I own an Epson 3200 Perfection scanner that will do a single 4x5 negative. Cost me £25. In reality it might achieve 1600dpi but for most of the negatives I scan (35mm and 6x6 medium format) that is sufficient. Anything outstanding gets sent to a lab with a super duper scanner.

Anyway, doesn't help in your camera search but might give you a scanning option for the future.
 
Ben johns said:
Use a digital camera. I scan all my negatives from with a Sony a6000 and a 30mm macro lens. It is far better than a a flatbed. I had a Epson v550 and the 35mm scans were pretty poor, with the macro lens they approach what I’ve got from 645 negatives. Plus if you want to get a huge scan you can get in close and take multiple photos and stitch it together for a huge “scan”
Click to expand...
It's OK scanning 35mm with a 20MP sensor but scanning 4x5 with even a 40MP sensor is throwing away a lot of resolution. I scan my 4x5 with a v550 and the results are good enough, the resultant tiffs are about 100Mb

Tom Pinchenzo said:
Are there any LF cameras that have roll film backs, like 6x9? That would give the flexibility of a technical camera but with 120?
Click to expand...
As I said above, its not a camera it's a bag of bits, so yes there are 6x9 roll film backs, you just need one that fits the box that you buy and as most cameras use the Graflok standard back I guess any Graflok roll film back would do. I have two, they are a royal pain in the arse to use.

ETA - one of the advantages of sheet film is that you can shoot and develop one or two or three frames, without having to finish a roll. If I shoot 4 frames on a day out with LF that's gunning it.
 
Last edited:
Tom Pinchenzo said:
Are there any LF cameras that have roll film backs, like 6x9? That would give the flexibility of a technical camera but with 120?
Click to expand...
If the rear standard is Graflock then there are several roll film backs that will mount so in answer to your question......Yes.

Of course this means that you are forced to developall the exposures the same way which for me takes away one of the advantages of using individual sheets for each exposure.
I suspect the smaller size ( 6x9) will also restrict the amount and effectiveness of the movements available with a field caméra
 
Asha said:
I suspect the smaller size ( 6x9) will also restrict the amount and effectiveness of the movements available with a field caméra
Click to expand...
Hmm ... I think you could get more movement because you can allow vignetting inside the 4x5 frame as long as it is outside the 6x9?
 
sirch said:
It's OK scanning 35mm with a 20MP sensor but scanning 4x5 with even a 40MP sensor is throwing away a lot of resolution. I scan my 4x5 with a v550 and the results are good enough, the resultant tiffs are about 100Mb


As I said above, its not a camera it's a bag of bits, so yes there are 6x9 roll film backs, you just need one that fits the box that you buy and as most cameras use the Graflok standard back I guess any Graflok roll film back would do. I have two, they are a royal pain in the arse to use.

ETA - one of the advantages of sheet film is that you can shoot and develop one or two or three frames, without having to finish a roll. If I shoot 4 frames on a day out with LF that's gunning it.
Click to expand...
Do you really think that the v550 will out perform a camera? When I’ve compared the same negative scanned with the v550 to my camera the difference is night and day. I’m not sure that using a digital camera on a 4x5 would be throwing away a load of resolution compared to a v550, I would say using a v550 would be the lesser of the 2, it’s why I sold mine. It’s quicker for sure though. As I said it’s very easy to take multiple photos and stitch them together, I’ve done it with a 6x6 negative and the resolution was very high
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top