s_udom

<blockquote>

<p>I LOVE portraiture with MF, specifically Hasselblad and 150 or longer. Have you considered a MF option instead?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Huge fan of the Hasselblad 120 macro on 645 (unfortunately have only worked with digital and not film) for portraits. But what can I say, just itching to dive into LF work! But maybe I'll have to stick with a bit of a shorter lens than is my preference for headshots if i want to keep things portable.</p>

<p>Thanks so much for the responses guys! Super helpful!</p>

<p>Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying i need to spend that much. I was just basing the number on how much I'm used to having to pay for used 35mm lenses that have the quality I'm happy with :P (both my 35mm lenses were just under that price used) And definitely used is the way I'd like to go. I'm more than happy to spend less money!! But I'm not really interested in much of an upgrade path on the lens front. Like you said, if I go used, I hopefully I can get most of my money back if I decide 4x5 isn't for me (or if I go for an 8x10 camera!)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Want to be able to control the shape of the subject? Then you will need a camera with back tilts and swings.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not sure I follow. Again, never done any portraiture on a view camera, but why would I be using back movements on a person? I'm not against it, just curious as the vast majority of my experience is with 35mm and medium format SLR so I've never really had this option. But I think you guys are right... I should just get a field camera with all the movements. </p>

<p>As for why bother with an LF camera. It's the look I'm after, not resolution (or movements, but as you guys have pointed out, I might as well experiment with them). As far as I can tell it's the look of a lens shot at f8 and still having a really shallow DOF. I'm not sure I know how to quantify it, but from what I've seen, I love that creaminess of the background falling away while having the in focus bits being tack sharp in a way that's unlike what I've seen coming out of 35mm or medium format shots. People I look to for inspiration on the LF front are people like Greg Miller and Alec Soth (and now that I'm looking again through some of my favorites, you can see the focal plane not being parallel to the camera, so guess I'm after movements afterall).</p>

<p>thanks again!</p>

<p>Hello all! Just joined the forums, and I'm off to ask probably the most asked question around.</p>

<p>I'm looking for suggestions for my first LF camera. I'm after a 4x5 field camera for portraiture. Not at all bothered about movements. Mainly concerned about it's weight and size. From what I've read a Crown Graphic with all the extraneous accessories would do the trick, but i'm wondering if there's anything else out there I should consider? I'd like to keep the camera budget down to save money for lenses, unless there's a good reason to plunk down for a more expensive camera (remember not really interested in movements).</p>

<p>Also on the lookout for 2 lenses. First something in the 85-135mm 35mm equivalent focal length range, then eventually also I'd like to get something in the 35-50mm 35mm equivalent focal length range. I'm thinking something modern, but I'm completely lost on the options. Budget on these is a bit unknown, but it would be nice to keep it under $1500/lens, but if that's unreasonable or there's an amazing lens that's worth saving up for, then so be it.</p>

<p>I've never shot film or portraiture on a 4x5 camera, although I have done product photography with a Sinar rail camera a phaseone back (I work as an assistant). I'm very interested in getting into 4x5 portraiture for my own personal work, but unfortunately I don't know anyone who still shoots 4x5 and so I'm here for guidance! Not looking to buy anything in the immediate future, more here for guidance on things to look for so I can figure out a budget that I should start saving towards :)</p>

<p>thanks!</p>