Travelwide 4x5: Good for learning LF?

Here is something nobody who is raving about LF will never make it available to read.
LF means slow and static.
By the time you set the rig, get it in focus ... the landscape will change.
Because sky, clouds and light are something which is constantly changing.
You will spend fifteen minutes before you’ll be able to press release cable and light, clouds pattern has changed.
This is why here is so many mediocre LF landscapes, including Phortio.

Same for portraits. No LF fan write you what for portraits with LF you need to spend a lot of time to get decent portrait. Not another nothing special snap.

What LF is good for?
If you like to deal with deadly chemicals it will works with collodion.
But all collodion emulsion pictures looks the same.
Or you could get into Ansel Adams sixteen shades of grey.

Most of the fun I found with LF was using enlarger paper as negative.
MG RC 3 1/2x5 photo paper fits into 4x5 nicely. No money and time wasted on LF film. No enlarger needed, but if you scan the final print...
I’ll post example later.
Here is one nice part in LF. Wooden field camera. It just as nice as Leica. And it could lasts forever.
Not a collodion poison, but liquid light emulsion.
Google it.

shorelineae said:
Thank you very much, everyone.

As Ian (Takkun) very nicely summarized the thread, there is a wide range of advice here. When this camera popped up on a local classifieds, I was sorely tempted because nowadays we need to pay customs+VAT tax on every online purchase and there are no shops here to buy from.

That said, I don't need such a camera right now. I intend to travel sometime in the coming year and had been looking at a Fuji GSW690iii for the purpose of shooting wide landscapes while on the move (literally; cross-country travel).

I do currently scan both 35mm & medium format negatives. I started learning darkroom printing recently and that's going slowly in parallel (I like it; it's fun!).

I think for my particular needs, as many of you have suggested, it makes sense to focus on medium format for now and wait for when I have the time, budget and access to a full-size LF camera.

Considering that I wanted to use a camera on my _travels_ which suggests that I'll be trying to shoot a lot in a small span of time, I may not have the luxury of time that LF demands. Thus, a medium format rangefinder (pun intended) like GSW690 or similar, suits me best.

I'll continue reading about LF in the meantime to educate myself.

My profuse thanks to everyone who took the time to reply; I learnt something from all your replies!
Click to expand...
 
Ko.Fe." This is why here is so many mediocre LF landscapes, including Phortio."
Beyond this there are many mediocre photographs with iphones, P&S cameras, Leicas et al, medium format....mediocrity is not limited to LF.....
 
Sigh.. I routinely was able to setup and take a image with my LF gear in 2-3 minutes. That is, setup tripod, mount camera, lens on, standards aligned, focus , film holder on and image snapped. It's very doable. This is minus movements though and essentially guessitmating exposure. Anyone who says otherwise has probably not shot any LF at all or so occasionally that they are absolutely unfamiliar with gear. It does take time. But the more you use it the quicker you get
 
5x7 Sinar Norma 1 by Nokton48, on Flickr

LF does not have to be slow. Inexperienced users are slow. This is my 5x7 Sinar Norma and with automated cables I can can use it NEARLY as fast as ANY other camera I've used regardless of format. Not THAT expensive; there is one over on Phototrio right now for $250 from Japan. Of course you can pay more. This is the LEICA M2 of view cameras. I've owned many M2s and I own many Normas. If you are contemplating LF in the near future I highly suggest you investigate the NORMA. World finest in every way.

I boxed this camera and set it up twenty times in a row, by actual count. That is a good way to learn the handling of it.
 
This is contact print scan from 3 1/2 x 5 print made from enlarger paper negative of the same size. Click on it to see it in the large size.


Underwood by Kostya Fedot, on Flickr

Deardorff38 said:
Ko.Fe." This is why here is so many mediocre LF landscapes, including Phortio."
Beyond this there are many mediocre photographs with iphones, P&S cameras, Leicas et al, medium format....mediocrity is not limited to LF.....
Click to expand...

I'm not LF fan after using it. Including printing under enlarger.
You could not like it, but with LF it more often limited to very static objects (if you are not this F1 photog with LF SLR or with LF RF). But anything else, including mobile phones allows to take more pictures in situations where LF just useless. And for anything static even mobile phone wins because with mobile phone you could get better angle.

stompyq said:
Sigh.. I routinely was able to setup and take a image with my LF gear in 2-3 minutes. That is, setup tripod, mount camera, lens on, standards aligned, focus , film holder on and image snapped. It's very doable. This is minus movements though and essentially guessitmating exposure. Anyone who says otherwise has probably not shot any LF at all or so occasionally that they are absolutely unfamiliar with gear. It does take time. But the more you use it the quicker you get
Click to expand...

Where, in NYC?

Where I'm have to pack everything before I go from one spot to another. Where I'm it is often even no roads and no flat, even surface to put tripod on.
It takes me or anyone else here more than 2-3 minutes just to make sure what tripod is ready , steady and secure. It has absolutely nothing to do with amount of exposures taken.
Or even film format.
Do not tell me what Ansel Adams was taking it with within two minutes in the Rockies. And read how Yousuf Karsh was taking it for portraits. No dross images, because he was preparing for very long time even before seater was in the frame.

I bet you or this chunk of metal user above :) just never really timed it, it just in your imagination.
 
I use 4x5 for portraits and street photography. I have no need for lens movements of any sort. I have a late-model Crown Graphic with a top mounted rangefinder that is 100% accurate. I admit that a 4x5 field camera is not as easy to use as many, smaller format cameras, but it isn’t hard either. Composing 4x5 is easy, focusing is easy and pressing the shutter button is easy. Pulling out the dark slide is an admitted pain, as is changing changing a film holder. But the results from a 4x5 negative make it all worth it. Quality is better than square format 120.

I use about everything. 4x5, 120, 35mm film and digital. I use whatever gives me the best results, or helps me capture the image I see in my mind. 4x5 is a big part of that.

Jim B.
 
Ko.Fe. .... nice rant. I think the OP was wondering if LF would work for him.....and his photo work ("I would like to use it as a 4x5 camera for landscapes while traveling or environmental portraits") rather than why it doesn't work for you.
 
For me, large format is about looking at the ground glass and figuring out what you want to put in there. I like 4x5, but the view on the glass isn’t that different from medium format to make the hassle worth it (to me). So I deal with the much greater pain of 8x10 since I like the view. What happens if I move the camera here, do I need more depth of field there, nah that’s boring, maybe move it over here.....All things that could be done with a smaller camera, of course, but I like the process through the ground glass. And I enjoy making contact prints.

Not sure the Travelwide would give me that. It seems great for traveling light though, but not sure it’s worth it over medium format.
 
Deardorff38 said:
Ko.Fe. .... nice rant. I think the OP was wondering if LF would work for him.....and his photo work ("I would like to use it as a 4x5 camera for landscapes while traveling or environmental portraits") rather than why it doesn't work for you.
Click to expand...

Please, read the entire thread and especially what OP has written. Preferably with paying more attention what OP was asking about. Right now it doesn’t looks this way. :)
 
I did the unforgivable commenting on LF, thinking that the 4x5 was a real 4x5..
Not a cute weigh nothing, no movements, fitted with ONE lens, a 90mm..
Looking at images, I thought all the samples were with a plastic lens in a Holga..
without that wonderful results of a really bad camera and lens..
All seem to have flare, that even we Leica aficionados would cry about..
The cost seems remarkable and in a sense good value..

My opinion based on the awful experience: the slowness, missed images,
leaking folders, film coming loose in camera and now prohibitive price of sheet film.
Ko_Fe use of paper a great idea, with great result..

Please note that depth of field a major issue, movements available or not.
Avedon lost many hundreds of images in "Shooting the West".
Focus not being on as subjects moved slightly.
Remember a portrait lens on LF is about 480mm on 8/10, 280mm on 4x5.
Think of depth of field!
The camera gets you 4x5 but is almost a Brownie in concept.
M'Lady gave me an old "U.S. Camera Annual" 1953.
There are facing portraits, one by Cartier-Bresson (35mm film),
the other by a Hollywood photographer 4/5 or 8/10.
HCB's photo is way better, sharper, no room for retouching (original photoshop).
I cannot guess what OP would really want, that's a personal decision.
All like me in "No Go" are giving their experiences..
I used 4x5 professionally till i saw the light and voila!, A Leica M3, 50mm.
 
Just because a camera uses 4x5 sheetfilm doesn't mean you are required to use it to achieve an f/64 aesthetic. Large format film offers boundless other creative possibilities. For example, getting that dreamy creamy range of tonal gradation, razor-thin depth of field at wide apertures, and that intangible three-dimensional richness smaller formats just miss. The travelwide gives you a fairly lightweight, hand-holdable, and simple tool to explore some of these other possibilities.
 
Yeah large format is slow and cumbersome, but nailing a shot on sheet film is extremely satisfying. Also I’ve enjoyed the recent resurgence of using 4x5 in documentary projects, see the links below:

https://www.bryanschutmaat.com/grays

https://www.jdudleygreer.com/somewhere-along-the-line

http://www.alystomlinson.co.uk/personal/ex-voto/

https://www.matthewgenitempo.com/jasper

As for the Travelwide being a suitable camera for learning LF, if you’re mostly going to to do landscape work then it’ll do. You’ll learn about the 4x5 workflow and you’ll eventually obtain all the gear for that if you like it, then you can upgrade to a more flexible camera if you want to use longer lenses and movements.
 
I liked the idea of the Travelwide, and used it for a while. However, the helical assembly is very fragile. Mine took a minor hit and it destroyed the assembly and consequently the camera itself. You are better off with a Crown Graphic.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
This is contact print scan from 3 1/2 x 5 print made from enlarger paper negative of the same size. Click on it to see it in the large size.


Underwood by Kostya Fedot, on Flickr



I'm not LF fan after using it. Including printing under enlarger.
You could not like it, but with LF it more often limited to very static objects (if you are not this F1 photog with LF SLR or with LF RF). But anything else, including mobile phones allows to take more pictures in situations where LF just useless. And for anything static even mobile phone wins because with mobile phone you could get better angle.


Where, in NYC?

Where I'm have to pack everything before I go from one spot to another. Where I'm it is often even no roads and no flat, even surface to put tripod on.
It takes me or anyone else here more than 2-3 minutes just to make sure what tripod is ready , steady and secure. It has absolutely nothing to do with amount of exposures taken.
Or even film format.
Do not tell me what Ansel Adams was taking it with within two minutes in the Rockies. And read how Yousuf Karsh was taking it for portraits. No dross images, because he was preparing for very long time even before seater was in the frame.

I bet you or this chunk of metal user above :) just never really timed it, it just in your imagination.
Click to expand...

I don't shoot LF anymore since I moved to NYC. This was upstate NY. Where it snows really bad and there's enough wildthings to photograph. I don't know what Adams did or what anyone else does. But just because you can't do it does not mean others can't. While I lived upstate I almost exclusively shot with a Chamonix 45n-1 and Velvia 50/100. Working at speed was important because most days I would have a limited amount of time to shoot/drive around looking for things to shoot. And yes I timed it because I knew when I would get off work, how long it is for me to get to a location that I had scouted out earlier and when the sun would set etc. Most times it was on average 5 min. I mean seriously. I've met people who shoot with speedgraphics on NYC streets and they are as fast as me with a Leica!!
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I bet you or this chunk of metal user above :) just never really timed it, it just in your imagination.
Click to expand...

NOPE. I practiced setting it up at the time and timed myself each time. Built up my skill level.

Back in the 80s and 90s I was getting paid a lot of money by prominent local Architects to deliver my goods. They won Architectural awards when they submitted my photographs. Some work appeared in national Architectural magazines and local print. :)

If you are slow you will lose good photographs.

Cell phones will not do the same job. Box cameras work OK with longer shots generally. If it's fragile box better be careful with it.
 
Ok. We must be slow here. This is what you need to understand.
We are not into architecture winning awards two mins shots here.
We don’t have architecture like this here.
But fields of corn and crop and ditches between and mountains of top soul on construction sites at new subdivisions and trails on the edge of Escarpment and iced ground on top of the waterfall. This is where I go with any gear and others with field camera.
Nor me; not anyone with LF I see here doing your quickes. Because it is not safe for setup.
How many of your two minutes shots were taken on the huge pail of top soil where you can’t find even and hard spot? And on top of it 70km/h wind.
I’m not slow; because i’m not into the same as you did for architecture snaps.
 
stompyq said:
I don't shoot LF anymore since I moved to NYC. This was upstate NY. Where it snows really bad and there's enough wildthings to photograph. I don't know what Adams did or what anyone else does. But just because you can't do it does not mean others can't. While I lived upstate I almost exclusively shot with a Chamonix 45n-1 and Velvia 50/100. Working at speed was important because most days I would have a limited amount of time to shoot/drive around looking for things to shoot. And yes I timed it because I knew when I would get off work, how long it is for me to get to a location that I had scouted out earlier and when the sun would set etc. Most times it was on average 5 min. I mean seriously. I've met people who shoot with speedgraphics on NYC streets and they are as fast as me with a Leica!!
Click to expand...

You never read about how Yosuf Karsh took his portraits with his only 8x10?
He would come in hours before...

So it was 5 minutes; not two. Thanks to be honest.
As for Graflex. I restored one and used one handheld. :)
 
OK I didn't say you are slow. :) I said if anybody operates a LF view camera in a slow manner you can sometimes lose opportunities for photographs.

Most times I spend a lot composing. But light can be fleeting and changing as we know.

I also use Plaubel Makiflex which is like a European auto iris Graflex. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top