Size does matter!!?

[deniz_merdan]

Hi,

 

I've been using 4x5 cameras for a while now and i love the large

negatives. Luckily, we have a Sounders/LPL 4x5 enlarger with a VC

head that is assigned to me(how lucky can you get?)

 

Well the school will be out in couple of weeks and i will no longer

have an access to the darkroom till next September.

 

I am thinking of contact printing or kallitypes till september but

4x5 negatives are a tad small for this.

 

and there is a big camera swap meet coming to town this sunday.

I will definitely be looking for LF equipment.

 

the problem is i just can't decide what to look for..

5x7 or 8x10

 

5x7 is a nice size but i would like huge 8x10 negatives for contact

printing, but 8x10 film will cost an arm and a leg and the camera

will probably weigh more than i do.

I am thinking of trading in my 35mm equipment for the purchase(nikon

F5)

 

5x7 with a 4x5 reducing back sounds like the best plan but i still

can't decide.

 

any input is appreciated.

 

thank you

[dave schlick]

did you consider using postives? slides can be viewed directy with a light box and 10x loop. it will save you a mint and you will be surprised how you can put yourself at the scene of the shot if you slowly look over the positive.. i like velvea and can get lost when looking at flowers, bark on a tree, water and rocks in a stream etc.. it can be like your there.. somthing ive never seen in a print.. get glacine covers or put them in a plastic back so you dont scatch your slide......im guessing that a box of velvia ready loads, some good shots, a light box and a loop will blow your sox off. dave..

[matthew_hoag]

Assuming B&W (are you in Vancouver - if so don't expect alot of LF gear at the show on Sunday), I'd suggest 8x10 the weight issue, etc. is not that bad. Yes the larger the format the more expensive the film. Actually I went from 4x5 enlarging to 11x14 contact. I'll never go back to enlargementing. 8x10 with reducing backwould be the best of both worlds.

 

Matthew

[deniz_merdan]

Dave, i've got quite a few 4x5,6x6 and 35mm velvias in my archives so its not about the color.

as i said 4x5 is a tad small for contact printing.

 

In the perfect world, 8x10 with 3 backs would be perfect, now gotta find that perfect light weight 8x10, and the lens.

Is 8x10 film really expensive?

[chuck_pere]

I've been trying a few 5x7 contact prints. I'm finding a big difference between 5x7 and 8x10 size prints. The 5x7 will work but needs an image that fits the size. The 8x10 is more universal. If you're only doing contacts I would go with the 8x10. Do a test enlarging some of your 4x5's to 5x7 and 8x10 sizes. Look them over and see if you can live with the smaller size for your images.

[tim_curry]

Deniz,

 

I wouldn't get rid of 35mm. I shoot 35mm, 6x6, 4x5 and 8x10. Each one has its place. For fast shooting, 35mm is still my preference as lenses film costs and processing all add up, along with ease of use. It still has a place.

 

8x10 will be a very significant investment when film holders, tripod, camera, lenses, spot meter, filters and other odds and ends come into play. If you want a challenge and fun at the same time, give a thought to 4x5, contact printing and azo paper. You have the 4x5 already, so you have everythng you need to start shooting. With azo paper, you don't need a darkroom, just a small bathroom will get you going. A regular light bulb in a reflector for printing, some Neutol WA for a paper developer and a few small trays are all you will need to buy. Try looking at a small azo contact print (4x5) mounted on an 8x10 mat and tell me it isn't exciting.

 

I know larger is better for contact printing, but you already have most of what you need to get started without sacrificing your 35mm equipment. It seems to me that for a more expensive larger format, you still haven't scratched the surface of 4x5 if you haven't tried azo.

Just my $.02 worth.

[g._armour_van_horn]

Why not just shoot 4x5 through the summer and catch up on printing when you get your free access to the enlarger back? Even if you can't wait and have to have a few enlarged at a pro lab immediately it's got to be a lot cheaper than starting up with a new format for a few months.

 

I'm sure an 8x10 camera would be just like the first potato chip, only each additional chip (lenses, film holders, etc) is going to be a lot more expensive. It might be cheaper to start looking for your own enlarger.

 

Now, if you really, REALLY want to go to 8x10 and are just looking for an excuse to go for it, go for it.

 

Van

[william_whitaker1]

I have to second the advice given above (TC and GAVH). If you're going to regain access to the enlarger in the fall, use the time now to photograph. Your portfolio will be much better for it than if you were to dive into new formats.<P>

 

Moving to a new format, especially 8x10 or larger can be seductive. The cost of a camera is but a fraction of the overall cost. And you can't stop with just one lens. (Don't ask me how I know....)<P>

 

Make new photographs; print in the fall. In the meantime, you <I>can</I> still contact print 4x5's. Heck, Paul Strand did.

[oyvind_d]

"Going up in film format for the wrong excuses!" is what comes to mind.

 

An Omega D2 4x5" condenser enlarger redesigned to work with a spot or LEDs diffuced through ground glass where the filter holder is and opal-glass instead of condensors would be cheaper than a new outfit, (the LEDs (Green 2,1V 400mcd and blue 4,9V 2500mcd) could make you work without electricity :-)

 

Also, what lenses do you have that will fit 8x10? That could make a difference.

 

Consider working with pinhole-photography and contact printing, in 12x20, at normal or larger viewing distances, the difference between a print mad with lens and a pinhole is small (don't take my word for it, I haven't tested it, but I will with a IKEA-box and a 360/9 Apo-Gerogon)

 

Øyvind:D

[jay_de_fehr]

If the price of 8x10 film is a concern, you probably can't afford the outfit. You can figure roughly $2/sheet for film minimum, $1/sheet of contact paper, another $1/sheet for chemicals. You could cut your paper cost in half by printing on enlarging paper, and you could save a little on your chemicals by buying bulk, but you're still looking at $3/printed exposure minimum. That's not so bad, is it? 100 printed exposures of 8x10 represents a lot of time in my case, and could last you all summer if you shoot 3 shots/day for 3 months. I think you could do that for $350.00, maybe less with some bargain hunting. Pick up an outfit like this one:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3805796799&category=15248

 

for $300+/-, a lens like this one:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3806050857&category=30076

 

for $50, a tripod like this one:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3805220726&category=30094

 

for $125 and you're all set for a summer of 8x10 shooting/contact printing for under $1000 including trays, safelight, printing light, darkcloth, cable release etc. You could possibly shave a hundred dollars or so off of that by getting a cheaper camera, of the wooden and wobbly type, or you could spend thousands more buying new equipment, but the stuff I listed above will last as long as you need it to, and serve you well in the mean time. Good luck, and have a great summer.

[deniz_merdan]

buying an enlarger is definitely out of the question. first of all, CAnada is not even my permenant home, so i don't own a house or have much access to a room to set a up a darkroom.

So contact printing will probably be my only option for a long time to come.

I am really interested in trying out some AZO and see where it takes me.

I am not gonna be completely abandoning 35mm either, i just want to get rid of my Nikon F5 body and use a FM2 or some sort with my high quality optics.

 

right now i own 2 lenses for 4x5 an Ektar 127mm which barely covers 4x5 and a commercial komura 210mm which i believe covers up to 5x7 with some room to play with.

I am interested in older uncoated, barrel lenses for 8x10, i think they have really neat qualities to them ( see Luther Gerlach interview in view camera mag)

 

I think i am seriously considering an 8x10 deardorff with a 4x5 reducing back.

I will eventually get some decent lenses for it.

 

its a big dilemma for me, hell i dont even know if i'll be able to take photography again next september. i wish public darkrooms were dirt cheap.

 

please give me more input on this.. I would love to hear other experiences..

 

thanks

[francis_abad]

Deniz, I only have an 8x10. Film is not expensive at all - it is more money, but not expensive. You will learn to see better and hence be more efficient with your film consumption. AZO contact prints is all I do. I love it. It is so easy. I set up my contact frame and bulb in my shower room when my family has gone to be for the evening. AZO is so slow I do not need to close the door or the tv while I work for fear of fogging the paper. You cant fog it if you tried. You will get addicted to seeing and using an 8x10. Your compositional skills will improve while at the same time you are getting a great exercise (just like a marine - hiking with a loaded pack). One caveat: like me you will want something bigger eventually!

[peter_chiappini]

The 300mm f/5.6 S-Tessar Jay posted as a suggestion doesn't have an aperture; it was used as some sort of process lens. In the picture, it also looks likes its just the front group of elements. -Peter

[john_kasaian1]

Deniz,

An 8x10 'dorff is a good idea for your purposes, though I don't know what your budget is or how you intend to use your 8x10. They aren't cheap though, and even the less expensive ones come with 'ample' price tags. Sometimes there are deals though, and I don't think you can go wrong with a 'dorff. Look up the Deardorff Historical Website for lots of good info.

 

There are other, less expensive old 8x10s out there but they are usually a lot heavier. I would not count out a Century Universal, B&J, Kodak, or Agfa Ansco though. Keep in mind you'll also need a tripod that will handle an 8x10 and holders. I'm not mentioning this to discourge you but you should be aware of it when budgeting for your purchase. FWIW, I built my 8x10 "kit" quite economically and have improved upon it over the years without doing too much financial harm to either my family or myself.

 

For B+W film, try Freestyle, Photowarehouse, and J and C in the US. I've bought sheet film(Fortepan)from Eightelm photo in Canada and found them excellent in both price and service. What will be the "cheapest" for you will probably depend as much on shipping and duty as the advertised price.

 

For lenses, there are many good classic ones for 8x10 that often aren't too expensive, and you can get a modern 240 G Claron barrel and mount it in a copal shutter often for less than what many classic lenses will cost. Many Wollensak and Ilex lenses in excellent shape and in working shutters undeservedly go for 'peanuts.' There are also APO Process lenses that are cheap and teach dexterity with the lenscaps in lieu of a shutter.

 

Good Luck!

[jay_de_fehr]

Sorry about the lens suggestion, I was just taking a quick look at the current oferings, and didn't look too closely. My first 8x10 lens was a Turner Reich Triple Convertible, which was a real bargain, even with the price of the CLA by SK Grimes, and it performs beautifully to my eye. It's nowhere near as sharp and contrasty as my Ektanon, another great bargain, or as soft as my Verito, but fits very nicely between them. Three focal lengths for one bargain price. I highly recommend one, especially for someone who likes the look of vintage glass. Good luck.

[gfen]

I've recently moved from 4x5 to 8x10 so that I could contact print exclusivly.

 

The costs added up quickly. Yes, tripods and lenses and film holders: oh my! However, you forget all the LITTLE things. Your filters won't cover a 100mm front element, your darkcloth is too small, bag is too small, developing trays are too small, and then the disposables. Paper, film, and chemicals. Takes me a liter of solution to cover the bottom of an 11x14 tray!

 

The other thing to think about? Its not that an 8x10 twice the size of a 4x5, its FOUR times bigger. I have to lug 15# of camera compared to 5#. The lens must weigh in close to 5#, too. Although, I actually got a better tripod than I used to have, so oddly enough that didn't go up in weight. Heh. Suddenly the luxury of packing 10 film holders is out the door, I make due with two. Each time I press that release, the dollar signs add up in my head.

 

So, OK..I'm able to give you plenty of negative reasons. On the other hand, there's nothing like the satisfaction of holding that 8x10 contact print in your hands. Sure, I could do just as good enlarging 4x5 for less work (and probably smaller formats, too), or even scanning and printing. However, there is a very nice feeling associated with the whole project. I can carry reducing backs and my 8x10 can do duty as 4x5, 5x7, or even 4x10. There's an increased ability to do alternative processes at reasonable print sizes. Also, because I'm busy adding those dollar signs each time I take a photo, I find myself analyzing what I do even more so than before.

 

Since it is just a few months absence from an enlarger and you enjoy printing, I would probably follow others' advice to just work on your 4x5 portfolio. You can always contact those 4x5s or even send them out to a lab until you get back to the darkroom come September.

[deniz_merdan]

Well, here is the deal...

I was at the camera show yesterday.. after walking around for a while, i saw a table with a 8x10 and 5x7 wooden cameras.. i quickly ran over.. after talking to the gentleman from Equinox photography from Oregon i purchased a 1882 Carlton Rochester Optical Co. 8x10 with a lens brass in a shutter which measures around 370mm f5.6 and covers quite nicely. and the shutter wprks pretty good at all speeds(there is not many)

Front doesn't have much movements(only swing), back has tilt and swing and rise, so its all good.

Bellows has couple of pin holes but nothing terrible, GG is nice the wood needs some cleaning and maybe stripping and re-staining but still quite nice. I got a good deal on this camera so i am happy. and my tripod seems to carry it even though i wouldn't count on it in the field.

I have no film holders. the back seems to accept glass plate holders instead of regular film holders even tho it is a standard spring back. i will try to convert it to accept film holders. what is the depth of the 8x10 holders from the surface to the film plane?

 

All in all i am quite happy.

 

I am just sad cause i didn't buy the Carl Zeiss Jena 210mm for C$100

oh well maybe next camera show...

[deniz_merdan]

here is the beast.. http://www.historiccamera.com/roc/ROC_carlton.html

[rowland_mowrey]

A friend of mine has an 11x14 version of that in his foyer as a display piece. He collects antique cameras. They are beautiful pieces of equipment. His is in just about mint condition.

 

Hope you enjoy it.

 

Ron Mowrey