Considering Buying a LF Camera

[iancoxleigh]

Apologies in advance, this shall probably be a long post.

 

I have recently been considering buying a 4x5 view camera.

 

-----

 

First, a few words about myself:

 

A. Current Equipment.

 

I am currently shooting with a Nikon D300 and an IR-converted D80. I shoot RAW, process in Lightroom and CS4. I

understand the value of getting the most out of the original by shooting with the later post-processing in mind.

For example, I am well versed in "exposing to the right" and implement such a strategy whenever possible.

 

I feel this is relevant to this discussion because I plan to scan all my film and produce final prints digitally.

 

I currently produce prints up to 16x24 on a Canon iPF5100.

 

 

B. Current Interests.

 

I photograph a number subjects. I have, recently, been actively pursuing landscape photography to a greater

degree. However, both botanical images and industrial night-time photography are equally important to me.

 

----

 

I have been consider this move to a number of 4x5s for a number of reasons:

 

 

1. I have making larger and large prints and have been considering adding a 24 inch printer at some point in the

next few years. However, while I have been finding that 12MP images make good 16x24 prints when from full frame

originals, if I crop more than about 1/3 it starts to push the limits of that size.

 

I would like to make print size something of which I have full control. I often see the value in small 10x10

prints -- some images just make better small prints. But, some things are simply better the bigger you can print

them. I would like my maximum size to be less restricted.

 

 

2. For a number of subjects -- but, particularly for my industrial night and architectural photos -- I have come

to REALLY, REALLY want camera movements.

 

It seems painful to spend $1800 for each of three PC lenses from Nikon (and FF camera to put them on) when a view

camera wouldn't cost too much more.

 

 

3. I have been working on a series of images where large, industrial sodium-lights are placed within the exposed

frame of a night-image. I have had difficulties controlling flare. I have read in a number of locations that LF

lenses handle flare better than most 35mm lenses (due to their simple optical formulae for equivalent fields of

view).

 

 

4. Perhaps most importantly, I would like to adopt a process that forced/encouraged a more reflective and slower

working pace.

 

---

 

So, I have been investigating a number of different 4x5 cameras for a while now. Looking at all the cameras I

have read about, I most like the Ebony 45SU.

 

The reasons I like this (in order of importance) camera are:

 

1. It is non-folding. I am extremely attracted to the idea of being able to fully collapse the camera without

removing the lens.

 

You see, I am not a "sit and wait" landscape photographer. I much prefer to hunt for good light than wait for it.

While I want to adopt slower and more deliberative working process, I want the ability -- as much as it will be

possible -- to set up quickly in fast-changing light.

 

2. I like that it has fairly wide range of movements. I am interested in architectural subjects

 

3. I like that the Ebony will accept quite wide lenses without needed recessed lensboards. If someday I have

enough money (or I win the lottery) I would be interested in buying a MFDB and adapting it the 4x5 camera -- that

would require comparatively wider lenses for the same FOV.

 

4. I like the basic idea of asymmetrical movements. For classic near-far landscapes, they seem to make a great

deal of sense.

 

 

However, this camera has one large downside -- price. I can reduce the price a considerable amount by foregoing

the asymmetrical movements; but, it is still high. Moreover, there seem to be very few used Ebony cameras that

appear on the market and I had hope to avoid the unnecessary expense of buying new.

 

So, my basic questions are:

 

What other camera(s) might you consider I investigate? Keeping my list of preferences in mind as much as

possible. In particular, is there ANY other light-weight non-folding field camera?

 

Is there some important consideration I have overlooked?

 

Thank you for your advice.

 

Ian

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[eric_brody]

Arca Swiss Field. It is one of the finest, most rigid, easy to set up, system based cameras one can buy. Check over at the LF forum, people are constantly singing its praises. It too is expensive, but it could be a lifetime purchase, as it was for me. It was not my first camera though. I used a Toyo Field camera for many years with good results but always longed for the Arca. My images are no better but I do love using that camera. Were I to win the lottery (very unlikely since I do not buy tickets), I might buy more accessories, but the camera would not change.

 

The camera is only part of the equation, consider processing, pretty easy to do yourself with b&w, sometimes hard to find for color, and then how to print. Choices include scanning, decent scanners are not free, you have a good printer, or a darkroom, actually likely to be the cheapest, at least for b&w.

 

The greatest factor, which you acknowledged is shooting style, it is most definitely not for everyone. You might want to rent, or borrow a camera, if possible, to see if the basic process suits your style.

 

Good luck.

 

Eric

[mcpoljak2003]

I second the Arca Swiss recommendation. Good stuff, but I don't use one. Since I think misery and pain breed creativity, I like to haul a Toyo G 4x5 or 8x10 monorail into the field. 6 or 8 hours of that and you feel like you've accomplished something - even if your shots are crap! I wouldn't limit yourself to something that can collapse with a lens still on it. Most field cameras can be set up, and ready to go in a couple minutes if you're organized and know intuitively what you need to do to get a fleeting shot. While walking around, I'll keep a lens on the 4x5 for (somewhat) quick action. Although quick action and a monorail are usually mutually exclusive propositions, I've never been want for anything faster.

 

Sounds like you're in the midst of a fundamental change in the way you work. I like to think of working with LF as akin to leisurely reading the Sunday Times (on Sunday, or course) with several cups of good coffee and many breaks and pauses to reflect on an article or three.

 

As far as other considerations - don't forget all the accessories you'll need - the gross tonnage of film holders, light meter, loupe, Polaroid holder, dark cloth, lenses, etc. etc. can sometimes make the experience trying. Also don't forget that you'll need to really know your film and exposure parameters - reciprocity compensations, bellows draw compensations, filter factors etc. etc. It's best to get everything - through practice - memorized and second nature - without having to look it up. But a good working field manual - I have the Kodak Professional Photo Guide all marked up and appended to with Post-It's, bits of random pages etc. - can come in handy.

 

I say go for it. It will be a little rocky in the beginning. Learn from your mistakes and enjoy developing your process. Nothing beats an 8x10 transparency or contact print.

[sheldonnalos]

I have a similar approach to you... shooting a lot of digital and doing careful post through CS4/etc. I also shoot 4x5 for when I want higher quality/larger prints, which is typically for my landscape shooting.

 

Here are some thoughts I'd toss into the mix for you...

 

1. Have you tried stitching and the perspective control tools in CS4? If all you need is the occasional large print and corrected verticals, this is definitely a viable option.

 

2. Don't worry too much about the speed of camera setup and whether a lens can stay mounted on the camera. A lot of what makes large format slower is the composition/tilt/focus/meter/shoot process, not how quickly the camera unfolds. A folding vs. non folding camera is much less of an issue than your familiarity with the gear and process and whether you are lucky enough to have the right lens mounted on the camera for the shot you need. Invariably the lens you want to use at the moment will be the one buried in your pack, not the one on your camera. :-)

 

3. Don't feel like you need to spend a huge amount of money on the camera to start out. The camera does not influence the final image quality, as long as it is rigid when locked down (most cameras are). People primarily have camera preferences due to their needs/likes in the "user interface" of how the camera works. It's hard to know that when picking your first camera, so to buy the top of the line camera when starting out may not be the best approach. The Ebony 45SU is a great camera, but it might not fit perfectly with your needs. Alternatively your needs might just as well be met by a much less expensive camera such as a Chamonix.

 

4. If you have the money and are interested in architectural subjects, and are thinking about a MFDB potentially down the road, consider the Arca Swiss. I shoot the Arca Swiss 4x5 Field with micrometric orbix (geared tilt) and it is a STELLAR camera. It will be more rigid than the Ebony, easier to control and level standards, and more precise in the movements. The Ebony is a very nice wood field camera, but it is still a wood field.

 

There is a Arca Swiss 4x5 F-Metric camera for sale here in the FS forum from a regular member. If you are considering dropping $4k on a camera this should be at the top of your list.

[kelly_flanigan1]

(1) Figure what you want to photograph<BR><BR>(2) Figure what angular coverage you need; and what swings and tilts too.<BR><BR> (3) Scout out your target lenses; reviews their costs<BR><BR> (4) Find camera bodies that will work with well your target lenses. <BR><BR>Without knowing the lenses; you are buying the cart or trailer without considering the horse or truck thats used with it. Your beloved camera may not be the best user with certain lenses. Consider the whole affair not just the camera body.

[iancoxleigh]

<p>Thank you all for your comments. I will take a number of them to heart and broaden my list of potential cameras.

</P><P>

<b>Any basic thoughts on whether is it better to buy cheap(er) to begin or whether to invest now with the hopes of a well-researched, more expensive, purchase being the right one from the beginning (or at least not loosing much on re-sale)? </B>

</P><P>

I adopted the latter strategy when it came to tripods. I bought a Gitzo, L-brakets, and a Markins Ballhead right from the start. I can not say enough about that being absolutely the right decision. If the tripod was not so gloriously perfect and easy to use, I would never have learned to work off of a tripod and to see it as a help in almost all occasions and not a hinderence.

</P><P>

------</P><P>

Kelly,

<br><br>

1. Landscapes, and (Wide-Angle) Architecturals -- especially in mixed artificial light at night. Some closer range botanical studies in the field.

<br><br>

2. This seems hard to do without previous LF experience. Is there a method you could suggest that would allow me to calculate how much additional coverage (to allow for movements) I would need?

<br><br>

3. I know the focal lengths I probably want: 75mm, 95mm, 150mm, 200mm. I doubt I would want anything longer than that at all -- and even if I did, anything longer would not be used at infinity anyways.

<br><br>

As for the specific lenses, I do not know. I have imagined a cost of $1500 per lens. That is lower than the price of some I have investigated but much higher than others.

<br><br>

4. As far as I can tell, that would be a VERY long list of potential cameras. To narrow that list, I had a few factors I was considering:

<br><br>

Non-Folding (which i shall reconsider given the above comments), <br>

Lower Weight (so probably wood),<br>

Use of both 75mm and 200mm lenses without having to change bellows. Another even wider option -- say 47mm -- without needing to change bellows would be good if I got a MFDB.

 

</P>

[iancoxleigh]

Oh, I should add that I was considering buying an Epson v700 scanner anyways (to scan older film I have shot and my mother's and other family slides and prints).

 

I have a Gosen Luma meter I have been using.

 

I have access to a darkroom at will. I do not have the knowledge; but, plan to learn to develop myself. I still plan to scan and print rather than optically print.

[iancoxleigh]

"You might want to rent, or borrow a camera, if possible, to see if the basic process suits your style."

 

Definitely. I plan to do that in early spring (or sooner) and do not plan to make any purchase until summer or next fall.

[brucecahn]

There is a 5x7 non folder made by Walker which costs much less than the Ebony 45SU. It is tough and accurate if a little ugly. It has front movements but no back mvmts. It will get much better results than any 4x5 and is not much bigger. Since I am an Ebony dealer, I would rather you got the 45SU, but the savings on the Walker would be around $1500.

[AJG]

One thing popped out at me in your description of wants--quick set-up. I still remember going out with a neophyte photographer who had a

shiny new Canon 35 mm slr w/motor and autoexposure. By the time I had set up my Toyo monorail on my tripod, framed my shot,taken a

couple of spot meter readings, set my exposure and was about ready to pull my dark slide and take a picture, I happened to look over at my

friend who was still struggling to load his 35. I'm not a genius with these things, but by then I had been working extensively with my 4x5 for a

couple of years, so I was pretty quick.

Since you want to do architectural work, you may find that a monorail might have some advantages in terms of rigidity and maximum

movements for the price, if you want to start low and decide if this is really for you. When I was starting out with large format 26+ years ago, it

seemed that folding cameras had some real issues with lenses like my 115 mm Grandagon, and other large and heavy wide angle lenses. For

field work, I borrowed a sewing machine and made a cloth case out of backpack cordura nylon, padded with the kind of foam that campers use

under a sleeping bag. I made some pockets for the outside to hold film holders and extra lenses, and attached a waist belt so it could function

like a carpenter's apron when standing in a swamp. The weight is born by a shoulder strap that slides on to the monorail, so the camera hangs

upside down in the bag.

One thing to keep in mind is that if you buy good lenses and switch camera brands, all you are out is lens boards, unlike 35 or medium format

where you generally get to start over.

[keith_anderson7]

Ian, I'm starting off with 4x5 right now, and I'm really enjoying it. I'd been shooting with a dSLR, a 35mm rangefinder (film) or medium format (Hasselblad, Fuji) for years, but decided to take the LF plunge. After feeling overwhelmed with the camera and lens selection, I spent some time online and realized the lens options aren't as bad as they first seemed. Basically I can get 2nd hand lenses that are fantastic for 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of my Hasselblad lenses, and I'll probably be happier with the image quality.

 

I don't claim to know all the LF camera makers as well as many of the previous posters, but I ended up getting the Chamonix 45n-1 and I'm really pleased with the build quality and performance. I also strongly considered the Canham all metal field camera, and may eventually get one, but for now it's out of my price range.

 

Have fun with it, for myself I've found LF very enjoyable and less limiting than using an SLR or rangefinder where you're more or less stuck with lenses and accessories from the camera manufacturer. With LF, you can slap just about whatever you want on a lensboard so you have more freedom to buy what makes the most sense for weight, performance, focal length, cost, etc.

[ranong]

i have and love a 4x5 chamonix camera.

 

http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/

 

it is small, light and easy/quick to set up. i have used a 65mm lens without bag bellows (i am waiting for my bag bellows....it will be much nicer with bag bellows for sure). i use a 90mm f8 a lot. perfect lens. new the camera is about $800. a great value.

[alex_smith7]

Ian,

 

I may be coming late to the discussion. Forgive me. If you have narrowed in on an Ebony 45SU you have clearly done some homework about the types of things you're looking for. Since most of the repondants have suggested the Arca Swiss F-Field I thought I would try to redirect you toward your original choice. I have owned and used the Arca-Swiss field model (handy with the smaller standard on the front) and it is indeed a great camera. There are a lot of photographers who love it, and even more who use them since Jack Dykinga published his "Large Format Nature Photography"--a great book (and I mean that) that is as much an advertisement for his camera as an introduction to the field.

 

However...I have owned Ebony cameras both before, during, and since owning my Arca, and I have never looked back after selling my Arca. Sometimes I am still tempted to get another 4x5, but I never look outside of the Ebony line. I have also owned Toyo, Wisner, Wista, and Canham 4x5s. If you can settle for slightly less bellows length on the long end and live without asymmetric tilt, the Ebony 45S is certainly a much cheaper (and slightly lighter) alternative. With either Ebony you will have equal (in some cases slightly better, some cases slightly worse) movement capabilities as the Arca, in a significantly more compact package. It's true that the Arca is more modular, but I see this as a benefit as well as a negative. As far as the all-important rigidity, my Ebony cameras have all been able to lock down and remain as rigid as my Arca-Swiss. I like being able to use a 58mm Schneider on a flat board with plenty of movements with the default bellows, and then swap out to Fujinon 240A at the other end with some ability to focus closer than infinity, still with the same bellows. The real reasons for my Ebony preference though are less bag space, faster setup, and *center tilt* on front and rear standards (optional on the Arca Swiss for considerably greater cost and more bulk).

 

At any rate, either company produces a truly excellent camera, and you will likely be pleased with either one. Just don't turn aside from your initial feelings too quickly... ;-)

[alex_smith7]

Ian,

 

Sorry, one more thing. I should mention in the interests of full disclosure that while I too love the concept of a non-collapsing camera, my Ebony that gets taken out the most is the SV45Ti. Even more compact closed than the 45s, and I can use a 58mm on a flat board all the way out to a 450 non-telephoto on the same set of bellows. You are getting into significant cost and space with Arca-Swiss accessories in both rails and multiple sets of bellows to approach that range of focal lengths. Arca does not offer one single bellows solution that can accomplish that. Setup time is only marginally longer when you do it a few times.

[iancoxleigh]

First off, I want to thank you all. Your various comments have been helpful in thinking this through. Sometimes just talking/writing about something can help gel our own thoughts.

 

---

 

Bruce, thanks for the heads up about the Walker. I had forgotten all about it until you mentioned it. But, I had seen an advert for it in View Camera Magazine a while back. I think loosing back movements is something to think carefully about. But, it is otherwise quite a reasonable option -- especially since I am almost entirely interested in wide-angle compositions. I'm not even unhappy with its aesthetics. It has a certain pleasant utilitarian quality.

 

The availability of 13x18 or 5x7 film is another issue (or the hassle of cutting down 8x10 sheets). I have shot Provia and had Provia scanned in the past (35mm) and quite liked the results. I was hoping to use the same film in 4x5. I have yet to find 5x7 or 13x18 Provia in stock anywhere currently.

 

--

 

Eddie, Keith, thanks for the tip of the Chomonix. It certainly has some feature I find quite compelling -- the use of carbon fibre as an essential component. The stunningly low weight is certainly attractive!

 

I am confident it has enough movements for just about anything I'd want to do in the field for landscapes. But, I am a little concerned that it might be a bit insufficient for architecturals -- particularly in having a much more limited rise and an absence of back rise or fall.

 

Still, at $800 it is entirely enticing.

 

---

 

Alex, thank you for reminding me of all the reasons why I had initially thought of Ebony. From very wide, to sort of long, with lots of movements and minimal weight and simple user-interaction.

 

Now that I am re-thinking my commitment to buying a non-folding camera, I'll have to re-examine the line of folding cameras as well.

 

---

 

Once again, thank you all.

 

As soon as I make a purchase and have some first shots I promise to post a full follow-up.

 

Ian

[bob_salomon]

Linhof TechniKardan 45S