Comments on: [Video] How To Take A Photograph On A 4×5 Camera

By: James Parker

James Parker — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 12:42:00 +0000

Last year (19 years old) and also this year, I shoot with the 4×5″ Sinar camera for product shoots at college. Amazing feeling when you develop the colour transparency and see it on the lightbox! When our Mamiya/PhaseOne Cameras breakdown (for unknown reasons), I go straight for the 4×5″, which is a fraction of the cost. haha

By: Larry Gaurano

Larry Gaurano — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:55:00 +0000

I shoot with a 4×5 currently for landscapes. TMax 100 film and then scan the images. Great results!

By: Valérie Mercier

Valérie Mercier — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 03:28:00 +0000

I’m a 20 old students at The School of the Photographic Arts: Otttawa.
In our first year we only shoot on medium and large format films. It’s been a great breakthrought in my personnal practice. These type of camera make you learn to slow down the whole process, to think and compose wisely your images. Yes i do prefer to scan my negatives. The advantage is the cost of the paper and takes less time. Darkroom paper and chemicals are way more expensive than photo paper for a printer. But I got to say, the whole dark room process is what make photography a craft, an art form like we know it today. I hope every profesionnal around the world had the chance to explore the darkroom at least once in their lives.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:59:00 +0000

I’m 23 and use a 4×5 from time to time, does that make me old? haha, I mostly don’t because scanning the film for digital use is a very expensive and non practical use. But still you can’t get the same results with digital, especially shooting product.

By: Corey Melton

Corey Melton — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 04:23:00 +0000

haha! i love Pippy’s long stockings! But for serious, I was seriously considering buying these a while back, but they are SOOOOOOO expensive. Just for a decent one. Crazy isnt it. Its cheaper to walk around with a handheld rapid fire high resolution computer in your hand that is weatherproof. But a broken accordian you throw film into? Crazy stuff

By: Wyatt Michalek

Wyatt Michalek — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:20:00 +0000

I spent 2 years working with 8×10 and acra swiss 6×9 view cameras with digital backs love them to death. Long live schiemflug!! The moves you can do with theses cameras offer so many capabilities.

By: Robert Lunak

Robert Lunak — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:42:00 +0000

Actually i am going back to use film more often, the last shoots (non commercial) were done half half or a third digtal, rest analog on a Nikon F5 and a RZ67, both wit Tmax100/400 or kodak portra… i have the feeling that analog film renders light differently, especially highlights… skin retouching is even easier then on my leaf aptus22 coz of the grain and the gradients… from what i have encountered the last year i get better results with analog, more pleasing to my eye and on my sinar p2 getting a really nice big negative with awesome lenses you get for a bargain online is just a holiday from taking 150k Photos digitally a year…

Enjoy film as long as its available ( i do hope long!)

By: Brad Livengood

Brad Livengood — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 14:33:00 +0000

I remember shooting slide film then using a slide scanner to digitize them. This was about 10 years ago when digital SLRs were first coming out. It wasn’t that I didn’t want to shoot digital to begin with, it was just that the technology wasn’t there. My scanner was giving me 19mp images while the best camera was the Nikon D1x that was 5.47mp and cost $5,000.

Maybe today shooting large format and scanning is more cost effective than a $50,000 hasselblad depending on how much you shoot?

By: Nicholas Gonzalez

Nicholas Gonzalez — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 14:21:00 +0000

I’m very grateful for taking on digital late in the game, because I believe shooting film made me a better digital photographer. I still feel like every frame cost me, and that helps to not get reckless. Unfortunately I am more grateful for digital, despite my belief that it still doesn’t look as good as film (particularly in motion pictures), because of the convenience to shoot whenever I want and be creative till the batteries go out.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 07:55:00 +0000

The amazing thing u can do with those cameras is that u can rotate in two axes the front and back so u can shift the focal plane to use the lowest aperture possible. With 240 mm lens u have to stop down to 32 to have a whole twining tea box in focus (short side) so it’s absolutely important to tilt ur focal plane to follow the line of the box. U can for example put in focus all the objects laying on a 5 meter table :)

tilting the back allows u also to straight lines and clear the prospective, or decrease it’s convergence. That’s the ultimate evolution of control in photography.
The only problem is that every picture cost u 10€ just to have the diapo here in Italy and a digital back (would be incredible quality) will cost u a lot…
The still life photographers (high level ones) use those a lot of times… have a look to those to see the pictures: Riccardo Abbondanza http://www.picxselstudio.it/ and http://www.varianti.it