What large format camera has quickest operation?

Keith,

 

it's true that when using an RB Graflex SLR one must still change film from one sheet to the next, and the subject might move in the process, BUT, unlike a view/field camera, the film holder does not obstruct viewing/focusing, and one can look through the lens at the subject, while adjusting focus at the moment of exposure, so it matters little how much the subject moves while one is advancing film. Using an SLR is nothing like using a view/field camera. A view/field camera cannot be used hand held, and there is an unavoidable delay between focusing and exposure. I use and love my Deardorff V8, but it is a completely different animal from my Graflex, which operates much more like a MF SLR than a LF view/field camera. A view/field camera simply does not address the OP's stated concerns regarding the delay between focus and exposure, no matter how quickly it might be operated.

"It has a self-cocking shutter, automatically closes the shutter for you, and you can set the f stop from behind the camera."

 

You could also use the Prontor Professional shutter system on almost any view camera. That not only is self-cocking but you can add

controllers that set aperture and shutter speed from behind the camera as well as open the shutter to open aperture for focusing, to

stopped down aperture for DOF preview and fully closed for shooting at taking aperture. If your camera has an auto back it would

automatically close the shutter to taking aperture when the holder is inserted.

 

Wista also makes a dedicated system that will do most of this with their cameras using Wista versions of the Copal Press shutter. But

this shutter can not be set from behind the camera.

 

These systems make any view camera "fast" once the camera is set up and the movements are made. No view camera is faster then

any other, with the same type of movements, when it comes to composing the actual scene. Some cameras may have one or two extra

steps required though to compose a specific scene. Cameras with large amounts of direct displacement will be faster to use then those

that must use indirect displacements to do the same job. But a camera with large amounts of direct displacements require lenses with

lots of coverage in order to use the camera that way.

I'm happy with mine; Toyo Omega 45D :)

Sometimes it's good to be happy with what's in hand...

Mark, the short answer: If you're gonna shoot large format, drop the word "quick" from your vocabulary...you might get off one fairly fast shot from a 4x5 rangefinder-equipped press camera hand-held and already loaded with a sheet film holder with the dark slide in your back pocket and the lens pre-set, but that one shot's the end of "quick".

It isn't as hard as it seems once you get used to it. With experience you can get off a shot within a few seconds of seeing it on the glass, with a normal 8x10 or 4x5. If that is not fast enough for you consider a Linhof Master Technika which is rangefinder focusable and hand holdable. You can get a shot with that as fast as with a 120 camera, but it does take experience.

LF Photography is slow and always will be slow. Its about making pictures, not taking pictures. If you dont want to make pictures, stick to a point and shoot.

Mark, I am not really a large format guy, though I might become (the wife willing and so on). Any way have a look at the Razzle (http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/index.html) custom built 4x5 from Australia I think. I met a guy (no shit), who swears by them, especially for their fast handling.

 

/M

John,

 

Spoken like a typical landscape photographer. The notion that LF is necessarily slow paced and contemplative is utter nonsense. LF is about what we make it about. For some it's about slowing down and studying the composition on the gg, using movements to control perspective and the plane of focus, contact printing, and the list goes on. For others, LF is about making large format negatives from which to print. An RB Graflex SLR is every bit as much a LF camera as a monorail, field or press camera of the same format, and designed specifically to address the relative weaknesses of those other types of cameras for people who work in a different way than those who would choose them. If you can't understand why one would want the ability to work quickly and freely to capture fleeting expressions and gestures AND make large negatives, take another look at your portraits. Maybe you could use a good point and shoot.

If someone thinks that large format has to be slow then they should look at sports photography as well as news

photography from the 1950s and earlier.

large format photography is as slow as you want to make it.

Absolutely read the <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00PtZU">news article linked in this

photo.net thread</a>.

<p>

We have gotten soft - and weak.

<p>

On the other hand more than a few of his subjects were still lives:-)

If you are accustomed to the speed of smaller formats, then anything in large format will appear to be glacially slow. Sorry, but that's the way it is. Now if you're looking for a faster 4x5 format than the usual tripod mounted filed or monorail camera, there are alternatives in the form of old press cameras. Burke and James made some, and we all know about the Graflex Speed and Crown Graphics. Provided the rangefinder works properly, and is calibrated for the lens you plan to use, you can fit a Grafmatic back to the thing and blast away 6 frames at a time.

Jay, that is exactly why I suggested an RB!

Good call, Keith.

Great cameras they are. I had a 3x4 that I used for a while and then sold due to lack of usability in color. I got a gorgeous 1954 Speed in a complete kit instead. I regret getting rid of the RB now, but I really only shot color at the time so I guess it made sense...and I do think that my Speed was a heck of a find in that condition and in that complete of a kit. In the coming months I hope to find a nice 4x5 series D.

 

Keith

Hi Keith.

 

My RB is a 3x4, and I love it, but I too am looking for a 4x5 for the availability of films in the format. I have a really nice Crown Graphic I should sell because I never use it. I'm a lot better at buying things than selling them. It's a problem.

Mark,

 

All of the above. I use a press camera, designed for easy hand held photography. With that I take advantage of the range finder focusing, it's quick and easy, and I use a sports finder to compose. To deal with film changes I use Grafmatic or Bagmatic film changers. Both are fast once you get used to them. I use self cocking lenses to eliminate the step of cocking the shutter. And last but not least, I use a chainpod, a piece of chain attached to the bottom of the camera that you step on and pull up on to steady the camera.

 

I can shoot a 25 sheet box of film fast enough to go bankrupt in an afternoon of photography.

Despite claims to the contrary, using a Graflex SLR is not speedy. The mirror must be returned after every shot. The shutter must be rewound after every shot. The aperture must be reset after each shot (even if it's a semi-auto diaphragm). The 3.25x4.25 model works well hand-held, but the 4x5 is better suited for a tripod. Only the last version (Super D) has a bright Ektalite lens with the GG, older models have very dim viewing, especially at actual taking apertures.

Bill,

 

compared to a view/field camera, a Graflex SLR is supersonic, and since I typically shoot fast portrait lenses at max. aperture, viewing is bright and there is no need to reset the aperture. I also disagree that the 4x5 is better suited to a tripod than shooting hand held. The 4x5 functions and handles just like the 3x4, it's just a little bigger, which is not a problem unless you suffer some physical handicap. Being free of a tripod and having the ability to focus and compose until the instant of exposure opens up possibilities unavailable to users of view/field cameras, and making twelve exposures in a minute is beyond "speedy" by comparison.

Jay, I'm with you and Keith. I spent much too much time setting up yesterday afternoon for a shot of one little flower with my 2x3 Speed, just did the same again today. Different flower today, though.

 

But and however, I much prefer to light my macro shots with electronic flash and that rules out Graflex SLRs. If nothing else, flash eliminates motion blur, and it was a little windy yesterday and today.

 

Now, if there were an auto-diaphragming version of, say, the Arca-Swiss SLR ...

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

 

Oh, yeah, I must really value the larger trannies. This weekend's shots would have been quick and easy with 35 mm gear.

Jerome,

 

Thanks for the compliment. I used to watermark but it was kind of irritating. You had to place the cursor over the image

to make the mark disappear and my web designer said if someone really wants to steal the image, the mark couldn't

prevent that so I dropped it.

 

Sorry for the sidebar.

 

I'm old enough to remember shooting with a 4x5 Speed Graphic for grab shots, and they were fun, but the monorail I use

now makes that usage impossible. Besides, I like slowing down.

 

cheers,

http://www.fotomancamera.com/product_list.asp?id=190

 

the ultimate in quick!

Gary makes a good point, practice practice practice, i can't remember now how long it took ansel adams to get his camera out

to capture moonrise over hernandez, but he was able to pull it off because he knew his equipment like the back of his hand.

<i>"If someone thinks that large format has to be slow then they should look at sports photography as well as

news photography from the 1950s and earlier."</i><br>

True, but on the other hand news photographers used a giant flash that made small apertures possible, so they

could rely on the depth of field. They also relied on the negative being big enough and the newspaper print

quality being low enough to make the image look acceptable to the readers.<br>

It was speedy, all right, but far from optimum. :-)

Hi Mark,

 

I currently own 6 view cameras and have spent half of a life time in the view camera market, and that's a long time. Of the monorail VC's the fastest is the original 4x5 Calumet (not the Cambo with a Calumet name). Because the bellows in not removable and the focus drives can be released with a squeeze the darned things will work faster than anything else and peices wont fall off if you push the wrong button. I still own a WF Calumet (architectural type which I invented) but I gave my last 16 inch CC400 away to a student who needed it.

 

Wooden flat bed VC's are faster than most of the monorails and the true field cameras (yes there is a difference but virtually none of the sellers or manufacturers know the difference). Press cameras such as Busch, Crown, and Speed graphics work well and fast, but have very little swing and tilt controls.

 

Lynn

If you are seeking to do very tight face shots, I'd stick with a RB67 or Hasselblad. If you want to do more environmental portraits, then a 4x5 or larger is going to work fine... especially if you use lighting because you'll gain a bit of depth of focus there. Consider Avedon's cowboy shots as perfect examples... those may have even been done with an 8x10. And Yosef Karsh managed to get in a few good shots with LF as well.

 

I don't agree that graphlex view finders need to be at all inaccurate... they can be adjusted to perfection. And the wire frame view finders can be pretty handy too.