The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

LF (4x5) Newbie Questions

Lars

Active member
90 should be no problem. Only extreme shifts are usually a problem, and then only with very short focal lengths. I think even a 65 is workable on the Chamonix, though it might make the bellows crumble a bit temporarily. I've used 47XL on my Ebony with full rise, a 75-90 should not be a problem on most folders.

If you want to use your longer lens for 1:1 macros then 180-210 is more appropriate. A 240 is likely much heavier in a Copal 3, an 480 mm extension will be a bit shaky so you'll need a second tripod to get everything to calm down. With a 180 OTOH you get 360 mm at 1:1 which is more moderate.

Then again, if you look at dedicated macro lenses for 4x5, they are usually 120 mm or so, to give a moderate extension at 1:1. There is no real need for long focal lengths for macro. Keep in mind that at 1:1 the image circle doubles, so a 4x5 lens will cover 8x10 at 1:1.
 

carstenw

Active member
The Schneider Symmar-S 210mm f/5.6 also seems to be quite affordable, although it is a bit heavier. Is there a reason to avoid it over the G-Claron? I am not sure if f/9 will give shallow enough DoF for my uses...
 

carstenw

Active member
Thanks for the macro-thoughts, Lars, that is helpful. I might just get the 210 or 240 and a dedicated macro lens later. For starting off, 1:2 or 1:3 should be enough for me.
 

carstenw

Active member
About loupes, can someone recommend a nice loupe possible to use with glasses, perhaps 6-8x magnification? Price is a concern, but quality is more important, ultimately.
 

rmueller

Well-known member
About loupes, can someone recommend a nice loupe possible to use with glasses, perhaps 6-8x magnification? Price is a concern, but quality is more important, ultimately.
Hi Carsten,

I would not use a 8x, it is only good to inspect the details of the ground
glass IMO.

I use a Schneider 6x and occasionally a Toyo 3.6x, see
http://www.adorama.com/TYFA.html for the Toyo and
http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/foto/zubehoer_lupen.htm
for the Schneider.

Regards,
Ralf
 

rmueller

Well-known member
Carsten,

The Schneider is good quality, although it has a plastic housing. I use the Toyo from
time to time to verify sharpness in the corners since it has smaller diameter.
I would recommend the Schneider.

Regards,
Ralf
 

Oren Grad

Active member
I am not sure if f/9 will give shallow enough DoF for my uses...
Do try one of those calculators. Your challenge in large format macro work is not going to be getting shallow focus, it's going to be getting deep enough focus.

F/5.6 will make viewing a bit easier. But bear in mind that focusing becomes tricky at macro distances. Your effective apertures will be smaller because of bellows extension - diffraction will rear its ugly head more quickly. And you will need to add exposure compensation because of bellows extension - this is typically ignored or handled automatically by TTL meters in smaller formats - potentially pushing you into reciprocity failure.

Shorter focal lengths enable you to get away with a shorter maximum bellows draw, but as with distant subjects they still affect the perspective and the rendering of space, and the result may not be what you want.

Large format is wonderful. But macro work in particular becomes exponentially more challenging technically as the format size goes up. Many users who prefer large format for general work continue to do macro work in smaller formats because it's impossible to achieve the results they want in any other way. Be prepared for a lot of learning in this specialized domain, far beyond the general unfamiliarity of large format.

Re lenses: at least in the US, late-model 210mm f/5.6 plasmats are plentiful and cheap. If you're on a budget, the best value for a general purpose lens in terms of optical quality for money will tend to be found in early '80s-vintage multicoated lenses - Schneider Symmar-S MC, Rodenstock Sironar-N MC, Caltar II-N MC (which is just the Rodenstock under a private label, usually cheaper because of that). Specialized macro lenses (Macro-Sironar, Macro-Symmar, Nikkor AM) will be better corrected than general-purpose plasmats for 1:2 or 1:3, but they will tend to be much more expensive, especially if you want the longer focal lengths. You can start with a regular plasmat and see where that takes you.
 

carstenw

Active member
Oren, I am entirely with you, I am not intending to use f/5.6 for macro work, but for portrait work! The macro work is more of a side-interest which I want to think about in advance. The main use for the 210/240 will be landscape/detail, secondary purpose portraits, and only third for close-ups.
 

Oren Grad

Active member
OK, that sounds good.

I'd say just go for one of the 210's. The 240/5.6 plasmats are all in #3 shutters, which make them much bigger and heavier. The 240 process lenses like the G-Claron and Apo-Ronar come in #1 shutters and are compact but are f/9, which means dimmer viewing and more difficult focusing.

Whichever way you choose to go: welcome aboard, good luck, and enjoy! :)
 

carstenw

Active member
Thanks, I am very excited about this! I have to balance purchases with sales of other equipment though, so it might be a while before my first frame is exposed.

Speaking of exposure, what about development? I would like to develop the negatives myself, and scan them. The scanning end is taken care of, and I am already developing MF film (B&W), so what challenges can I expect with LF? Are there light-tight containers to pour developer into and out of for LF? I recall doing some 4x5 in a photo course I took about 420 years ago, but the containers were open (I hung the negatives into them in a rack), and I was doing it in a dark room. That would be harder to set up now, in my current apartment.
 

Jeremy

New member
Carsten,

Much of what you think might be different in actual practice with large format--for example, the idea that 75mm is equivalent to a 24mm on 35mm. I haven't done the math so I don't know if this is based on the diagonal of the format, but a 75mm on 4x5 feels much wider than a 24mm on 35mm--much closer to 21mm, imo. This is due to the boxier format.

I would suggest not trying to make too many plans or make too many purchases before you've done any shooting.
 

carstenw

Active member
Another question: Chamonix accessories. Is the "Universal Bellows" just the bellows, and thus needs to be purchased separately, or are there really two kinds?

Do I need a bag bellows for the 90mm?

Should I buy the lensboards from Chamonix or from elsewhere? I am kinda tempted to spend that little extra and not have to worry about separate ordering and shipping...

Is the folding viewer any good, or should I aim for a cloth?

What is the protective leather jacket? It already comes with a wrap...
 

Jeremy

New member
For developing 4x5 film I have yet to find a better option than the Jobo 3010 Expert drum. It has to be loaded in the dark, but everything else can be done in the light. It's for rotary processing, but you can use a Beseler or UniColor (or whatever) rotating base instead of a Jobo unit.

It will develop 10 sheets at one time.
 

carstenw

Active member
Jeremy, 24mm is about what 75mm would be if 4x5 was cut to 3.33x5, i.e. the same dimensions as 135 format. It probably feels a tad wider... For comparison, I currently use my Contax 645 with 35mm and 120mm macro lenses, and get along really well with those. The 35mm is about a 21mm equivalent, but I don't need it quite so wide, so I thought perhaps 75mm.

Edit: I am planning to start with two lenses, one fairly wide, and one slightly tele. This will allow me to continue my current long-term project without interruption, and smoothly switching from 645 to 4x5. I am deciding between 75mm and 90mm for the wide end, and 210mm and 240mm for the long end. For practical reasons, it sounds like I might end up with 90mm and 210mm, but I wanted to try to make the decision as informed as possible.
 
Last edited:

Jeremy

New member
Another question: Chamonix accessories. Is the "Universal Bellows" just the bellows, and thus needs to be purchased separately, or are there really two kinds?

Do I need a bag bellows for the 90mm?

Should I buy the lensboards from Chamonix or from elsewhere? I am kinda tempted to spend that little extra and not have to worry about separate ordering and shipping...

Is the folding viewer any good, or should I aim for a cloth?

What is the protective leather jacket? It already comes with a wrap...
The "Universal Bellows" are a different type of bellows that lend themselves more to movements with wide angle lenses.

I have the normal (non-universal bellows) on my Chamonix and have no problems using a 90mm lens. If you're planning on going wider than 90mm or think you might I would get the universal bellows instead of the normal one.

You don't need a bag bellows for 90mm in normal shooting.

It doesn't make any difference where you get the boards as long as they fit. If it's less of a hassle to spend the little extra then there's no reason not to do so.

The protective leather jacket is more cosmetic, imo, than anything else.
 

Jeremy

New member
Jeremy, 24mm is about what 75mm would be if 4x5 was cut to 3.33x5, i.e. the same dimensions as 135 format. It probably feels a tad wider... For comparison, I currently use my Contax 645 with 35mm and 120mm macro lenses, and get along really well with those. The 35mm is about a 21mm equivalent, but I don't need it quite so wide, so I thought perhaps 75mm.
Ahh, gotcha.

I shoot 4x5 for, among other things, the 4x5 aspect ratio so I base such decisions on the format as a whole.
 

Jeremy

New member
Jeremy, you mean this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/25424-REG/Jobo_3010_Expert_Sheet_Film_Drum.html

How does it work? I am used to hand-turning :) The price is pretty impressive if it is just a plastic container for 4x5 film! I am currently loading my film in a dark bag, but perhaps space would be a bit tight for something this large...
Yes, that's it and it's just a big plastic container, but designed for perfect agitation every time for each of the 10 sheets without any problems. It's worth the cost.

You can put it on something like this instead of getting a Jobo unit (like the CPA2 or something):

 

carstenw

Active member
I just added more info to the post you just quoted... the 3.33x5 trick was just to get a feel for the equivalence of lenses, not to make final decisions.
 
Top