Starting out....

[graham_meek]

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>First time post on this forum, so please be gentle with me!</p>

<p>I've been seriously interested in photography for around 5 years and over that time realise I like to photograph landscapes, people and places. I heavily focus on landscapes and the other subjects when travelling. For the type of photos I take, probably best to view my website: <a href="http://www.meekymanphotogpahy.co.uk">www.meekymanphotogpahy.co.uk</a>. Photography is a hobby for me and I generally take time out for photo trips by myself, be it one day, a weekend or more every now and then. Obviously holidays are with my wife and not normally photo orientated.</p>

<p>I have gone through the upgrade/upgrade path and now use a Nikon D700 with quality primes, some manual focus and some autofocus as well as two zooms. When out taking landscapes I use the manual focus primes and am happy with what I make but wonder if I am really being silly here. After all I am using a full frame digital for it's supposed higher quality images (large sensor and all that). But then I am slow and methodical when out landscaping...being selective over the subject, always on the tripod, waiting for the light and frequently a weekend away means I come back with no more than 4 photos. I don't want to be on an endless path of "upgrading" a digital camera and am wondering if it's worth transitioning to a 5 x4 view camera for my landscape photos. I'd then sell the D700 and several lenses, to fund the move and buy a simple crop sensor digital for photos of people and places when travelling for non photo specific holidays where a 5 x4 would be impractical. </p>

<p>What I like about digital are the histogram (I usually manually spotmeter landscapes), the ability to change iso and white balance. Are the lack of these a restriction on 5 x4? Seems to me I have seen many photos taken with a view camera where they are not exactly catching the light at it's best. For landscapers out there, is it possible/easy to use a view camera when "chasing the light"? I guess it comes down to predicting the light? Also, lets say the conditions needed for taking waterfall photos, overcast light, with a digitial I can alter the iso to get the shutter speed I want for the desired effect in the water and a large depth of field. Yet with a view camera I get the impression that you'd be talking multiple second exposures for these situations..right?</p>

<p>I know I should take a workshop using a view camera before leaping, and I will, but just wanted to gather opinions.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Graham</p>

 

[dhbebb]

<p>If you like a contemplative approach, 4x5 could be for you. You might well find you were happy with one camera (something like a Crown Graphic is not the last word in sophistication but is light in weight and delivers quality as high as any other camera), and even just one or two lenses. There is of course no histogram with 4x5 film, but blowing highlights is not the issue with LF film, at least negative film, that it is with digital. Auto white balance is of course also not found on LF cameras, with reversal film a set of correction filters will be required for accurate color (not necessarily for creative color), white balance is not course not an issue with b+w. There is no variable ISO either, for most purposes ISO 400 film can be used for field photography, if it is necessary to work at small stops (almost all LF lens are optimized in terms of optical quality for f16, you may need to close to f45 for adequate depth of field), then exposures may well be long. As you are used to using a spotmeter, you could well adopt the Zone System (not vital but useful) without much difficulty. "Chasing the light" - the fact that a Crown Graphic can be taken out of a bag, opened. set to infinity focus and aimed via the external viewfinder in 20 seconds or less can be a help here! If you were to invest the time in 4x5, you'd probably find you shot 10 or less frames during a weekend but still had the 4 keepers that you do now!</p>

[graham_meek]

<p>Thanks David for that.<br>

I already have a contemplative approach I reckon!<br>

How about blowing highlights with slide film? I read that slide film is preferred for 5 x 4...is this so? Maybe easier/better to scan?</p>

<p>Graham</p>

[michael_briggs2]

<p>I prefer using negative film for its greater dynamic range. "Chasing the light" ... maybe a little more planning ... setup your tripod a couple minutes in a advance, compose and focus. Stand beside your camera and click your shutter when the light or clouds or whatever is optimum.<br>

One equipment advantage of LF is that the camera and lenses are independent. So if you decide to change cameras, even switching brands, you can keep the lenses that you like.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>David's comment about a contemplative approach is probably quite accurate. In this "have it now" world of instant-everything, we want to snap the shot and move on. If you simply find a beautiful place, and observe for a longer period of time, you will get a shot you are happy with. I also carry a note pad, when hiking or backpacking, making notes of shots I think would be better at sunrise, sunset, mid-day, autumn or winter, when there are less leaves, with snow, or full foliage... those types of things. If that sort of shooting is attractive to you, then I would go with a 4x5.</p>

<p>I also have another philosophy, which relates to "feature rich" areas you might be traveling through. And that is: take the images you can get now, and move on to the next. I think you stand a very good chance of catching more good to great images, than waiting hours for a single image, and perhaps never get it.</p>

<p>But there is one more thing: connecting with your subject. There are images I have taken where I've waited a long time for just the right light. I'll include, below, an image that has immense importance to me, because of the feeling of the warm sun, watching clouds form across the high desert, near where I live, the sound of birds, the gentle breeze, and sometimes the awesome silence—all while waiting for the right clouds. It entirely depends on what you want to get out of your photography: does it influence you? And will it influence others?</p><div></div>

[lwg]

<p>It sounds like you are already a large format photographer, you just are using the wrong equipment ;-)</p>

<p>If your current shooting style results in only 4 photos per outing, then large format is not going to be a hinderance at all. With a decent scanner you will get more resolution than your D700. You will not find some things as convenient, such as the need to carry color correction filters instead of tweaking white balance in post production. </p>

<p>As far as shutter speeds, yes they will be slower. Waterfalls deep in the woods are frequently in the 1/2 to 4 second range for me. Think ISO 100 and f/16 to f/22 as a common combo for color.</p>

<p>I generally like color negative film over slides for the extra latitude. But it depends on the light.</p>

<p>Chasing changing conditions are not the easiest with 4x5, but it can be done. However I like an SLR for faster work.</p>

[graham_meek]

<p>Thanks everyone for your contributions.</p>

<p>I'm not going to rush things, but mull it over over the next few months, especially the ££ factor! </p>

<p>I'm right in thinking that the basics I will need (for colour film/slides) is camera, lenses (90 mm and 150mm perhaps), dark cloth, focussing loupe, film holders (3), spot meter, lens boards, scanner, film tent for loading sheet film and umbrella/i-pod whilst waiting for the light? Anything obvious I have missed? Hoping that the current Manfrotto 055MF4 + Arca Swiss Z1 ballhead will be stable enough with a Tachihara/Wista/ShenHao/Chamonix 45n?</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Graham</p>

[lwg]

<p>I would recommend different lenses, but that's personal. I find the 210 more frequently used than the 150. I like a 90, 135 and 210 set, or if I'm only taking two I grab the 135 and 210.</p>

<p>But the big thing you are missing is filters. Color/colour correction filters are needed if you are shooting slides, but it's also good to use on negative film. You can probably get by by adding an 81B to start. A polariser is also very useful, but that's more a matter of taste.</p>

<p>You will also need an empty film box to put your exposed sheets. Not a problem once you've been shooting for a while, but when you are just getting started it's easy to over look. Buy two boxes of film and move all the film into one box. Use the other for the exposed stuff. Make sure to get it back from your lab.</p>

[rob_hale1]

<p>Hi Graham,<br /><br />This question came up in a similar form on another site to which I suggested the following possible solution, which might also suit you :-<br /><br />http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=4483&page=2<br /><br />the Rob Hale post on this page that is addressed to Andy. <br /><br />If it suits you, there is a whole new arena of classical printing without the need of a full blown dark room, enlarger and enlarger meters etc, etc.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />Rob</p>

[dan_south]

A 4x5 is a completely different way of working than a DSLR on a tripod no matter how deliberately you operate today.

 

First of all forget that histogram and other helpful tools.

 

Secondly, be prepared for a lot of trial and error, and accept the fact that you're going to make a number of mistakes

along the way.

 

Be prepared to carry film and keep it away from heat and dust. You'll need to load and unload and orgnize film in

complete darkness or in a changing bag where you cannot see your hands.

 

Be prepared to limit your shots to a dozen or so until you get back to your house or car or hotel, because that's all that

you can load in your holders at one time. And that includes what you have available for bracketing exposures.

 

Be prepared to load film when you're tired and hungry or wake up in the morning to a brilliant sunrise and empty film holders.

 

Be prepared to spend five to ten minutes focusing and metering and setting your aperture and shutter speed before you can record a single image.

 

Be prepared to predict what the light will be doing ten minutes from now.

 

Be prepared to struggle mightily to focus the dark edges of a wide angle lens with significant light falloff.

 

Be prepared to hold your breath under a hot dark cloth so you don't steam your ground glass while focusing.

 

Be prepared to learn about filters and color temperature, although your DSLR can give you hints as to what filter is

needed if you set it to daylight white balance.

 

Be prepared to spend significant time and/or money to scan your film or to learn wet printing techniques.

 

Be prepared to understand movements, the key advantage of a view camera.

 

If you are only getting four keepers per weekend now, how many will you be getting when you have to deal with all of

that?

 

It might be a good idea to borrow or rent a 4x5, a loupe, a lens, a changing bag, and some film holders for a couple of weekends before you decide to invest

money into this pursuit. It might make total sense to you, and you'll be hooked. Or it might be a struggle that you're

not willing to put up with.

[kparratt]

<p>When I first moved to Norway, this stupidly expensive little country, I neither had, nor could I afford a wide angle lens for anything, least of all the Hasselblad. But I did have a couple of 1920s wooden dark slides, slightly under 5x7 inch. So I built and camera around them and spent time perfecting a pin hole. You see it and resulting image if you scroll down <strong><a href="../alternative-cameras-forum/00KBZc">here</a></strong>. I was going to Bergen for a few days, and those two double sided film holders were the only image capturing opportunities I took with me. In other words, 4 exposures only. ;-)<br>

I do have a 4x5 Technika now, an early 1953/4 model, which came with it's original two lens outfit. Would I like a state of the art Rodenstock Grandagon lens? .. or Schneider Super Angulon XL ? Yes, of course. Have I explored the full potential of the old Angulon 90mm on the camera? No, .. not yet.<br>

I like and always come back to a statement by the author Jonathan Eastland in his Leica M Compendium, when discussing the best lens for this and that: "If you can't dig any deeper into your pocket, dig deeper into your imagination."</p>

[jnanian]

<p>before you sink the $$$ into a large format camera, lenses &C. maybe you should <br>

find someone near you who has a lf camera and go out one day with him/her and see what<br /> it is all about. some people like it, some people don't ...<br>

if you think that buying a lf camera and a few lenses will stop you from<br>

buying more and more "stuff" ... you might be wrong .. <br>

a lot of people are not only chasing the light, but the magic bullet ... <br />or the combination of lenses and film and developing and printing techniques<br />that will give them the perfect --- everything....<br>

good luck !</p>

[Wilmarco Imaging]

<p>I think large format has made me a better photographer. I am two months into my LF career, with 30+ years of 35mm and MF in my background. </p>

<p>LF requires a great deal of though about exposure and composition. It also gives a great amount of control over processing individual images/sheets of film. For me, this has resulted in generating far fewer negatives, which I then feel compelled to print. </p>

<p>Because I am generating fewer negatives, I am spending more time printing individual images. This has improved my printing, in terms of finding the precise combination of exposure and contrast needed to achieve the image I am looking for. For example, for the past few nights, I have printed exactly one image. This is because I have spent the previous day evaluating the prior night's print, and deciding what needs to be changed in the next print. Formerly I would bang out a half dozen prints of an image, without being very satisfied with any of them. I am not a big dodge-and-burn fan, but if I come across my meisterstück image, maybe I will take up dodging and burning. </p>

<p>A little off topic, but viewing a print after dry down, and in both incandescent and natural light, has a huge affect on how I respond to a printed image.</p>

<p>Bottom line for me is LF has taken my photography to a higher level.</p>