M8/M9 users that also use Large Format Cameras

[eleskin]

For most of my shots, the M8 and M9 are more than adequate for many subjects in terms of resolution, shadow detail, etc,,, but there are some occasions where a very large file is needed or for some of us (8x10 scanned is 800 megapixel) , a break from the digital world and the use of the good old 4x5 or 8x10 film and taking our time and really thinking about the single shot.

So for the M9 / M8 users here. How many of you put your M8/M9 down once in a while and get a 4x5 or 8x10 out just for the hell of it and why?

It is funny, because where I teach, people normally see an M8 around my neck, and the other day I had my Linhof 4x5 out. Many gave me strange looks, and one actually said what I was doing was "old school".

Funny. Old School is how I started 25 years ago, and I am convinced the "old School" knowledge made me a better digital photographer with my M8.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I use up to 12x15 inch, and I'm sure you're right that 'old school' is useful training (I bought my first 5x4 in about 1970, and started to shoot 5x4 for money a few years later). Something that's intrigued me lately, though, is 3x enlargements from 56x72mm, which comes out as 'whole plate' (6.5 x 8.5 inches, 168 x 216mm). The quality, with the right film and lens, is indistinguishable from a contact print. Which is, of course, why I do it. The M9 is fine for colour, but for me film wins (in ALL formats) for B+W.

Cheers,

R.

 

[keeds]

I use an M8u and still have my 7x17 that I can't seem to bring myself to "move on"...

 

[gdi]

I use 4x5's as well as an M9, but I only shoot B&W with them. If the M9 (or any Digital) could approach the look - tone gradation and especially DR - I don't think I would use them much. (But even 35mm B&W has big DR advantage IMO.)

 

[250swb]

Well its just ignorance that anybody thinks large format is 'old school', so perhaps the teaching is wrong? Or rather, its the insistance that everything should be 'the latest' that drives this thought?

Either way, the important thing as eleskin has intimated is not the difference in quality between an M9 and large format, but the difference in attitude towards making the photograph. You do create something different, perhaps very subtly different, if you are using a large format camera instead of a 35mm rangefinder. Its not about quality primarily. Use a Holga, use an M9, use a DSLR, use a P&S, use a 8x10, as soon as a body of work is amassed its easy to see how the choice of camera has influenced the photograph as much as the subject has.

So what people are throwing away by thinking something is 'old school' is a means of expression, just as buying the latest EVIL camera may be adopting a new means of expression. The clever thing is to educate people to see no difference between old and new cameras, but to recognise different picture making genre's instead.

Steve

 

[f16sunshine]

I use 4x5 and would like to try larger some day. Only for BW film. Roger I noticed you say 5x4 rather than the more common 4x5. I've also noticed other Europeans say the same way as well I recall there was some reason for it. Sorry to go OT but would you explain?

 

[Rayt]

I am shooting 4x5 and 5x7 and having a great time processing b/w film. I would like to get into contact printing in the future. The problem is the lack of time and I have a young family. The M9 is great because now I don't need to process 135 film and scan so more time for shooting LF.

 

[ederek]

I'm just starting with large format using a 2x3 Crown Graphic (w/ a back for roll film) and a 4x5. Will shoot B&W only.

I'm absolutely impressed by some of the M9 "digiroids" that Christopher Broadbent is doing at largeformatphotography.info with still lifes (in the "Safe Have for Tiny Formats" thread). Incredible.

Look at this page if you want to be blown away:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=43423&page=86

There's a still w/ the M9 straight up, then w/ 3 vertical images stitched.

 

[ederek]

There's also the interesting portraits being done by Frank Petronio, and some nice work by Venchka.

 

[aniMal]

I use an M8, sometimes along with a small 4x5, or lately with a Linhof. The first combination fits in an ordinary bag, but the last is better for really serious work.

I shoot all colour, what I want to have from the large format is the style, speed and resolution that it entails.

The M8 is an excellent light meter, I normally shoot the scene with it first, finding the best exposure - and also getting a "back-up" shot. Then I use the histogram to choose the exposure on film, this way it is quite easy to catch all the tonal range in a scene. I have never worked with the zone system really, but some of the 4x5 negatives from this summers trip where exemplary. One even had a perfect histogram straight out of the scanner - something I would not have been able to with just a light meter.

Digital Leicas are the perfect tool this way - one can even use the same cable release. Also the shutter speed dial and aperture ring makes it easier extrapolating the steps from say aperture 8 to 32/64.

 

[sepiareverb]

The M9 is fine for colour, but for me film wins (in ALL formats) for B+W.

Right with you here Roger.

I shoot mostly 35mm and the M9/M8.2 these days, but own and use a Canham 810 and a hybrid old 1114 (half Kodak 2D half unknown). A recent visit to the F64 show in Portland ME really made me pine for those 8x10 contact prints. I got to see a favorite Edward Weston image I'd never seen as a silver print- wow they do sing.

I'll likely be shooting some 810 this winter. I pulled the camera out this spring, but didn't really settle in with it. I shot 810 exclusively for about five years, but almost all of that was still life work here in the studio. In the field 810 is a very different animal.

 

[Voe]

I used to have a heavy Bronica ETRS, a Yashica Mat TLR, but I sold all that and bought a Fujifilm GA645Zi, it has an excellent zoom range (approx 35-55mm equiv.). It's a very small and light (for a medium format) camera, fits in a small bag together wth my Leica.

 

[robklurfield]

To all of you experts, what would be a good, cheap way for a neophyte to his feet wet with LF?

 

[Rayt]

To all of you experts, what would be a good, cheap way for a neophyte to his feet wet with LF?

http://graflex.org/speed-graphic/

 

[f16sunshine]

Rob you are no neophyte.
Try a true view camera. You can get an old Cambo 4x5 with lens for little dough. IMHO it's the best place to start. I never went any further... I learned on an old Cambo that I still have.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Rob - Sell your Leica, then you can do LF right ;-) But seriously people make too much of a fuss about it being difficult or complex. In a lot of ways it is more forgiving than smaller format stuff, just take your time.

Here's a shopping list:

1. Medium-sized tripod, Gitzo #2-series, Tiltall, etc.

2. Clean excellent-condition top-rangefinder Graflex Crown Graphic with "kit" lens (135/4.7 Xenar/Optar/Ektar). All the lenses are great, condition is all that matters, the top rangefinders are the last models made and the RFs tend to still work fine, even though you'll want to use the camera on the tripod, especially at first. You want one in stock condition, don't buy a mucked up one since they are not rare or expensive... $250 to $500.

A Speed Graphic is the same thing essentially, with a focal plane shutter that you probably won't use at first.

3. Five or so Fidelity or Lisco modern plastic film holders, don't pay more than $7-8 each used.

4. A 4-inch long Toyo "Hood" 4x Loupe, which is designed to be long enough to clear the folding metal focusing hood of the Crown, $40.

5. A darkroom or a Harrison "Pup Tent" film changing tent, $150 new.

6. Couple ten-sheet boxes of film.

7. Lightmeter

8. Cable Release

9. Lenshade if you want to be fancy....

And that is absolutely everything you need. Read up on how to load the holders and get the film processed - if you can spool 35mm reels then handling 4x5 is 100x easier.

Everything else is no different than shooting a meterless classic camera - focus, set the aperture and shutter speed, shoot.

If a monorail would suit you better then there are wonderful deals on sub $300 Cambo, Toyo, Calumet, and even Sinar F monorails, often with a decent lens. With a monorail you will tend to have and use the movements, whereas with a Crown Graphic you rarely bother with any movements and just shoot the darn thing.

These cameras are so cheap you can probably have both. After you do it for a bit you can always try a Linhof Technika or some pansified Ebony camera, but the $200 cameras make exactly the same quality picture as the $6000 ones.

Jim at mpex.com or KEH or many of the NYC stores, etc. can get you set up if you're scared of eBay.

The largeformatphotography.info forum is very helpful. That APUG site pisses me off but they will be helpful if you lie and tell them you aren't using a computer to access their website.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I use 4x5 and would like to try larger some day. Only for BW film. Roger I noticed you say 5x4 rather than the more common 4x5. I've also noticed other Europeans say the same way as well I recall there was some reason for it. Sorry to go OT but would you explain?

Euphony. In English you normally leave out the the 'by', so it's 'five-four' (generally comes out 'fi-for', with the 'v' almost swallowed) and 'ten-eight'. But then it's 'ten-twelve' and 'eleven-fourteen' (often as 'lem-fourteen'). Try it and you'll see.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

To all of you experts, what would be a good, cheap way for a neophyte to his feet wet with LF?

Dear Rob,

You might find the following of interest:

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps large.html (a survey of large formats and cameras)

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps how re-shutter.html (re-shuttering LF lenses)

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps how loading cut film.html (loading cut film holders)

My own inclination is not to piddle around with 5x4 but to go straight to a sensible size format such as 5x7. MUCH nicer contact prints!

Cheers,

R.

 

[robklurfield]

Frank, sell my Leica? I did that twice and regretted it both times (the only one I don't miss is the Digilux 2 that is now in the able hands of Memphis; terrible regrets about selling the CL, then, later, all at once, an M4, M6 35 Cron, 50Dr cron, 90 tele-elmarit; miss all those; but, life moves on). Never again. Actually, worse than selling a camera, we are selling a house. When it's sold, I'm going to use a little of the proceeds to try something new, possibly LF. Thanks for the very detailed list and the sense of humor (especially about APUG).

Roger, I've visited your pages on this topic, but not recently. I probably not buying anything until next year. So, in due time, I'll have to revisit your excellent section on LF.

Frank, am I correct in understanding that you don't do any wet printing anymore? All scans, even with your LF stuff? Then printing on a 2200? I actually have a 2200. This is beginning to seem like some doable even by me.

You experts make this seem easy for a ham-handed, all-thumbs dummy like me. 100X easier to load film holders than spools? That sounds great to me.

 

[downstairs]

....So for the M9 / M8 users here. How many of you put your M8/M9 down once in a while and get a 4x5 or 8x10 out just for the hell of it and why?....

I decouple my 8x10 once in a while and and reshoot with M8 and M9 just for the hell of it and hoping to convince myself that I'm not wasting time with the 8x10. I post the results here.
The most interesting results come from 3 bracketed and tone-mapped M9 shots. The sharpest, but not particularly interesting, from stitched M8 and M9 shots with the macro elmar (longer lens + more film area). Multiple-scan tone-mappped 4x5s hold up pretty well. The weakest results are from straight 8x10s. There seems to be no way to build up mid-tones in development. Shadows and highlights come out fine in the soup but mid-tone require a computer. Or not.