Question re: Adams 'Rose and Driftwood'

[Wenge]

Does anyone know what focal length 4x5 lens A.A. shot this image with? All I can find is it was 4x5 and shot close in natural light at f/45 but can't find which mm lens he used. Maybe a LF expert can tell (or knows)? Many thanks. Mark

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I read it in one of his books once. Might have been in "Examples: the Making Of 40 Photographs." I don't remember the focal length though, and it really doesn't matter. For a closeup image like that lens focal length is less critical than for other types of work. He probably used a standard or slightly longer than standard lens. Something like a 210mm would work well for that.

 

[MrFujicaman]

8 inch Kodak Zeiss Anastigmat as per "Examples"

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

8 inch Kodak Zeiss Anastigmat as per "Examples"

That's 200mm. I was close in my guess!

 

[Wenge]

200mm that close at f/45 ..and got those results..wow...was just curious, thks guys

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

200mm that close at f/45 ..and got those results..wow...was just curious, thks guys

Remember that on 4x5 a 200mm lens is basically a normal lens. On 4x5, a 150mm lens is technically the equal to a 50mm lens on 35mm, but many large format photographers use a 210mm as their standard lens. When I briefly shot 4x5, I had a 203mm Kodak lens that was incredibly sharp and worked great as a standard lens.


Most of the time, you'll shoot at f45 on 4x5. This is necessary because such long lenses have little depth of field, even stopped down to apertures like f11 or f16 that normally give a lot of depth of field on smaller format systems.

 

[Wenge]

have been experimenting to get close-ups (w/everything in focus) lately w/ various camera/lens combos, while the Fuji GFX and the 63mm @f/16 is winning at this point, but still open to other opinions. That Adams shot is stunning.

 

[Wenge]

Chris I too shot 4x5 briefly with a 4x5 Wista (and 150 +210 Schneider? i think) but effectively zero experience w/only around 50ish final Polaroid or Velvia exposures, most of them crap (sold the camera 2011)

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

have been experimenting to get close-ups (w/everything in focus) lately w/ various camera/lens combos, while the Fuji GFX and the 63mm @f/16 is winning at this point, but still open to other opinions. That Adams shot is stunning.

If you have the Fuji medium format digital camera, you have something that will basically equal 4x5 in quality while being MUCH easier to get good results with.


The thing with large format is that the depth of field is so narrow that you cannot simply focus on the main subject and then stop down to get everything in focus, the way people often do with 35mm or medium format.


You have to focus on the closest thing in the image that must be sharp, then note the position of the lensboard on the focusing rail. Then you focus on the furthest thing that must be sharp, and note the position of the lensboard on the focusing rail. The, move the lensboard to a place exactly halfway between the near and far focus points. Then stop down. I used to have a chart that told what aperture to use depending on the spread between the two focused distances. The system worked but is cumbersome.

 

[Wenge]

GFX is also good w/adapted C/Y lens (28/2.8 and 50/1.7) along w/ AIS Nikkor 135/35.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

GFX is also good w/adapted C/Y lens (28/2.8 and 50/1.7) along w/ AIS Nikkor 135/35.

They're able to cover the larger sensor of the GFX?

 

[Wenge]

the 50 yes, 28 needs slight crop to effectively give 28mm and avoid vignetting, the Nikkor 135/3.5 old one on the other side, works too but is different in a good way.

 

[leicapixie]

Using larger formats one learns real quick about shrinking depth of field!
My Pentax 6x7 problem no smaller apertures than f22...
Before all you 35mm devotees laugh, your depth of field is for 5"x 7" print!
The larger you print, more shrinkage..
The Fuji is not even 6x4.5cm format.