clcolucci58
Established
Thinking of going down the large format road. What would be a good 4x5 starter camera. Processing the film is that a easy task? As for printing I know I would have to get another enlarger but thinking of going the scanner route for that as well with my medium format film I shoot now. As always thanks for all the advice and feedback
Regards
Chris
Regards
Chris
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
4x5 gear is getting so cheap now that you might as well start out with the thing you want to end up with. Figure out what kind of use you are going to put it to, and choose accordingly.
Choose a monorail if perspectival movements are important, but weight and bulk are not a problem. Choose a wood field if weight is an issue. Choose a press camera if you want rangefinder focusing. Get a Linhof Technika if you want it all.
I started out doing open tray developing. Then I modified a Jobo print drum to hold 4x5 sheets. Now I have a Jobo designed for the purpose. I roll the drums in my bath tub to agitate.
4x5 is easy, and fun, requires a little patience, but can be rewarding.
Choose a monorail if perspectival movements are important, but weight and bulk are not a problem. Choose a wood field if weight is an issue. Choose a press camera if you want rangefinder focusing. Get a Linhof Technika if you want it all.
I started out doing open tray developing. Then I modified a Jobo print drum to hold 4x5 sheets. Now I have a Jobo designed for the purpose. I roll the drums in my bath tub to agitate.
4x5 is easy, and fun, requires a little patience, but can be rewarding.
x-ray
Mentor
What will you be shooting with it? Want to shoot on a tripod or hand held? Want full movements with interchangable wide angle bellows or limited movements and limited capability of lenses? What kind of money do you want to spend?
For backpacking and high portability with wide angle bellows available you might consider something like a Shen Hao. There are several models depending on your preference. It's a good solid wooden flatbed with interchangable bellows. The good thing about them is they're still made and parts and accessories are readily available. They also use the standard Technika style lens board. This type of camera has to be used on a tripod.
You might find a used Wista or Wisner which are nice. Also the Nagioka was a nice field camera.
Used monorails are generally less expensive but heavier, larger and less portable. Calumet made many very good no frills cameras that can be bought for cheap. They don't have any frills but are solid and work. I used then in several places I worked in the 70's. They were originally made by Kodak.
For a really nice monorail around $400 Id suggest something like a Linhof Cardan Color 45. For the top in classic monorail cameras the Sinar Norma is tops. I use the one I bought new in 1969 to this day a have shot tens of thousands of sheets through it. Now you can find one for $500 - $800. It's a modular camera and you can add regular and wide bellows plus additional lengths of rail.
Horseman, Linhof and Sinar are first rate.
In hand held cameras a Speed or Crown Graphic are good choices. Also the Busch Pressman is good. All of these are reasonable in price. For the very best buy a Linhof Master Technika, 2000 or 3000. These are very expensive but superb. I used both a 4x5 Master Technika I bought new in 1975 for 28 years and have used my Sinar Norma since 1969.
The very best in wooden field type cameras are the Ebony and Deardorff. I purchased a beater 1930's 8x10 Deardorff in 1975. It had been used by two other pros since new and I replaced the bellows when I bought it and used it for thousands of catalog shots till I sold it about eight years ago. I made one update on it but it performed like new for nearly 80 years. I now own an Ebony SV45TE and like new v8 Deardorff 8x10. You can't go wrong with these but they'll set you back several thousand.
Lenses are important. You want a lens(es) with a big image circle if you want to use movements. I'd suggest a Schneider Symmar S, Fujinon W series, Nikkor W or Rodenstock Sironar N. Some of the Caltar lenses were made by Schneider and Rodenstock and re badged. In turn Sinar Sinaron were Rodenstock Lenses. A 150mm is normal, 180 and 210 slightly Tele. The older Ilex lenses are very good and cheap.
For wides a 90 f8 is pretty much the 1st you should consider. A SchneiderSuper Angulon (not the Angulon) can be bought very cheap. Rodenstock Grandagon f6.8, Nikkor SW f8 or Fujinon SW f8 are all superb. The Nikkor can get expensive because it has a bigger coverage.
There were a lot of different models made by most makers that although they have the same focal length are dramatically different. You really need to know what you're buying. Fuji for example made 3 different versions of the W series. The first was distinguished by smaller front element and overall size and the writing (Fujinon W and focal length) on the retaining ring that holds the front element in. These were mostly single coated but some were multi coated. These are very sharp and have very large image circles. They're very desirable and quite good. I've owned several. The second version had a large front mount and writing around the outside of the mount. These were multi coated and had less coverage. Good but less desirable. The third version was smaller and had improved coverage but not as large image circle as the V1. Very good lenses.
Fuji also made a series which was a Tessar type and very desirable in the 450 and 600 mm.
Nikon and Schneider made similar series and changes.
Feel free to pm if you have questions. I have a great deal of experience with view cameras and lenses.
For backpacking and high portability with wide angle bellows available you might consider something like a Shen Hao. There are several models depending on your preference. It's a good solid wooden flatbed with interchangable bellows. The good thing about them is they're still made and parts and accessories are readily available. They also use the standard Technika style lens board. This type of camera has to be used on a tripod.
You might find a used Wista or Wisner which are nice. Also the Nagioka was a nice field camera.
Used monorails are generally less expensive but heavier, larger and less portable. Calumet made many very good no frills cameras that can be bought for cheap. They don't have any frills but are solid and work. I used then in several places I worked in the 70's. They were originally made by Kodak.
For a really nice monorail around $400 Id suggest something like a Linhof Cardan Color 45. For the top in classic monorail cameras the Sinar Norma is tops. I use the one I bought new in 1969 to this day a have shot tens of thousands of sheets through it. Now you can find one for $500 - $800. It's a modular camera and you can add regular and wide bellows plus additional lengths of rail.
Horseman, Linhof and Sinar are first rate.
In hand held cameras a Speed or Crown Graphic are good choices. Also the Busch Pressman is good. All of these are reasonable in price. For the very best buy a Linhof Master Technika, 2000 or 3000. These are very expensive but superb. I used both a 4x5 Master Technika I bought new in 1975 for 28 years and have used my Sinar Norma since 1969.
The very best in wooden field type cameras are the Ebony and Deardorff. I purchased a beater 1930's 8x10 Deardorff in 1975. It had been used by two other pros since new and I replaced the bellows when I bought it and used it for thousands of catalog shots till I sold it about eight years ago. I made one update on it but it performed like new for nearly 80 years. I now own an Ebony SV45TE and like new v8 Deardorff 8x10. You can't go wrong with these but they'll set you back several thousand.
Lenses are important. You want a lens(es) with a big image circle if you want to use movements. I'd suggest a Schneider Symmar S, Fujinon W series, Nikkor W or Rodenstock Sironar N. Some of the Caltar lenses were made by Schneider and Rodenstock and re badged. In turn Sinar Sinaron were Rodenstock Lenses. A 150mm is normal, 180 and 210 slightly Tele. The older Ilex lenses are very good and cheap.
For wides a 90 f8 is pretty much the 1st you should consider. A SchneiderSuper Angulon (not the Angulon) can be bought very cheap. Rodenstock Grandagon f6.8, Nikkor SW f8 or Fujinon SW f8 are all superb. The Nikkor can get expensive because it has a bigger coverage.
There were a lot of different models made by most makers that although they have the same focal length are dramatically different. You really need to know what you're buying. Fuji for example made 3 different versions of the W series. The first was distinguished by smaller front element and overall size and the writing (Fujinon W and focal length) on the retaining ring that holds the front element in. These were mostly single coated but some were multi coated. These are very sharp and have very large image circles. They're very desirable and quite good. I've owned several. The second version had a large front mount and writing around the outside of the mount. These were multi coated and had less coverage. Good but less desirable. The third version was smaller and had improved coverage but not as large image circle as the V1. Very good lenses.
Fuji also made a series which was a Tessar type and very desirable in the 450 and 600 mm.
Nikon and Schneider made similar series and changes.
Feel free to pm if you have questions. I have a great deal of experience with view cameras and lenses.
Shac
Well-known
The head bartender has some great articles on 4x5's:'
https://cameraquest.com/classics.htm - this is the main camera area - scroll down for large format. Here's 2 to star off
https://cameraquest.com/techs.htm
https://cameraquest.com/supergrp.htm
I have the Super Speed Graphic and it's a sturdy (metal body) and relatively light field camera, with a revolving back.
APUG site is a good place to look for used 4x5's as well as Large Format Photography
Good luck & have fun
https://cameraquest.com/classics.htm - this is the main camera area - scroll down for large format. Here's 2 to star off
https://cameraquest.com/techs.htm
https://cameraquest.com/supergrp.htm
I have the Super Speed Graphic and it's a sturdy (metal body) and relatively light field camera, with a revolving back.
APUG site is a good place to look for used 4x5's as well as Large Format Photography
Good luck & have fun
x-ray
Mentor
Look on the large format forum.
The Super Speed had no internal shutter where as all other Speeds had one. The Anniversary and earlier were wood bodies and the Pacdmaker was metal. The Crown Graphics had no shutter and the Pacemaker had a metal body. I still have a pacemaker my dad bought new in 1964. They're great but basic cameras.
The Super Speed had no internal shutter where as all other Speeds had one. The Anniversary and earlier were wood bodies and the Pacdmaker was metal. The Crown Graphics had no shutter and the Pacemaker had a metal body. I still have a pacemaker my dad bought new in 1964. They're great but basic cameras.
EdSawyer
Established
Pacemaker speeds/crowns still have a wooden body (Mahogany). The Super Speed / Super graphic had a metal body. I like the pacemakers best of all the Graflex rangefinder 4x5s.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Crown Graphic for me. There's nothing like hand holding a large format camera ... suddenly your Weegee! LOL 
rjbuzzclick
Well-known
I started with a Pacemaker Speed Graphic, which I still use. I developed my film using a Beseler print drum by rolling it back and forth on a 2x4 as I didn't have a motor base. I also didn't have an enlarger so I contact printed my negatives using two pieces of glass and a 4-watt nightlight bulb. It was an inexpensive way to get into 4x5. Once I decided that I liked it I bought the other things to make it easer.
JChrome
Street Worker
There's been a lot said here. I'll just say some quick things:
I started in February with a Chamonix 45F1. I would take a serious look at them, a lot of people are using and loving them (I love mine).
I like using the grafmatic 4x5 backs. They hold 6 sheets of 4x5 and make it really convenient (also easy to load).
I bought an Oben carbon fiber legs and a RRS ball head. Like them both. No complaints about the RRS head but the Oben could have been designed a bit better. I bought it used for $250 though which was a good deal.
I like having lenses that can cover 8x10 image circles because, as a LF newbie, I love playing with movements I never had access to. That may change once I form stronger opinions.
I use Craigslist a lot. I like Arista Black and White from Freestyle to make it really cheap. In the beginning you make lots of mistakes (very easy to) so be sure your mistakes are cheap.
I develop using the Mod54 and a tank. I scan using an Epson Perfection 4990 that I purchased from the Bay.
In regards to the scanner - the 4990, V500 and V700 etc have much larger scanning real estate for film than other flatbeds. This is helpful for 35mm, 120 and 4x5. In one scan, I can scan 2 sheets of 4x5, one 8x10, 6 shots of 6x6 or 24 shots of 35mm. This is much more than my Canon 9000F can do and reduces my workflow.
Let us know what you do!
I started in February with a Chamonix 45F1. I would take a serious look at them, a lot of people are using and loving them (I love mine).
I like using the grafmatic 4x5 backs. They hold 6 sheets of 4x5 and make it really convenient (also easy to load).
I bought an Oben carbon fiber legs and a RRS ball head. Like them both. No complaints about the RRS head but the Oben could have been designed a bit better. I bought it used for $250 though which was a good deal.
I like having lenses that can cover 8x10 image circles because, as a LF newbie, I love playing with movements I never had access to. That may change once I form stronger opinions.
I use Craigslist a lot. I like Arista Black and White from Freestyle to make it really cheap. In the beginning you make lots of mistakes (very easy to) so be sure your mistakes are cheap.
I develop using the Mod54 and a tank. I scan using an Epson Perfection 4990 that I purchased from the Bay.
In regards to the scanner - the 4990, V500 and V700 etc have much larger scanning real estate for film than other flatbeds. This is helpful for 35mm, 120 and 4x5. In one scan, I can scan 2 sheets of 4x5, one 8x10, 6 shots of 6x6 or 24 shots of 35mm. This is much more than my Canon 9000F can do and reduces my workflow.
Let us know what you do!
Dpingr1
Established
All great advice. I started with a top rangefinder Pacemaker Crown Graphic, and it is still my favorite camera. They are not too expensive, though purchasing lenses can cause you to develop GAS pretty fast. The good news is that low and medium priced lens/shutter combinations provide great images -- you don't need the newest Sironar for that. If you get a Speed (with working curtain shutter) rather than a Crown, you can use shutterless process lenses. Nothing is sharper than those. On a view or field camera, fit them with ancient (or new!) Packard shutters -- amaze your friends! Some of these lens/shutters will migrate to other large format cameras if they have sufficient coverage. So many combinations, and most for way less than a new Leica. (Of course, most things are.) One more plug -- Arista EDU sheet film is dirt cheap and pretty decent to start with -- less than a buck a sheet currently. I develop my sheets four at a time in Unicolor drums -- cheap, dependable, clean, and easy. Try it out -- those big negatives will hook you right away.
aizan
Mentor
i'd also consider 8x10. you'll need a bigger tripod and a backpack, but it's not necessarily more expensive. you'll have a lot more fun with alternative processes, too.
x-ray
Mentor
Start simple and inexpensive. There's no guarantee you'll like large format. it changes your style completely. You have to slow down and think out each shot. It's larger, heavier, more time consuming and expensive per shot. It's a totally different game so proceed with caution. buy something cheap and give it a try.
As a long time 8x10 and even 11x14 user, it's a romantic thought to shoot such a huge format but when practicality come into these cameras are beasts and awkward. For much of my career I shot catalogs on 8x10 and even 11x14 Ektachrome. Fun, use but the bigger you go the more difficult they are to use. After decades of shooting x810 and 11x14 4x5 seems like a toy now.
As a long time 8x10 and even 11x14 user, it's a romantic thought to shoot such a huge format but when practicality come into these cameras are beasts and awkward. For much of my career I shot catalogs on 8x10 and even 11x14 Ektachrome. Fun, use but the bigger you go the more difficult they are to use. After decades of shooting x810 and 11x14 4x5 seems like a toy now.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
Look for the best lenses possible...if you continue with 4x5 they can be used on any camera body...just change out the lens board...
Go with a major name brand and there should be plenty of parts out there when you need them...
You can also use a 120 film backs if you don't always want to use 4x5 film...
Go with a major name brand and there should be plenty of parts out there when you need them...
You can also use a 120 film backs if you don't always want to use 4x5 film...
x-ray
Mentor
There's no need to waste money on expensive lenses. The Rodenstock Sironar S is way over kill as are most lenses today. The Sironar S is highly regarded for resolution and coverage but out of sight in price. When it comes down to it even many turn of the century lenses are more than enough. For many years I used a very early Dagor Series III from the late 20's or early 30's for catalog work for Philips - Magnavox - Philco. It was so old that it wasn't factory coated and had it's own bloom (natural coating from oxidation). I shot the catalogs on 8x10 Ektachrome and it was just as good as my new Symmar. I liked the larger image circle of the Dagor vs the Symmar. One of my current lenses is a 60 year old 12" Commercial Ektar for my 8x10 and 4x5 with excellent results. I own quite a few modern lenses yet and have had the best of the best, the Apo lenses and there's no difference unless you're an exceptional photographer and making murals. If you need the additional image circle for product to architecture then that's one thing but just to buy the "Best" for bragging rights then that's silly. Anyway, what is the best? Most coverage, least flare, highest resolution, least distortion, what is the best? The best is what works for you for your application. I even used a turn of the century triple convertible B&H Zeiss protar on my 8x10 for some major commercial jobs. I was ancient and had a gouge in the front element and was made 50 years before coatings were invented. It was a stellar performer.
Product work in studio, the Goerz Red Dot Artar and Rodenstock Apo Ronar are tops and I've owned several and used them for decades. They're shy on coverage but super flat field and apo process lenses for close studio work under 10 times the FL of the lens. Oh yes, they're slow, f9.5, f11, f16 wide open. For general work the Schneider Symmar S, Nikkor W, Fujinon W and Rodenstock Sirronar N are the tops and reasonably priced used. Great coverage, f5.6 on most and sharp as a razor. For larger image circles the vintage Goerz Dagor, Rodenstock Sironar W, Schneider Symmar HM and Fuji 1st version W Fujinon are great. Dagor's, Sironar W and Symmar HM will set you back some major change. For the really big image circle the Schneider Super Symmar XL will blow a hole in your wallet but they cover unlike anything else.
Great reasonably priced vintage lenses with adequate coverage and classic rendering are the Kodak commercial Ektatr's in Ilex shutters. Also the classic Kodak Ektar 203mm f7.7 Ektar is superb. It's tiny and ultra sharp even wide open at close distances. I have one and have used it for years.
You can spend a boat load of money but you'll never see the difference.
x-ray
Mentor
It's hard to tell much from gallery photos but here's one from 1975 with a 150mm Symmar S
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=59031
Here's one with the B&L Zeiss Protar on 8x10
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=59119
Here's one with a 19" Goerz Red Dot Artar on 8x10
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=59118
Here's one on 2x3 with a 53mm f4 Super Angulon
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58532
ANOTHER ON 8X10 (10 minute exposure at f256) with the B&L Zeiss Protar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58530
I'm guessing here but fairly certain this was either a 150 or 210mm Symmar S on 4x5
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58531
I think this was an 8-1/4" Red Dot Artar Goerz on a Baby Deardorff 4x5
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58093
Here's a 180 Symmar (pre S) on 5x7 Sinar Norma
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58002
This is a 121mm Super Angulon f8 on a 5x7 Sinar Norma
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=57922
This was another 5x7 with my 1930's Deardorff and Super Angulon F8
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=57921
This was shot with a 4x5 Pacemaker Crown Graphic with a 135mm f4.7 Xenar Schneider
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=25880
Another with the Pacemaker 4x5 and 135 Xenar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=25879
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=59031
Here's one with the B&L Zeiss Protar on 8x10
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=59119
Here's one with a 19" Goerz Red Dot Artar on 8x10
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=59118
Here's one on 2x3 with a 53mm f4 Super Angulon
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58532
ANOTHER ON 8X10 (10 minute exposure at f256) with the B&L Zeiss Protar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58530
I'm guessing here but fairly certain this was either a 150 or 210mm Symmar S on 4x5
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58531
I think this was an 8-1/4" Red Dot Artar Goerz on a Baby Deardorff 4x5
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58093
Here's a 180 Symmar (pre S) on 5x7 Sinar Norma
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58002
This is a 121mm Super Angulon f8 on a 5x7 Sinar Norma
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=57922
This was another 5x7 with my 1930's Deardorff and Super Angulon F8
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=57921
This was shot with a 4x5 Pacemaker Crown Graphic with a 135mm f4.7 Xenar Schneider
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=25880
Another with the Pacemaker 4x5 and 135 Xenar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=25879
dfatty
Well-known
Great information in this thread, thanks. I hopefully will be dipping my foot in the 4x5 water soon with a Travelwide. After I see what the results look like, I may try a larger body with movements.
mdarnton
Well-known
I had exactly the same idea, about 4x5, two years ago. Since then I've worked through a lot of equipment, and settled on 8x10. What I would say is that there is really no way to go wrong: LF equipment is dirt cheap, lenses work on any camera and many cross formats. If you change your mind it's easy to slide over into something else.
Wanting to do studio portraits, I started with a 4x5 Cambo--they're cheap and it's an extensive system, and the parts are very easy to find--but any of the suggestions above are good ones. Probably the biggest decision to make in advance is whether you are looking for a studio, field, or hand camera.
Wanting to do studio portraits, I started with a 4x5 Cambo--they're cheap and it's an extensive system, and the parts are very easy to find--but any of the suggestions above are good ones. Probably the biggest decision to make in advance is whether you are looking for a studio, field, or hand camera.
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
I'd like to second "x-rays" remarks. The lens gas is hard to resist, but really
don't fall for it until you've seen what some inexpensive lens can do. Peter
don't fall for it until you've seen what some inexpensive lens can do. Peter
mdarnton
Well-known
Yeah. In fact after buying a couple of modern lenses I stumbled into a cheap archaic one and loved the effect so much I haven't bought a modern lens since. With large format, sharpness isn't really a big issue, and there are other things to consider.
And the word xray reminds me of something else. If you go over to the LF forum you can find threads on using xray film. If you look at my Flickr page you can find examples. The stuff costs 40 cents per 8x10 sheet--that's like buying at 1975 prices! And it has its own lovely look. That's what really swung me big into LF.
And the word xray reminds me of something else. If you go over to the LF forum you can find threads on using xray film. If you look at my Flickr page you can find examples. The stuff costs 40 cents per 8x10 sheet--that's like buying at 1975 prices! And it has its own lovely look. That's what really swung me big into LF.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Working, fresh Graflex to keep it compact and as expensive lens as you could afford.
Developing is one 4x5 per regular tank. Scanning is 1/2 of 4x5 per scan and stitching. Contact prints are good enough as well.
It doesn't hurt to try it. I did. With cheap cameras and mediocre lenses... Not worth of it...