It is properly difficult to overstate how much different large format photography is compared with 35mm or 120 film, much less digital. Is it worth it?I am by no means an expert in large format photography — I have been borrowing an old press camera from a buddy and have been working my way through a few boxes of 4x5 sheets after having him show me the ropes with his much nicer field camera. Though I am not an expert, I have been looking to invest in a 4x5 camera and all of the things that are needed along with it after having had enough experience to feel comfortable shooting it and enough to see value in it.
Cost
The actual cost of the camera and lens is actually not that bad compared with medium format. At a shop in Pheonix, AZ I visited the other weekend I saw two of the cleanest press cameras I have ever seen and they, with accompanying lenses, cost a cool $399. (Compared with the cheapest option at B&H costing more than $2,000) That said, if $400 was all it took to be fully vested, I would already be knee deep into it. In fact, the camera is but the first step. Most of the time, the cameras are not sold with a lens so right there you’re adding at least $100 or more. Then there’s the cost of the film holders… Perhaps what makes large format photography most distinct from the other formats is the need for film holders. Indeed, with large format you shoot by sheets rather than rolls. Vintage holders used could be had for around $10 a holder but a new set of 2 Toyo holders is $150.
Then you get to the film… the cost of film is where it starts adding up and fast. For one, if you’re shooting C-41 or E-6 and don’t have a way to develop them at home, you’re looking at at least $4 a sheet to mail it in. The cheapest scans I’ve ever found are still $5 for anything decent — if you want them scanned on a drum scanner, the cost is closer to $50+ a sheet. For now, I’ve found a way to shoot, develop, and digitize my sheets for around $4/sheet. For C-41 or E-6, I don’t know that I’ll be able to get away for less than $15 a sheet.
Lastly, this all assumes that you already have a solid tripod. If not, that is a must. Optional items that can make life easier include an Epson scanner; the v800 and v850 are capable of handing 4x5 sheets and up to 8x10 sheets. Further, if you were receptive to developing your own B&W at home, you can get a Patterson tank with the insert for less than $100.
As a footnote to this entire section, all of my research has been in a 4x5 camera. Trying to get into 8x10 photography presents entirely different costs and challenges.
Image by Matt Seal
Benefit
Comparing film that looks quite grainy in 35mm format, the grain is so attenuated in large format that while still noticeable, it is far more pleasing. Perhaps more importantly, the resolution is just unreal. With a minimum of 15 times the surface area of a full frame camera, 100% crops still retain enough sharpness that you’ll wonder how you were ever satisfied before.
Conclusion
I go back and forth on this constantly. I sincerely cannot decide if it’s something I want to get into or something I should let go of. I figure that with the cost of a decent field camera, holders, a better tripod, and a v800, the total cost is in the upwards of $2,000. To further complicate the matter, I honestly don’t know what I would use the camera for in my everyday life or even on trips. Attempting to fly with a 4x5 camera and film holders can take up a lot of space that could and would otherwise be used for other camera gear that allows for more photographs for the same cost. I honestly don’t know what I’ll do. If anyone has any thoughts/suggestions they're willing to share, please leave a comment.
Image by Matt Seal
Images used with permission
But what is the return on investment ?
It's an artist's tool, and therefore ROI doesn't have the same significance as a tool of trade in a business.
Ah, I forgot artists aren't meant to make business and vice versa, my bad.
Misrepresentation of a generalisation as a false dichotomy.
You put this tool with artistry, and a gfx with business. I clearly understand, these are the main goals for owning these, but that doesn't keep you from owning one in a purpose oposite to logic.
I met a guy living from a 4x5 film camera chamber, shooting portraits in the street with "instant" photo. - Look for afghan box.
And what about rich people buying a $10k leica for "fun" with no business purpose ? Can't Christopher (gfx guy) buy a nice tool for himself, and use it in his business when suited ?
The other article had "professional use" in the title. That's the difference.
Again, can't you use a personnal tool in your business sometimes, and write a review about it's professional use ?
I'm sure there's a point buried in there somewhere.
Are you that dumb that you need me to help you make 1+1 = 2 ?
If you see photography as strictly business, you will need to work on a return on investment, to buy a camera such as a gfx.
If you see it as a nice tool you can use for fun (and business, maybe), then enjoy yourself and buy it if you can. Same as a nice car. You don't need one to ride through a city, but you can enjoy riding one.
Is it that complicated ?
No, I'm just sick to death of idiots who can't construct an argument; instead present endless streams of fallacies.
It must be hard for you, being sick of yourself :/
And there we have it.
Bored now.
Wow! and I thought some of my comments were abrasive. People talk about ROI on a camera and have no problem paying 70,000 dollars on a pickup truck that begins to lose value from the moment it is driven off the lot.
You have to be very, very careful doing that when it comes to IRS and deducting expenses/depreciation. Better to play it safe, and don't mix the two uses.
The ROI is different for every individual. For someone like Paolo Roversi, it's obviously in the millions. For others, it's zero. Just like $20,000 bicycles and $50,000 golf clubs. Some make millions, others no money at all. This shouldn't be confusing for anyone.
You can sell yourself as offering something very unique in 2019 with large format. I charge extra for shooting large format film portrait sessions and I find that there are people who are willing to pay.
I quite agree with you, my comment was more a joke answer to Will Murray who, on an other article (about the Fuji gfx 100), is bashing the redactor for not showing a real business case.
I've owned two and they produce exquisite images; however, they were such a pain carry and use I barely used them.
I wouldn't even get involved with 8x10 chrome in small tank. I'm sure you can get something but E6 is very volume dependent for good results. Of course one can't see what he can't see, but a good line (of chemicals) does make a difference even if many will never know the difference.
You got me to thinking about the word "actual", so I looked up its definition. Interesting, is it not?
Also I agree that it is good to not use the same word twice (or more) in a short exposition, unless it is some explicit noun and it cannot be avoided.
Language can be a beautiful thing, an art, when used carefully and with an ear to how it sounds, or indeed, how it looks on the page.
Best regards to you, Mr Lantsov.
Yeah if I could afford it. But I'd want a camera with all the movements. Swing, tilt, rise (front and back), cross etc. Show me digital camera where you can put the the Scheimpflug Rule into effect.
Yes, but that is only two movements. Some large format cameras have more movements.
Sinar P2 e and P3 with digital back.
touché
The Cambo Actus View Camera is right up your alley.
https://www.cambo.com/en/actus-series/
Costs about the same as a TS lens, but gives you so much more movement and Scheimpflug control.
touché
For those interested in a slightly more detailed view on this, I wrote the following article for LL 14 years ago... pretty everything still applies today...
https://luminous-landscape.com/on-the-appeal-of-lf-cameras-for-an-innoce...
Michael Reichman is mentioned as the author, but this is an issue on the site I am having corrected.
If you don't know what you would shoot with it, then is makes no sense to buy it. Even for $2000 what sort of lens are getting for $100??
A long time ago I got an 8x10 cheap, used it off and on for 10 years on jobs and for shooting portfolio work. Few things were as impressive as looking at 8x10 chromes on a light table. The lab bill was pretty impressive too. But the work went away, and I sold the 4x5 and 8x10 about 8 years ago.
He wrote an article to share his experience. He stated costs and what he was able to do and what he thinks about it. I'm not sure where you think he's suggesting you do something i.e. "advice". People do share in this world without "should do".
Yes. Someone buy my 4x5
what do you have?
ah. wth... i didn't want to reply to someone's conversation...
I shoot large and Ultra Large format as a way to unwind from the pace of "regular" shoots. It's not uncommon for me to take a mini sabbatical with just an 8x10 and just wander around for a week. I may not even shoot a sheet or I'll shoot several, the point for me is the pace of just letting the light lead me and enjoying myself. That said, I've been paid well to shoot with Large/Ultra Large and medium format film several times over the last few years. While not enough to sustain my business, there are clients who are interested in something other than digital.
Who cares?
Folks who may be considering getting into LF might find someones personal experience worthwhile.
2019 Marks 20 years since I bought my View Camera. I've earned $0 with his camera but that's OK as I use it to shoot landscapes for my own artistic satisfaction. For me the return on investment has been what this camera has taught me about photography. Because it is more involved to set up - it forces me to really look at the scene before I even get the camera out, 'pre-visualise' to borrow a term from Ansel Adams. It's taught me to have an appreciation for the field of view of each lens, to carefully meter the scene and check the subject brightness range. It's also taught me to control my depth of field through lens selection, subject to camera distance, aperture, and the camera movements. Yes you can learn all that on a digital camera, and once learned they are equally applicable to all cameras (minus the movements). However, with a large format camera I MUST do all those things relatively slowly. Carefully making each creative choice. Some people find it fiddly and frustrating - I find it meditative. Really it depends upon what you enjoy. If you are into landscape and find 4x5 film prohibitively expensive try shooting a 6x12cm back and use 120 roll film. It's cheaper per frame, and you can still use movements but it will cost you 1/3 of the image area off a 4x5. I like the format - but not everyone does.
I use 4X5 and 8X10 in my business . Clients do and will pay the benefits that large format offers . It all depends on what and who you are shooting for . Different formats for different jobs. If you are unsure. Stick with what you know and are comfortable with.
That's a decision that should be made after some serious thinking and weighing out....for the obvious reasons. Price is not the only factor and perhaps not the most important one. We all know what's involved in making such a choice. After shooting 4x5 for a while, I turned back to medium format and am very happy. The closest I come to shooting large format now is with the Fuji GX680.....and thst's pretty damn close anyway.
Can anybody comment on the image quality of a 4x5 large format camera and one of the newer medium fromat cameras such as the Fuji GFX 100 ? I have read that depth of field on the Fuji is quite shalllow, so you basically have to focus stack...not sure if that is true. I am looking for something to make very large prints (40x60), it at least sounds like a drum scanned 4x5 negative is unparalleled when it comes to resolution and image quality, and even a 100+ Megapixel medium format camera does not come close...?
Digital is not even on the same planet .
Hello Robert, I assume you mean digital doesn't even come close to the image quality of a 4x5 ? It kind of figures, as the drum scanned image is several Gigabits in size...
You are right.
Digital image quality can blow the doors off of 4x5. I don’t believe resolution is the limiting factor for digital medium format if you are buying pro camera and pro lenses.
What you get with 4x5 is a different look to the images. The ability to tilt and shift. The fun of focusing on an upside down and backward image on the glass. The magic of watching the image appear in the darkroom.
I’ve shot sports with a Canon 1DX (when they were new) and L series lenses like the 300mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2 and others. I worked my way up to that camera going through Canon: 10D, 20D, 1D mkII, 5D mkII then the 1DX in 2014. I bought well used cameras where depreciation had slowed down, then after a year or so upgraded by selling the previous and adding a few hundred for the next. The improvement in features, controls and image quality was very impressive with each upgrade. That was 35mm. I have to believe medium format digital is even better. I love shallow DOF, but I’m typically shooting people, not macro and not landscapes.
It is for me. I shoot 6x6 and 6x8 and have used 4x5. The results are quite significant, but the medium formats hold their own. This article asks...."...is it worth it". It does not ask if it is worth it for return on investment. I, and many others, am retired...so I don't give a damn about ROI. For me, it's about the love of photography. There's much more in this life than doing things for money. The ROI I receive is the pleasure of doing what I love. But then....many people are 'in the business' aspect of this as well and need to think about ROI, but please remember that ROI doesn't mean much, if anything, to others. Just my 2 cents. Spend it wisely.
I have been shooting large format film for a couple of years. The cost of equipment is not as bad as you would imagine. First of all if shop carefully you can find great deals on very clean used equipment. It’s more a matter of assembling your kit as opposed to plopping down your credit card. Large format is a process that takes time and this applies to acquiring not only your images but your equipment to do so. It forces you to slow down and think , and this is a big part of the enjoyment of shooting this way.
For hobby reasons -yes, great to get into. I took my 4x5 Zone IV (made by Wista) to Germany for a month. The camera folded up nicely in one of those old leather covered hard cases that I bought used for $10. At each airport security check, I would get the question: “Is that a camera?”. They enjoyed seeing the old style camera unfold.
I had been shooting part time for our local newspaper. High school sports, light news, marathons, festivals, etc and had managed to become a reliable mediocre photographer. I enjoyed what I could do with great digital gear capturing live action.
The 4x5 film brought back the magic of watching the image emerge in the darkroom. Instead of long days of way too many photos, I enjoyed slow photography. In Berlin, often people would stop while I was composing a shot and ask, in English, “Iz zat a kameera?”
My favorite shot was a 3 second exposure of a Russian musical trio underground in the subway. Today it’s one of only three “wall hangers” in my house.
With about $20 of radio shack parts (2011) I built a shutter speed tester. Flashlight for light source, phototransistor, capacitor, and 3.5mm audio cable. Computer analog audio jacks output 3.5 volts to power earbuds and microphones. Free software called “audacity” is for recording and editing audio. The output from the phototransistor shows up in audacity, on a time line. I can measure to 1/1000 shutter speed -more than enough for my shutters. The higher speeds on my shutter were off by about a stop.
My iPhone made it easy to keep a list of the shutter speed corrections. I had some Type 55 positive/negative film so I didn’t need a darkroom.
Not for snapshots, but a really great look when it all comes together.