EQUIPMENT FOR ARCHITECTURAL WORK

[fred_souza]

First of all, thanks for your time!!

I'm moving up to LF for it's capabilities and conventions in the

architectural field but it seems that my shopping list of equipment

could be not well completed. Is this all the basic for me to be

readly shooting and what store could sell me all this equipment, new

or used with a reliable and informative service. Of course there are

many stores... but reliable??????? I need a salesperson that would

help me get together all the details needed for a functional

equipment since there are so many variables in equipment choise and

assembly.

This is my list:

---Sinar F2 with wide angle bellows

---Schneider Super Angulon 75mm and 90mm(F/8 or above should do)with

respective lens boards and shutter releses

---Fuji and Polaroid film holders

---A Fresnel or a Boss lens for my GG ??????

---A dark cloth

---A 1-degree spot meter by Pentax

---A three-way Manfrotto tripod head and tripod

---Now,what else???

 

Thanks once again and Aloha---Fred Souza

[golliegwillie]

A loupe

[mark_sampson]

If you're going to shoot architecture, that means interiors, and that means lighting. Which is a subject too complex to go into here... You need a copy of Norman McGrath's book, "Photographing Buildings Inside and Out". THE essential reference.

[jnorman2]

while perhaps 80-90 percent of my exterior work is done with a nikkor sw90/8, there are times when other lenses are a near necessity. i use a rodenstock 135/5.6 as my normal lens for medium distant work, and a nikkor 210/5.6 as my telephoto for detail shots. to do architectural work appropriately, you will soon find the need to move beyond just a WA or two in your kit. my apprentice currently uses only a 135mm as her only lens, which suffices for most of the assignments i give her, but she really needs to pick up a 90mm. i like the beattie intenscreen used in conjunction with a regular fresnel lens, and i also like using a reflex viewfinder. i do not use polaroid materials any longer unless i need to check interior lighting. i use the kodak readyload system - it is wonderful. i do about 2000 negs per year through it, with no problems at all. for dealers, i like f-stops here, and midwest. good luck.

[david_karp]

Talk to Jim at Midwest Photo Exchange.

[tim_atherton2]

jnorman - what film do you find yourself using most these days?

 

tim a

[jnorman2]

tim - i use tmax100 exclusively for b/w. for CTs, i use either EPP or EPN.

[james_driscoll2]

I shoot architecture for a living and these are my humble and not

so humble opinions about equipment.

 

1. Your on the right track with the camera. The Sinar F2 (and

Arca's) is an architectural photographers dream. Light weight,

tons of useful (and not so useful!!!) accessories, full movements,

and holds up well to rough usage.

 

2.Lens- The 90mm is a good choice...I would rather go with the

72mm XL, than a 75mm lens...it is a lot better coverage and

quaility wise. It is rather cheap when you look around ($1200.00

new, and MPEX sells them for $900 used in 10 condition). The

two most used lenses for exteriors are probably the 90mm and

the 110/115/120/121mm lenses. Depending on what you

shoot...you might be reaching for the 120mm more than the

90mm. The 72/75mm lens get used a lot less frequently than

you think, and is too "wide angle" for a lot of stuff. Less than that

is really not used...unless you shoot a lot of 8x8 foot bathrooms.

You should really look into longer lenses (210mm-300mm)

record shots are needed, but creative and detail shots call for

longer lenses. I use a 240mm alot, and a 300mm quite a bit

and have used 600mm and 1200mm lenses to get the

perspective I want sometimes.

 

3.Other stuff....nobody mentioned the most important thing- A

LADDER. Getting up high, is a much needed thing in

architectural shooting, and frequently I have been as high as 12

feet up in the air, when I could not get access to a building or roof

across the street. A heavy tripod that can go this high (I use a

gitzo 500 series) is an absolute godsend, and makes up for its

heavy weight by being extremely versitile. I have also had the

need to go as low as 2' off the ground and again the gitzo

handles this with ease. I find a Gitzo much easier to level than a

Bogen, and I don't like either of there heads, and instead use a

Sinar Pan Tilt head. Expensive....but worth every penny. Polaroid

backs and holders of course and get a Sinar Fresnel....worth its

weight in gold when using wide lenses.

 

Another very useful item, is the older Sinar swing-out gel filter

holder. Not a rare item, but tough to find used because they are

"keepers". I use it all the time, and it is worth its weight in

platinum.

[martin_richter1]

Since you are just getting started and money invested is money you can not use to eat on, check out the rental equipment in the area. My rule is do not buy something until there is an established need for it. That way you are not buying stuff you use once a year.

 

Lenses and lighting gear are usually available for day/week rental and once the places get to know you the better quality stuff will become available.

[dick roadnight cotswolds]

James:

 

Yes, getting (the camera) high is often essential, or very helpful, even with normal height buildings.

 

If you need to be among the building in a city, piloted aircraft are not normally an option.

 

Pilotless aircraft are a distinct possibility:

 

A large electrically powered aircraft is vibration free when you briefly turn the motor off.

 

My initial idea was to have a wireless video link for the viewfinder, but you can stand in the middle of the desired picture and point the tailplane at yourself: for image size you only need to work out the angular size of your view of the aircraft from that point.

 

High tripods are useful for low buildings: my 10m Manfrotto tripod lets me see over a typical 2 story building, can be used with LF cameras, often makes it unnecessary to use the 47XL, and lets you see the other buildings/countryside/garden in the area.

 

Luksa make a 70ft mast, but (at $18,000) it seems cheap and nasty compared to the Manfrotto, and cannot take an LF. The main problem seems to be the CCTV view finder, but with a Digiback (and Sinar P3) with a full time video view finder, that would not be a problem.

 

I should not mention it here, but a high viewpoint can eliminate the need for movements, and allow you to use something basic� like a Hasselblad!

[james_driscoll2]

Dick...I usually don't wave your namesake around....but for all of

your humor...how much architectural shooting have you done???

 

Everyone loves to quote from "Photographing Buildings Inside

and Out", inside there is a lovely photo of Big Mr. McGrath with

his Sinar in the air at about a height of 12 feet,and he is shooting

a one story ranch house.

 

The past year and a half I have photographed about 600

buildings....I am 5'8...I usually had to get the tripod about 7 feet

off of the ground....I have colleuges here in NY who routinely rent

construction lifts to get 3-4 stories off the ground when shooting

a building....movements are used to help you correct perspective

and...they don't give them to you.

[lbi115l]

I think the point that was being made is that in an ideal world, you don't need to correct for perspective.

 

Got another building in the way? You COULD use a short lens and some rise, OR you could knock down the building and stick the camera 30 feet in the air hanging from a small aluminum pipe. Yeah, the movements are easier, but are they as much fun?

 

-A landscape photographer with far too much momvement for what I shoot.

[dick roadnight cotswolds]

James:

 

Experience can be a disadvantage when it comes to assessing alternative methods, techniques and tools.

 

On an amateur LF forum thread about my 10m tripod they did not think it would be useful� but soon after, on the same forum, there was a thread on how much tripod elevation is required for getting the tops of buildings within the image circle with lens horizontal.

 

You posted:

 

�Everyone loves to quote from "Photographing Buildings Inside and

Out", inside there is a lovely photo of Big Mr. McGrath with his Sinar in the air at about a height of 12 feet, and he is shooting a one story ranch house.�

 

The original question was not specifically about city architectural photography, and my 10 meter tripod enables me to do the same, more safely and with one or two storey buildings, giving a view of the building in the context of its surroundings. This, of course works better with MF SLRs and monorails with DigiBacks, as you (if you can zone focus) can compose (using the CCTV camera on the SLR view finder, or the video viewfinder of the digiback) and shoot all in one operation. With LF you might wish to view the GG with the CCTV, and then lower the tripod and load film.

 

Hiring a construction lift achieves the same objective, at great expense � without the complication of having to operate the camera remotely.

 

Jason:

 

You posted:

 

�Got another building in the way? You COULD use a short lens and

some rise, OR you could knock down the building and stick the camera 30 feet in the air hanging from a small aluminium pipe.�

 

I try to avoid using very short lenses, and, even with a 47XL, you can run out of image circle in many shots of churches with high spires in small churchyards.

 

The high tripod lets you use less rise in the churchyard, or to move back and photograph over the churchyard wall, or over the building that was in the way.

 

I believe that you were agreeing with me that if you can get to a point level with a point half way up the building, you can keep the verticals vertical without using camera movements.