Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,684   Posts: 1,482,247   Online: 1063
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49
  1. #11
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    I've also pondered the 5x7 format but in my head, I can see the manufacturers doing away with 5x7 and only having 4x5 and 8x10.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    I think 4x5 of all the formats might be at the most risk from the camera makers.

    Many 4x5 are relatively lower cost then the bigger cameras. Lots and I mean lots of used models out there.

    Sooner or later all the new 4x5 holders will be gone. I wonder if anybody will step up to make 4x5 holders.

    So from a equipment stand point I think 5x7 might be safer.

  3. #13
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    I guess I forgot to mention that I was talking about film.

  4. #14
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,045
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    424
    Quote Originally Posted by c6h6o3 View Post
    5x7 holders are a lot more difficult to obtain than the film. The only ones I've been able to find new are the Shen Haos at $66.95 apiece, which I refuse to pay. Battered, dusty, broken 5x7 holders are going on ebay for as much as $40.00 apiece. This is because B&H and Calumet sell only 13x18cm holders and not 5x7.

    If you're primarily interested in color films, the availability of 13x18cm film might be more important to you than 5x7. Ektachrome 64T, for example, is available now in 8x10, 4x5, 4x5 Readyloads and 13x18cm sheets. No 5x7.
    I bit the bullet and got four of the new Shen Hao holders. Yes, that kind of price is expensive, but when you consider what people are charging for used broke-ass beat-up 50 year old wood holders with cracked darkslides, that price is very reasonable. I've had the chance to test them out, and they're as nice as the best new Lisco and Fidelity 5x7 holders I have. And they're a fair sight prettier too.

    As to the long-term survival of 5x7 as a size, well, if whole-plate (6.5x8.5) can make a comeback, which it seems to be doing, then 5x7 will stick around for a very long time to come. 5x7 is just such a nice size, and the proportions are terrific too. I really like the 5x7 proportion, much moreso than the 8x10 or 4x5 shape.

  5. #15
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    My reasoning for my statement is that one sheet of 8x10 makes 4 sheets of 4x5. Both sizes that are being used.

    As far as I know, and I have no idea what size film is originally made in and cut from, 5x7 is it's own run?

  6. #16
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by david b View Post
    I've also pondered the 5x7 format but in my head, I can see the manufacturers doing away with 5x7 and only having 4x5 and 8x10.
    The 5x7 format has its own appeal, which may not be obvious until you shoot it. It's nearly double the size of 4x5, and is plenty big for contact-printing. On the other hand, 5x7 cameras and lenses are not a whole lot bigger than 4x5 equipment -- moving up to 8x10 means bigger, heavier and more expensive equipment, and slower shutter speeds for any given light condition. Here are a couple of neat essays that discuss the 5x7 format:

    http://www.shutterbug.net/equipmentr...too/index.html (By Roger Hicks)

    http://www.largeformatphotography.info/5x7.html (by Q.T. Luong)

    Many of the arguments for 5x7 apply to some extent to whole-plate cameras as well, though they come closer to 8x10 size. There is an effort afoot here on APUG to resuscitate the whole-plate format -- do a forum search and you will find the threads.

    RFXB

    EDIT: Oops, I see Scott beat me to the punch on the whole-plate reference.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    Quote Originally Posted by david b View Post
    My reasoning for my statement is that one sheet of 8x10 makes 4 sheets of 4x5. Both sizes that are being used.

    As far as I know, and I have no idea what size film is originally made in and cut from, 5x7 is it's own run?
    The cutting machine needs to be reset but it's the same master roll.

  8. #18
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    Thanks Nick for clarifying.

    As for the 5x7 format, I am holding out for a Canham 4x5/5x7, this way I have the best of both worlds.

  9. #19
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,045
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    424
    Quote Originally Posted by david b View Post
    Thanks Nick for clarifying.

    As for the 5x7 format, I am holding out for a Canham 4x5/5x7, this way I have the best of both worlds.
    David-

    go for the Canham Woodfield! Awesome camera - I have it in the 5x7 guise, with a 4x5 reducing back, and with the 5x12 conversion kit to boot. Keith may start making whole plate kits for it as well, once the Fotoman holders hit the market and he has something to design around.

  10. #20
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    Scott,
    I thought the Woodfield was the only option. The metal 4x5 doesn't have a 5x7 option, does it?

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin