which 4x5 system is best for macro photography?

Hello :)

 

I would like to get a 4x5 camera - macro capabilities are the most

important factor to me in deciding which camera to go with. But I

really don't know what the factors are and what is better for macro.

I have never used large format before and I don't know much about it,

so I am not sure what to look for or what factors to compare.

Most of my work would be done in the studio, so portability is not so

much of an issue ... I would just like to be able to get as close as

possible. :)

Preferably I would like to buy a used system, from eBay or the like,

because I am a student and don't have all that much money to spend :)

 

thank you

 

joanne~*

I think you are pretty much looking at a monorail system. Which one depends upon your budget, preferences etc.

 

I would suggest a camera with full movements (which most monorail cameras have), long extension and interchangeable bellows. When you are doing macro work, you really can use all the movements the camera has got (even rear rise and shift). You also want a long monorail or the ability to add on a longer rail or extension rail. Arca Swiss, Sinar, Toyo all make good cameras. Budget priced lines can be had from Calumet or old Kodaks. If you want to go really cheap, you can make your own with a kit from www.bender.com, although I think there are enough cheaper cameras that you don't NEED to go this route.

 

Look at http://www.largeformatphotography.info/listcameras.html to read some camera reviews. Lots of field cameras but also some monorails.

 

Cheers, DJ

I've used Sinar C, Arca-Swiss F-line and Canham DLC cameras

for close up work, which I'm defining as being in the range of 1:4

to 1:1 ratio (subject to size on film).<P>What are you

photographing? Geared movements, especially on the rear

standard make a huge difference in the world of photographing

small thing, so see if you can find a used Sinar C, P or X camera

or a Horseman LX camera. I'd recommend the Arca cameras as

well but it is very hard to find used Arca-Swiss F-line or Monolith

cameras as the owners tend to hang on to them.

Linhof Bi monorail system. They have been out of production for a few years and some will say that a lack of product support is a reason to not go there, but the camera is one of the most flexible and well engineered systems to ever be offered. Great deals can be had on them. Folks keep their Deardorfs up and running one way or another and the factory closed up shop a while back. Good Luck.

Macro in the lab, Leitz Aristophot or Nikon Multiphot or (really, no kidding) Polaroid MP-4. Macro in the studio/field, depends on a lot, the key thing is movable rear standard. Flatbed cameras that set magnification by moving the front standard are too limiting with short lenses, and that's what you'll need if you want to work much above 1:1.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

NONE! Except for people who really know what they're doing, and have a specific need, there is no place in today's world for Macro Photography with Large Format eqipment. Get real; learn with appropiate equipment then, if you still think you need to use it, you will be properly prepared. (Note: this is not intended as a flip answer to an innocent question. How else are you gonna learn?)

It wasn't intended as a flip answer, but it was nonetheless.

 

My response: monorail, definitely. Brand? Doesn't matter. Invest in a good lens.

Joanne, on matter what camera you select, make sure it has plenty of bellows extension. The ability to focus the rear standard is a must for macro work. That means a monorail type camera. Midwest Photo Exchange (mpex.com) has a used Toyo CX monorail, in the original box, for under $400. They can furnish a used Nikon 150W lens for under $400. Look up the phone number on their website and call Jim. Thurs. is his day off, but he will be in the store after 10AM on Friday and Sat. Toyo is a great system that you can expand when you are ready. You will also need lots of light for macro work. Ask Jim about it. He is knowledgeable and helpful.

What LF lenses are especially well suited for macro photography?

Macro photgraphy with LF can be a lot of fun, a real challenge and frustrating.

However, saying that there is no place for it in today's world is far from the

truth. There are some things that even a Nikkor 105 can't do.

 

Like most others, I believe that a momorail will offer a great deal of flexibility.

The Canham DLC that Ellis recommends is a fine camera and will do the job,

but as I indicated a monorail may be more flexible.

 

Good shooting.

Mike

Chris Hawkins, if I were to choose one lens to use, exclusively, for Macro photography, I would choose the Nikkor 120 f5.6 AM-ED Apo-Macro. It won't cover 4X5 at infinity, but it is specifically designed for extreme close-up work. There is a used one listed on the Midwest website for under $700. The Nikkor 150W f5.6 will work fine for close-ups at 1:1, and it can also be used as a normal lens. It covers 4X5 at infinity, with room to spare.

Perhaps I am mistaking Macro for Micro. What kind of Macro photography is LF suitable for?

To tackle macro with a 4x5 can be rewarding, but will more likely be frustrating. You will soon realize that your depth of field is very shallow. Unless your aim is to take benefit of this fact (like if you want to shoot a watch and have the needles in focus with everything else blurred), you will be better served by a medium format camera and a good macro lens. I tried shooting flowers with 4x5 and was unable to get the full flower from the edge of the petals to the bottom of the flower in focus, despite the help of Mr. Scheimpflug. Of course a daisy like flat flower would have been okay. For more or less two dimensional subjects, 4x5 would work though. But then you have to figure the exposure factor... My pentax 6x7 TTL metering is so easy to use and the slides delivered by the 135 macro are very sharp. If I want shallow DOF, I mount the 90 or 150/2.8 on extension ring and it's fantastic.

"I would just like to be able to get as close as possible. "

 

Do you mean like 3:1, or do you mean 1:1. And what are you

trying to photograph, and at what size reproduction?

 

Personally I feel that LF is not the medium to do any real

production work in the macro field. It might be a fun learning tool,

but once you want to take it somwhere, let's say outside for that

neat flower in the back yard, your immediately put into a even

bigger disadvantage. I think that if you were to go ask any pro

photographer working for a living to do a job for you, for let's say

an 8x10 print at 1:1 of a flower, and let's pretend that he had any

tool at his disposal, I don't think there would be one

photographer that would pull out a LF camera to do the job. Well

maybe one; And he''s probably a member here. (^:

 

I want to do macro as well and at last decided that the 6x7 format

was alot more practical, as my intended output was under

16x20. I just picked up a RB67 Pro-S for the job. Nice right side

up viewing; An extension bellows for focusing and sharp optics. I

also have a cut film back coming for it to do N+ or N- developing

with. I think that a RB67 is alot more practical for the job than a

LF camera; Well that is unless your enlarging to the size of a

wall!

 

Oh btw, don't be stupid and spend your money on somethiing

that you'll find out isn't quite right for you, and then be stuck. Rent,

I repeat, Rent an outfit and try it out first!!!

Bill, Paul and Wayne took the words out of my mouth. The best 4x5 for macrophotography is a smaller format!<p>Sorry, but most of the advantages of LF are completely lost in macro work. The depth-of-field is miniscule, and the screen is usually so dim that focusing the image is almost impossible, unless you fry the subject with light.<br>(At 1:1 your f/5.6 lens becomes f/11.)<br>OK, so lens tilt and swing can compensate for some of the shallow DOF, but then some MF systems have bellows that allow for lens movements too, giving you the best of both worlds.<p>If you really feel the need to own an LF camera, then for goodness sake get one that takes a rollfilm back, because I've got a feeling you'll end up using that facility a LOT.

The best (and cheapest) medium format camera for studio/still life

macro is a 4X5 monorail with a roll film back. Don't discount the

advantages of extreme movements for perspective as well as focus plane control. Add to that the ability to use any lens of your choice.

I would still recommend the 4X5 even if you only use the roll back.

You have the option of using either format with a less expensive and

more flexible setup than you could get with a medium format system

camera.

Bill Mitchell, jewelry photography for catalog and advertising is just one example of LF macro photography. I agree that a roll film back on a LF camera for color work is more practical, but a 4X5 color tranny close-up of a watch or piece of jewelry is spectacular. Also, the macro outdoor nature shots in Jack Dykinga's latest book are a joy to behold.

I'll assume by "macro" LF photography you mean from about 1:5 to 1:1, not some kind of work that's going to involve cine lenses or Zeiss Luminars.

<P>

This is the kind of stuff I found 4x5 most amenable to when I used it, before getting into 8x10. Even now, if my subject is bigger than a human I rarely work too hard on getting the right print: the smaller stuff just interests me more.

<P>

I also think it's easier/cheaper to get results with a 4x5 in closeup work than with MF cameras: I've never had to squint into a prism finder in 4x5, or buy an extension tube or a special-purpose lens to focus closer. I just rack out the bellows, aim a flashlight at my subject, wait for my eyes to adjust, and compose & focus at effective f/18. It's not as quick as a rollfilm camera, but it works fine.

<P>

If you're really on a budget, consider a used 400-series Calumet camera: the one with the extra long monorail, total length ~24", usable extension 20-21". They don't go for a lot of money and have few disadvantages for the kind of work you want to do. None of its limitations as a camera would affect the new LF user: it's prone to yaw, lacks rear rise/fall, and doesn't have interchangeable bellows, but since yaw-free cameras are expensive, the Calumet has all other movements, and the extension is sufficient, I think you'd be OK with it.

<P>

Match the camera up with a 150/9 G-Claron in shutter. They go cheap used and I've found my G-Claron to be pretty sharp, especially close-up. You'll need some extra light on your subject to focus sometimes, but you'll find that you need a lot of light for 4x5 macro anyway.

<P>

If you're not really so poor, buy/borrow the most recent edition of Stroebel's <i>View Camera Technique</i> and look through it to find a camera you'd like. It actually has a chapter comparing the specs of every camera being produced at the time of its publication.

<P>

<i>VCT</i> is useful anyway for providing visual examples of different effects you can achieve on purpose or by unhappy accident. The formulas are fun too.

I find it a bit difficult to get a ring or coin sized object to fill over 50% of my 4x5 screen. I like to have a foot or more working distance, using a Sim S 210 lens on the Sinar. I also have extended rails to 2 full bellows extention on the Sinar. The image was out of focus, so I took the extention off and got better focus but lost magnification. I was wondering if a differnt lens would do the trick. I have plenty lights. This I would like at least 50% of the screen without blurring out, nice DOF to show sharpness in front and back. Would an enlarging lens work better bkwards? I hope this question helps the original poster. Also how do you contact individual posters here?

I wish to add additional information about macro work using film base in any format. Use of Polaroid back to proof your work could save considerable funds if mistakes in exposure or focus is made. digitize your work (extra cost), for it permits you to use software for image stacking (Helicon Focus Pro). When Helicon Focus is used in combination with Photoshop the results can be most spectacular. The nice part about H.F you can make adjustments by either camera movement or at the lens. For accuracy camera movements is best.