Question to all of you about film

[Lynn Ross]

I owned a Minolta SRT-101 in 1968, and then in 2003 I again brought a camera the 10d and have been having a blast, I've gone through many different camera's since then and lenses (you know the drill)
Just sold all my DSLR gear and brought the RD-1 and I'm really amazed with it but that's not what I was up to here...

Too you that have stayed the course (to use the presidents, Quote) and use film are you happy with this choice and those of you that have the advantage of both the digital and the film experience do you find that the digital is too easy to go to .... The reason that I'm asking this is I have a huge hankering to sell this camera and go to a large format 4x5, I'm not rich and I’m worried that the expense would end up more then the fun.

I brought the cameras in the first place to be in the great Outdoors and to travel to places that I’ve seen in photo’s … and I have done some of that traveling after all I live in Utah ….
Well to those of you that want to answer, Thanks ahead of time
Lynn
this is my site with my digital cam's... it's just a place to show my family my hobby🙂
www.wanderingon.com

 

[Dougg]

Hi Lynn -- I can sympathize that it becomes very hard to make equipment-changing choices when it involves selling your present gear (with which you're familiar) to acquire the new gear (which you hope you'll like better). It's a committment based on uncertainty.

Also, you are likely to find it useful to switch back to other gear as projects differ. If you can possibly manage the finances, try to keep your present gear if there's any chance you'll want it in future. Probably less expensive than selling/buying, selling/buying cycles.

 

[Silva Lining]

Nice website Lynn,

I use my DSLR mainly to take picures of my 10 month old son or when I am asked to shot a wedding or function of some sort, otherwise I hanker after film and look for opportunities to use my film cameras. I did try 4x5 and did enjoy it although I found that it was too slow and cumbersome for my type of photography. Landscapes and still lifes however do give the opportunitiy to tke advantage of the gint negative and associated quality.

I generally carry a Leica M3 and a Voigtlander Perkeo 6x6 medium format - both are reliable and give me quick and easy results.

 

[Bryce]

Lynn-
Of course this is all very personal, but I don't think I'd rely exclusively on a large format camera. Unless you're fabulously wealthy and also willing to carry a lot of heavy gear, you'll be limited to one or two lenses, and of course the snapshot isn't an option...
Also, with color you'll be dealing with long wait times and a lot of expense.
In your shoes I think I'd keep the RD-1 and your most used lenses, and save for a simple 4x5 kit. One lens, a relatively inexpensive body, etc. Just use the big camera for shots you're sure about and use the RD-1 as a meter, poloroid back, and for more informal shooting.
Another option is a compromise, and the route I've taken- medium format. Image quality isn't quite comparable to 4x5, but it's getting there.
I've ended up with too much gear, period. We'll leave that as another matter, but- I have Pentax 35mm gear, plus a *ist DS, a Voigtlander Bessa L and 15mm lens, a Brooks Veriwide (think Bessa L with 21mm lens, scaled up to 6x9 format), Fuji GS645S, and Mamiya TLR with 55, 80, 135mm lenses.
What actually gets used? The Fuji. Great image quality and easy to use; 80% of the pictures I take are with it. Next is the Voigtlander, followed by the digital Pentax, then the Brooks. The rest mostly gathers dust, but I can't sell it either- I occasionally want a long lens, macro capability, etc. The K1000 was given to me by my dad as a teenager and was my first real camera...
Whatever you decide on, keep shooting!

 

[rover]

As Silva has said, I haven't been bitten by LF, yet, due to the slow nature of the process and I do not generally shoot in an environment where it will flourish. That said, I have shot MF and suggest that you consider that. It is a step up from 35mm/dslr and along the line of progression to LF. It is pretty cheap to get into now too. You may be able to keep what you have and add a decent MF kit to your arsenal.

 

[Richard Black]

Film and Digital

Film and Digital

I use both, cop out, yeah. But I found the Olympus SP-350 to be an ideal, nearly rangefineresque, digital camera for me. It shoots raw, has a hot shoe, and I can adjust till the cows come home. But I travel with a Bessa R and two lenses, Minolta SLR, X-700, X-370 or Maxxum 4, and a Fuji GS645 rangefinder or a Moskva 5. All very small and I can get the best of film and digital. It is not either or but why not both, color and b&w. Keep what you have and pick up an inexpensive MF folder and enjoy.🙂

 

[mc_vancouver]

Film is obsolete. I use film.

Film is environmentally unsustainable. I get my film processed at a lab that has filters and recycles as much as it can, including recycling the canisters.

Film is slow. Slow is good.

36 frames is limiting. Limits force creative responses.

Film is grainy. Digital can't be blown up beyond a certain limit without disintegrating into pixels.

Photography, even digital photography, references film: ISO, granularity, printing, etc. I think as an art form film is better than digital for some things, like large format, and still adequate for "artistic" photojournalism and street photography, but for family/travel/reportage digital is the better choice.

 

[mwooten]

Lynn,
I agree with what Doug has said. Keep your gear if you can. I also think you might like to add a medium format to your RD1. They are rather "affordable" right now. I've a Bronica 645 ETRSi in the drawer that makes fantastic images, and it has the smallest negatives of the medium format "family."
If your feel drawn to 4x5, then I suggest finding a local college that has photo department, uses LF, and take a course. That way you can properly learn how to use a LF camera, and you can sort of "try before you buy."

Take care,
Michael

 

[Lynn Ross]

Question to all of you about film

Thanks Doug, you are right about keeping this camera I love the size of it and that is the reason for buying it in the first place is the size

I gave up on the DSLR's because of the size and now I want to go bigger 🙂 but when I was doing those cameras I loved going slow and deliberate, I had a T/S lens and it made me enjoy the between the ears stuff that you don't get when you are blasting away at the sunset or sunrise's

Sliva, Thanks for you input ... as I said above I like the slow but I'm also getting old 🙂 er

Bryce, the funny thing is that they don't weigh too much more than my old 1d and a 400 mm, 17-40, 90 TS, macro lens and all the gadgets a man can think of 🙂 I have priced the medium format cameras and the 4x5 is a steal compare to them camera $250, lens $325... I just wanted to know if you folks feel the expense of the film after a good shooting weekend

Rover, thanks for your thoughts also I want both but the facts are I have some medical stuff going on for the next 6 months then I'll be more able to work more and it will be summer and can do more, also the City of Salt Lake has decided to tear down the downtown and rebuild it so all the interesting buildings that are there won't be any more .....

Rich, you have the right idea I think that a small canon G2-G5 or something like that

mc_vancouver ... I agree slow is good, I've always been slow🙂 don't know if that's good but I've made it this long ... and I agree with artistic being a thought process...

Michael, Thanks for you comments, I don't feel that there is much difference between medium or large format, or 35mm or digital except that the film takes money to develop and the digital takes stop spending power 🙂 and so does this thing I'm wanting to do.
Lynn

 

[Trius]

Lynn: I am going to dissent a bit here. Yes, keep the R-D1 if you can, not just because it is digital, but because it is an RF.

But (IMHO, of course) skip MF and go for 4x5. I've had 35mm film (OM, Leica, Olympus & other fixed lens RF), MF (Rollei SL66 with 3 Zeiss lenses) and 4x5 (Toyo 45A field w/ Fujinon lenses) ... all of which I've loved and all of which have their particular use.

For me, 4X5 is the sweet spot of landscape, scenic and nature photography unless you want to go larger and focus on contact prints. The two main technical advantages of LF are that the film comes in sheets and that there are camera movements which allow you to do things that are not possible (or at least very difficult) otherwise.

The use of sheet film is liberating in many ways. Customizing development, esp. for b&w is so much easier. You have better control, even when it comes to testing out a new film or developer. Proof prints are so much larger and tell you more. Have you ever seen a really good 4x5 or larger contact print? It is inspiring. One photographer and author/teacher I admired in many respects was Fred Picker. He taught that a good photographer's contact proof should be as good or better than the majority of photographers' "exhibition" prints. I took him at his word and strove for this. Whether I succeeded or not is irrelevant; what I gained was a respect for the craft plus proof prints that told me so much more about what I was doing than if I made "just proofs".

You have already identified that "slow is good", and you live in an area where slow and studied observation is especially beneficial ... and possible. Zion is my favourite US national park. While the colours are wonderful, if I lived near I would be devoting a whole ton of b&w to that park. Roll film might be handy in some situations, in fact, a smaller camera might be the only practical tool in some settings. But there is way more than enough to be done with a large format camera; you won't be without subject matter, be it Zion, Arches, wherever.

A 4x5 with one lens is also more versatile than a roll film camera with one lens, in my opinion. I'm not sure why this is, but I just sense it. For 4x5, I would suggest a lens of about 210mm, which is slightly long. My "normal" lens on my Toyo is a 150; it's ok, but I've never been as comfortable with it as with a 50 on a 35mm. Again, I'm not sure why. I haven't used it for a long time, so maybe if I picked it up again, I'd feel differently.

A good quality, well kept 4x5 field camera can be had fairly cheaply used. And in the "normal" range (150-210/240mm), there are lots of good lenses that are not terribly expensive. I recommend a field camera for its added portability, but some prefer a traditional 4x5 with centre rail. A field 4X5 with one lens and a few holders, plus tripod, focusing hood and loupe is not a huge kit. It's not like an R-D1 with a couple of lenses and no tripod, certainly.

But if you are healthy and reasonably fit, you will do fine. I am currently not really fit enough, due to a disability, to really use my 4x5 to great advantage. That is a really sad thing for me, but I am working on getting back to a place where I can at least "justify" having it.

Whatever you do, keep it simple. Get one larger camera, one lens, two films (one colour, one b&w), and learn. With MF and LF, the cost of trying out lots of different options is too high. Not the $$ ... it's the time that's costly. To a large extent we're gearheads here, and that's not always a good thing. With 4x5 it's a really bad thing.

Let me know when you make that first really good 4x5 contact print. You'll be changed.

 

[ZeissFan]

Nice answer Trius. And very good thoughts here.

Myself, I continue to move further back in time with each purchase. I'm pretty much wedded to film, although I use digital on occasion but generally not for anything that I would consider "serious."

One thing you might try is a 6x9 camera and if you like that, then move up to perhaps a 9x12 plate camera. You can still buy sheet film at J and C photo (www.jandcphotography.com).

The plate cameras don't cost that much, relative to 4x5 equipment, and it will be lighter and easier to transport. The one thing you give up is tilt. Most have some degree of shift.

In any case, I agree with holding on to the RD-1 and continue adding to what you have. I'm a big proponent of using a variety of gear.

The worst thing is to believe that there's only one way or one camera system to take a photo.

 

[tetrisattack]

If your desire to use sheet film comes with the same hot urgency that drove you to buy your 10D and lenses and eventually your RD-1, then you might stop and reconsider. Large format photography isn't as consumable as the rest of the world of hobbyist photography. Sure, people wring their hands over what lens to buy and whether they need yaw-free movements, but the culture is remarkably true to the spirit of deliberate art. You get your camera and your tripod and that's it. You're left in your living room twiddling your thumbs wondering what to do with such a monster.

On the other hand, working with such a flexible camera system might force you to step up to the plate and produce something greater than you otherwise could have.

 

[bgb]

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/

Is worth a look lots of stuff to think about written by people that actually get out and do it 🙂

Keep everything if you can for now and ...sometime in the future sell what you don't use.

 

[ampguy]

Hi Lynn

Hi Lynn

I think it's a personal preference, and in my experience "guidelines" that suggest film, and/or MF/LF users shoot fewer but more keeper photos than 35mm, or digital snappers, that I've read such as those in the excellent Hicks and Schultz book on MF/LF that I reviewed recently in my blog, just don't always apply to others.

I think that if shooting film prevents anyone from taking as many photos as you want, then you should stick with, or move to digital. However, that being said, it's conceivable to me that some folks are happy shooting just a few shots a day, and have a very high success rate with keeper photos.

I owned a Minolta SRT-101 in 1968, and then in 2003 I again brought a camera the 10d and have been having a blast, I've gone through many different camera's since then and lenses (you know the drill)
Just sold all my DSLR gear and brought the RD-1 and I'm really amazed with it but that's not what I was up to here...

Too you that have stayed the course (to use the presidents, Quote) and use film are you happy with this choice and those of you that have the advantage of both the digital and the film experience do you find that the digital is too easy to go to .... The reason that I'm asking this is I have a huge hankering to sell this camera and go to a large format 4x5, I'm not rich and I’m worried that the expense would end up more then the fun.

I brought the cameras in the first place to be in the great Outdoors and to travel to places that I’ve seen in photo’s … and I have done some of that traveling after all I live in Utah ….
Well to those of you that want to answer, Thanks ahead of time
Lynn
this is my site with my digital cam's... it's just a place to show my family my hobby🙂
www.wanderingon.com

 

[sf]

4x5 is not like any other tool. I think Tetrisattack put it best.

I went from helf frame to 35 to 645 to 4x5 over a few years, and have experienced the best and worst of all formats in terms of usability and capability.

if you are the type of person who likes to capture "the moment" or who carries a camera around alot of the time, or who snaps lots of images, 4x5 is way outside your usual realm. It is slow, awkward, difficult to master, time consuming to prepare fpr use, and very error-inviting. It offers many ways to make mistakes.

It also gives the most control, the most square inches, slows you down so you think hard about everything, and will give you the most keepers per frame of any format, of course you'll rarely if ever shoot more than 10 or 20 frames in a week. Development can be more difficult than with smaller formats. Printing is very difficult as many labs can't deal with LF anymore.

It is good to experience other things. Try 4x5, but don't bother spending more that $400 on a setup because at the beginning, you'll never notice the difference unless you are a master printer. Buy an old field camera. They are the easiest. Or buy a monorail, they are the most capable in terms of movements.

 

[E_Aiken]

Large format is, as noted, an entirely different practice, and one with limitations that can be VERY frustrating to someone used to smaller formats. Like having a 120mm lens be a moderate wideangle, and having to stop down to f/11 to get decent depth of field on something... can you avoid the camera shaking on the tripod? Will your subject move? I love 4x5, but medium format is really where it's at for me. Quality is pretty close, and the flexibility is fantastic. I'd probably go with a MF camera like a Rolleiflex or Mamiya 7 before 4x5. You'll still get that tremendous big-film look, in a much more user-friendly package.

 

[Laurence]

Lynn, looking at your style of photography, it seems that you have a propensity toward landscape types of images, as well as images with large blocks of color and form, for the most part.

Medium or large format would go very well with this type of shooting, in my little opinion.

Personally, I would consider moving up to medium format first, and then see how it suits what you do before taking a plunge to large format. The medium format, even at 4.5x6 is quite a jump in the negative/transparency size, and will probably make your jaw drop!

It's ALL fun, though....🙂

 

[Lynn Ross]

Trius, thanks for this great info, I've been reading and drooling about this for awhile now. The camera that I've got my eye on is a 4X5 field camera with a 150 mm lens and film to boot 10 sheets of fuji 50, 10 sheets of fuji 100, 10 sheets of Provia 100 and 19 sheets of B/W and a dark cloth .... and the other one is just a camera without the lens and lensboard but that one is even cheaper, I'm leaning toward the one with all the goodies.
I like the fact that you can change ISO's or film just like digital

To me MF is too much like the SLR's that I went through except the size of the film, I feel that there is alot more one can do with that format (macro, nature) but I have a want to be in the southwest corner of this state that I live in and wander around slowly and have a camera that would be with that tempo, not just click and go click and go! Call me a dreamer, that's what I'am ....

I also have a gentleman that has a old darkroom setup for cheap with a 8x10 enlarger and enlarging lens, trays
I'm in trouble .... :bang: 🙂

Lynn

 

[Laurence]

Lynn Ross wrote: Call me a dreamer, that's what I'am ....

Well, you never brought that fact up before. So, that SEALS IT! Looks like 4x5 is coming. 🙄

 

[Trius]

All the information here is good. FWIW, I could go medium format again (esp. with Zeiss lenses!) and be very happy. But then, I have professional experience with all the formats, so it wouldn't be brand new to me.

If you do go 4x5, then do your practicing/learning with b&w since you have access to a darkroom. Anyone who has an 8x10 darkroom will have a good setup for sheet film (duh!) and you won't have to worry about equipping one, what to buy, etc. Use the Fuji stuff once you're reasonably comfortable with the camera's operation and the technical quality you're getting on b&w. That way, when you send the 4x5 chrome film in for processing, you won't be wondering if you are just too new to the equipment once you get results back. The cost of processing 4x5 colour is not worth using it for learning the basics, IMO.

Don't skimp on a tripod. I prefer wood, but that's just me. Wood doesn't bind, freeze up, get cold, etc like metal. (Yes, there are lots of really good metal and carbon fibre tripods; I'm not suggesting they're to be avoided.) I just rebuilt and refinished my tripod that is over 20 years old. Looks great, almost brand new. The other benefit is that when you mount a 4x5 on a classic wooden tripod, you will get more far more "Cool!!!" comments from passers-by. Hey, if you go to that effort, you may as well have fun with the spectators!!

Make sure you get a head assembly that is solid and easy to use. As others have noted, 4x5 is not quick and easy snapshooting; you want all your tools to be as friendly as possible. BTW, the head is the weak link in my LF setup. I'll upgrade it later once I start using shooting LF again. For most of us, getting the "ideal" kit takes awhile. As long as you know your weak links and think through your priorities, you are fine.

Earl