GX680 vs a 4x5

[AlbertZeroK]

I've always heard of the amazing things you can do with perspective with a view camera. But the investment into a 4x5 system is pretty substantial, by the time you go from enlarger, film, developing tools and of course the camera.

I'm wondering how a Fuji GX680 would compare to a 4x5 system? I realize the back plane is not adjustable, but I am stocked with plenty of medium format film and can handle it A-Z in my dark room. So I"m wondering what the down side of this camera vs a 4x5 would be.

[wildbill]

Several pounds. I've only carried one once. I own anchors which weigh less

[Jerevan]

A 4x5 with a rollfilm back, maybe?

[AlbertZeroK]

What I'm wondering is what do I miss by not having an articulating back?

I'm aware of 4x5 backs for MF film and the size of this thing.

[Jerevan]

Image control; depth of field and perspectives of the image.

"The shift and tilt movements make it possible to solve otherwise impossible depth-of-field problems, and to change perspective rendering, and create special effects that would be impossible with a conventional fixed-plane fixed-lens camera." as Wikipedia says.

[ph.otographer.com]

Except that the camera he's suggesting, the GX680, has Shift and Tilt movements already. He's referring to the additional controls associated with moving the film plane in the rear.

I've got a GX680, it's a great camera and I'd say a) weight ... it's a beast and b) some marginal extra degree of control that when starting out, you probably can't differentiate between.

Image control; depth of field and perspectives of the image.

"The shift and tilt movements make it possible to solve otherwise impossible depth-of-field problems, and to change perspective rendering, and create special effects that would be impossible with a conventional fixed-plane fixed-lens camera." as Wikipedia says.

[jp498]

I use both MF and LF, and what I like about MF is the combination of light weight, image quality, and quick operation. What I like about LF is the image quality and lens options. Can you use 150 years worth of lenses on the GX680? Do they still make new lenses for the GX680? I just bought a new lens from Reinhold Schable that he made for $61. Prior to that, I have bought a lens probably from the 1940's that's there is no modern equivalent for. If those LF things aren't interesting, then no need to pursue them.

You're not missing a ton by not having an articulating back. My speed graphics don't. I have a view camera that does, but I've only used rear rise to do the opposite of front rise. I've got portrait camera that have a movable back, but that's because they don't have a movable front.

If you like to scan, the common and inexpensive Epsons like the v700/v750 will do a nicer job with LF than MF. MF on the Epson is plenty good for web and small prints, but not as good as the more expensive Nikon 9000 scanner.

[Klainmeister]

Why not get a Baby Speed Graphic or a Horseman 6x9 or something of that nature that doesn't weigh as much as Hoover Dam?

[TheFlyingCamera]

A lot of 4x5 field cameras will actually weigh LESS than a GX680. And these days, with a little patience, you can find a 4x5 enlarger for next to nothing. Many 4x5 field cameras can be had for less than a GX680. Which, btw, you probably don't want because the 680 has issues with the rechargeable battery. The newer 680 II or III resolved some of the power supply issues, but then you're talking a LOT more money for the camera, at which point you can have a really nice 4x5 setup. Not that you'll ever need the ability to tie your bellows in knots, but a nice used Shen Hao or one of the later Zone VI or Wisner models will have all the movements you'll ever need and then some.

[ph.otographer.com]

I know from personal experience that the AA holder from the v.3 version of the GX680 works perfectly well in the v.1 version ... I have that setup now myself. The old rechargeables are no good ... all seem to have expired / exhausted themselves. I've read that you can fairly easily replace those using an RC car type battery shoehorned into the old case, and picked up 2 + a charger just for that, but the AA holder works so well there's no need.

A lot of 4x5 field cameras will actually weigh LESS than a GX680. And these days, with a little patience, you can find a 4x5 enlarger for next to nothing. Many 4x5 field cameras can be had for less than a GX680. Which, btw, you probably don't want because the 680 has issues with the rechargeable battery. The newer 680 II or III resolved some of the power supply issues, but then you're talking a LOT more money for the camera, at which point you can have a really nice 4x5 setup. Not that you'll ever need the ability to tie your bellows in knots, but a nice used Shen Hao or one of the later Zone VI or Wisner models will have all the movements you'll ever need and then some.