sh

Michael B: Thanks so much for responding, you've been so helpful with the lens issues. For

example, it is very interesting to me to know the largest front rise you've use with your

180mm lens is 53mm. I followed the threads/links you provided (and the links inside

those as well), I recommend them to other readers. The light falloff and image circle size

discussion helped a lot. I was thinking having the extra coverage was going to lessen the

falloff and thus might be worth the expense and the weight. I've never encountered these

concepts in my 35mm and 645 lens selections. The Apo-Symmar L Spec Chart closely

matches my diagrams. The Apo-Symmar L 5.6/150 with 233mm of coverage and 52/

46mm lens displacements might be a good choice for me given what I've learned so far.

The 180mm looks good too, it offers 77/70mm displacement, but is heavier, more

expensive and I now know I may not need that extra coverage. Something to think about.

Van: I shoot digital at work 95-99% of the time, I use a Leaf digital back and clients love

digital for all the obvious reasons, one being some clients art direct while I'm working and

we can see the shots as they come up on the monitor and then they know what they are

getting - they don't have to visualize. Then we tweak the lighting or the angle or adjust for

the reflections in metallic surfaces etc. But that's work. I'm looking for something for me

personally that's where the LF enters the scene!

Mike: Thanks for the input. I do have a 5mp DSLR with several lenses for just shooting

around. And I still have complete access to the MF gear (which I sold to the company I

work for) and it's an excellent cup of tea BTW. But the resolution and controlled (if labored)

use of the LF continues to appeal to me. I just have so much to learn and consider as I get

into it.

Brian E: I agree, whether the performance and endurance of the Canon 1Ds MkII over the

5D would be justifible for my use is doubtful. There are very happy users of both those

cameras.

W T: variety is good! There are unique advantages to LF and also DSLR ﾖ both of which are

desirable and worth using.

Ole: Those example links are great, very sharp! A bright focus on the GG and being able to

take advantage of the camera's movements is important to me, especially for urban

landscape. However, paying for extra performance that I will never use is simply a waste of

money (which you didn't state explicitly but I get the point). To arrive at the two lenses I

suggested as possible choices I considered the following: the two cameras I'm interested

in have extensive movement capabilities, I knew enough that I'd have to get an idea of

what the lens requirements would be to take advantage of these movements. To do this I

created a 4x5in rectangle in Adobe Illustrator and then a 259mm circle representing the

image circle of the 90 Super-Angulon XL, a 386mm image circle for the 150mm Super-

Symmar XL, and also a 234mm circle for the 150mm Apo-Symmar L. The XL circles

provide lots of coverage (the 150XL's 386mm image circle is MASSIVE) then I moved the

circles around on screen relative to the 4x5 area so I could visually see how much

movement there was. I also checked out squashing the circles into an oval (to represent tilt

or swing). The conclusion I reached was if I used a combination of movements, such as

significant rise + swing, I was going to need a large image circle to keep the corners

bright and sharp. I'm not sure my logic on this is completely correct and I'd be happy to

spend less and have lighter lenses in return which would be a win-win. The 386mm image

circle of the 150mm Super-Symmar XL is complete over-kill, but then look at the 150mm

Apo-Symmar L which can't handle the max rise without any swing added. How often I'd

need that rise and swing I'm not sure. Here is a link with jpgs of my "rise tests" (note I

reduced them proportionally 50% in order to post).

http://www.sethhansen.com/custom/4x5_lens_coverage.html

Mike L: I was looking into the Ebony ﾖ mainly because Joe Cornish uses it. Looks beautiful,

like the kind of camera you'd just want to touch.

D.B.: I'm real sorry to hear you lost equipment in hurricane Katrina and are starting over,

but congrats on your "new" 4x5 field camera and lenses - what camera did you get?

Scott: You've hit on one of the reasons I'm excited about the prospect of working in LF...

the greater demands in decision making before and during image creation might

potentially elevate my visualization abilities. I can strive of improvement. An image isn't

great because of the camera, but rather because of our response to the photograph. For

all it's esoteric technicalities photography can still be artistic, inspiring, thought provoking

and a hundred other things including FUN!

Michael: The image circle for the Apo-Symmar L is shown on the rise diagrams I created

(see the link above).

Thanks everyone for all the helpful responses, they are much appreciated.

Wilbur: Thanks for you insight. I'd rather make one memorable image than lots of so-so

images. LF will require quality over quantity, since I'll be making fewer images and really

thinking about the whole process. Misrach - powerful stuff. Years ago when I was first

getting interested in photography a teacher suggested going to a photo exhibit, I heard

about one and went to it... opening night... I didn't know a thing about the photographer,

the place was packed with people and there were really HUGE prints on the walls, featuring

perfectly exposed and printed desolate desert spaces with traces of human activity. It

really resonated with me, it was Misrach, and by dumb luck I had stumbled into his vision.

Pico: I would love both, no can do. I live in the Los Angeles area, I'm going to do what you

suggest and rent a LF camera and give it a go.

Ole: Thanks for showing me the flip-side of the coin. I've been concerned that digital is

making film cameras obsolete, but actually digital cameras seem to become obsolete in

just a hand-full of years from their release. LF has been around for decades. Thanks for

bringing up the lenses too. What do you think of these lenses for 4x5: Schneider 5.6/150

Super-Symmar XL and the Schneider 5.6/90mm Super-Angulon XL. I'm willing to take on

more weight to gain greater movement.

Tim: I have an Olympus E-1, it is only a 5mp DSLR but it's the 4/3rds and takes very sharp

clean images. So I would continue to use that but start using LF for a "proper photo" as

you say.

Ravi: I've been looking into the 5D, a friend just picked one up and likes it very much. She

doesn't have any of the tilt/shift lenses but we could rent one and try it out on her camera.

--- I'm just greedy and a bit foolish when it comes to the 16mp 1DsMkII ;-)

Troy: I'm familiar with the Speed Graphic and Crown Graphic but not the Super Graphic. I'll

look into it and see if it has rear movements.

Mike B: I can appreciate that LF is not the thing for you, and it may not be for me either

but I'll give it a whirl (if for no other reason than to get rid of that LF voice). It really

wouldn't be such a risk to try since the equipment holds its value like you said. I'm going

to try a rental first. Did you buy into a LF system and then sell it? Do you still have it?

Mike L: Digital "polaroids" also have histograms (nice!). If I had the choice of 3 lenses and

no B1, or 2 lenses and the B1 I'd take the latter. What do you think of a 150mm XL and a

90mm XL lens for the 4x5? Honestly, I don't even know how quick-load film works. Does it

free you from using film holders? I don't think they had that stuff 20 years ago.

Justin: I value your experience and the clear way you express yourself and I can relate to

everything you've said. Like you were with the Nikon, I've been trying to create images with

the 6x4.5 that would be better made with a LF camera. Depending on what the subject is I

shoot digital, 35mm film or medium format but I've been lacking the virtues of a large

format camera . LF would fit my needs for more detail/resolution and control or the

image, it could suit my goals if I can somewhat master it, and would certainly compliment

my personality. I'm happy to take plenty of time with a subject.

Raphael: I love when photography is the "main event" don't you!!? Yeah, the either/or

approach stems from my wanting to commit to the best that I can afford. I have a 5mp

DSLR so I'm certainly not up the creek without a digital paddle. Thus I figure I could invest

a bit more in a LF camera and lenses I really want and will truly appreciate instead of

"settling" for a camera that doesn't have the movements or lenses that don't have the

coverage.

Quentin: Between your 14mp and 8x10 I'd say you are a resolution lover. I can't even get

my mind around a 8x10 camera at this point. Do you scan the 8x10s yourself or do you

send them out?

Lon: Thanks for your response and I am going to do "both". My first step is to rent a LF

camera for a weekend to get a feel for that "over all experience" of LF. The digital world is

great, I really do love it and all my images end up as digital files on my G5 Mac at home or

the G4 at work, but then time goes by and there's a G6 out and then a 7 and software

keeps updating and before you know it a 5mp sensor keeps seeming smaller and smaller

and the digital merry-go-round keeps spinning on and on and there is no getting off

there's just more stuff to buy. UGGGH!

Andrew: I agree, $7K for a digital camera body is too much even for a camera as good as

that. I'm inclined to think it's better to go with the LF system now... let the digital advances

march onward and upward... and in the mean time I'll slow down and concentrate on the

whole image making process and see what I can learn, improve upon and grow into

visually. By the time I'm ready to come out from under the dark cloth there will be some

new digital wonder-camera to lust after.

Maga: Thanks for sharing your experience with the Arca Swiss F-Field... and also the

advice to Love what I Use. That's good to keep in mind no matter what equipment we are

blessed with.

Noah: Yes the process of making a picture is more important to me now than it ever has

been, and I want to improve and grow. I don't feel ready for the 8x10 however. Like you, I

too enjoy using both film and digital and thanks for the good word on the Arca system.

It's a choice between Apples & Oranges, but has anyone else had to choose between a

large format system or a high resolution digital SLR? Have you made the LF choice and

been happy? Had regrets? Can offer insights? What about the life span of LF photography

and film in this digital age? Digital backs cost an arm and a leg so are not really an option

for me. Does anyone have experience with the Horseman View Camera Converter used

with a digital SLR? Sounds kinda funky. Any input and opinions are welcome.

Background info - if interested:

I would be a newbie to LF photography since it's been 20 years since I used a view camera

(in photography class). I recently sold my medium format gear to my employer ﾖ so I still

get to use it :-) and now I'm trying to choose between two very different systems for me

personally: a large format view camera or a high resolution digital SLR. The large format

would probably be the Walker Titan SF 4x5 (or the Arca Swiss F-Line) the high resolution

digital SLR would be the Canon 1Ds Mark II with tilt/shift lenses. Ideally I'd have both the

LF & DSLR systems but - you know how that goes $$$. Each system is really great for

different reasons, purposes and results. It stinks having to choose one or the other.

I work as a graphic designer/photographer. When I'm shooting just for myself it is usually

landscape, urban landscape, still life and portraiture. Me being so digital it should be a no

brainer (go with the Canon) but I keep feeling a soul connection with the images that can

be created with the large format camera and film; the resolving power and rich detail, the

ability to control plane of focus and perspective. Plus, many photographers whose work I

admire use LF, including Olaf Otto Becker, Peter Bialobrzeski, Michael Eastman, Alec Soth,

Edward Burtynsky, Richard Misrach, Joel Sternfeld, and Andreas Gursky. So I have a difficult

decision to make. A friend told me "why not choose whatever you will USE the most?"

which is very practical advice. But the soul part of me says... why not choose whatever you

will LOVE the most? I wonder if that could be large format.

She also had several images publish in Atomica magazine the "Sensual"

edition - Vol.2 No. 1. Atomica is a new and often interesting magazine worth

checking out from time to time.

RE: <<I find Lux's photographs look like an adult view of the disquieting, alien

nature of childhood.>>

Jeff, I feel the same way... The pictures show children, but clearly focus on

adult perceptions. The work is about adults and their views - not about how

children experience the world.

RE: <<May be it is it gives the subjects a an "exploited" look.>>

Chip, it is almost like the children are puppets on invisible strings and whose

eyes can be moved at will, they are being presented as art like a painting, but

the question is: are they being exploited?

RE: <<I didn't feel the subjects were exploited.>>

Jake, I wish I could see these images in person as you have. Thanks for

sharing.