Budget Scanner and L.F camera

[fredjeang]

Hi,

2 questions refering to large format:

A) Does anybody could recommend me a good scanner for LF? ( as well as for any type of film format)
I'm starting from zero in film and L.F and as I have everything to buy I need to consider for the moment
a second hand scan.
The ideal would be not spending more than 500 for the scanner and being able to acheive decent results.

 What do you think of the Tachihara 4x5 ? Any user in the forum?
Would you recommend this camera to start in L.F ? (I've seen some very good ones at really good price)

Thank you very much.

Fred.

[shutay]

I have been using a Graflex Super Graphic since 2004 when I happened upon one in a shop complete with 2 lenses, clean in working order. Soon after that, it was clear that I'd need a way to scan the film, and ever since, I've been using a Canon Canoscan 9900F, which has worked very well for me as a hobby. It comes as standard with a light hood, film holders for 35mm film, 35mm slide film (mounted and unmounted), 4x5 film and 120/220 rollfilm. Conveniently, it has both Firewire 400 and USB connection options. Resolution wise, the highest resolution takes a long time to scan, but I hardly even scan at the maximum resolution anyway. I haven't had any film flatness issues (or Newton rings) with scanning 4x5 film, but it does happen sometimes with 120 rollfilm. Not much else to say other than that my requirements are modest, and it serves me well.

[LiamStrain]

The Epson 4990 performs very well for the price. For 120 and 4x5 for small to mid sized prints, you should be just fine. You can get ANR glass inserts, and better scanning holders to help boost the performance. If you want larger prints, you'll have to invest a good bit more, or have them drum scanned by a lab.

The tachihara wood field cameras are well made and relatively inexpensive. They work just fine. As with most wood fields, they are not particularly rigid, and have somewhat limited movements, and are a bit restrictive on how wide angle you can use. But they are lightweight, and easy to use. For landscapes, and general use, they are great cameras. If you are shooting alot of studio or architecture work, you'll eventually probably want to get a monorail or a technical field camera of some sort.

[fredjeang]

Thank you.
The 4990 seems to be highly regarded. I'll check the Canon 9900F.
Yes, the idea of Tachihara is for landscape and general purpose.

Ps: The cathedral image in "streetlevel" really impacted me.

Fred.

[hsmeets]

Hi,

2 questions refering to large format:

A) Does anybody could recommend me a good scanner for LF? ( as well as for any type of film format)
I'm starting from zero in film and L.F and as I have everything to buy I need to consider for the moment
a second hand scan.
The ideal would be not spending more than 500 for the scanner and being able to acheive decent results.

 What do you think of the Tachihara 4x5 ? Any user in the forum?
Would you recommend this camera to start in L.F ? (I've seen some very good ones at really good price)

Thank you very much.

Fred.

Checkout www.largeformatphotography.info if you have not before. There is also a forum.

[fredjeang]

Checkout www.largeformatphotography.info if you have not before. There is also a forum.

Great link. Yes, there are some didactic articles about "how to make the step" to LF.
Lu-La users advices are also very usefull.
Thank you.

Fred.

[Ben Rubinstein]

I bought a Tachihara and regretted it. To be honest the Shen Hao is a better option with it's Graflok back (can take stuff like roll film holders for pano work) and the ability to use wider lenses with a bag bellows. I needed both soon after I bought it and sold it within a month or so. The best of course for that type of camera is the Chamonix but it's more expensive. Beautiful peice of work though.

What I ended up with was an MPP mk7, you don't know the beauty of geared movements till you've tried them! It's a cheaper take on the Linhof bodies and harks back to the 70's. Was a really nice camera.

[Rob C]

I bought a Tachihara and regretted it. To be honest the Shen Hao is a better option with it's Graflok back (can take stuff like roll film holders for pano work) and the ability to use wider lenses with a bag bellows. I needed both soon after I bought it and sold it within a month or so. The best of course for that type of camera is the Chamonix but it's more expensive. Beautiful peice of work though.

What I ended up with was an MPP mk7, you don't know the beauty of geared movements till you've tried them! It's a cheaper take on the Linhof bodies and harks back to the 70's. Was a really nice camera.

Those MPPs were the staple bodies for 4x5 way back when I started in an industrial photo-unit in 1960... nothing 70s about them!

If I had to buy something LF today, then I would be looking at one of the other old-timers, the Sinar Norma. A monorail offers more control, even if it does become a small sail in the right wrong conditions.

Why settle for part of the movements - even the wind can be creative...

Rob C

[JdeV]

It's a slightly controversial thing to say but I personally don't think any of the cheaper wooden field cameras are good enough when zeroed out to be sure of alignment. You can get everything sharp but only if you look carefully over the whole ground glass with a lupe.

Since large format film is expensive and you will get a sharper image with a smaller format camera if the standards aren't aligned, I would recommend a 'technical' camera like the Graflex or MPP or a monorail like the Norma or an Arca over a wooden camera. All can be had very cheap.

[mmurph]

If you don't need movements, or maybe just shift, the Cambo Wide (shifts) or the Fotoman 45PS (for "point & shoot") and nice rigid, metal cameras.  Good WA cameras.  

I have 2 of each, plus a 4x5 field camera (Toyo IIA) that gets used less often. Much bigger and heavier and bulkier.

[MHFA]

Dear Fred,

in Germany you can find used Linhofs for about 200€, but to start Large Format Photography with a Flatbed scanner is like using bad lenses on the best Digital Back. Don`t do it!

Michael

[fredjeang]

Dear Fred,

in Germany you can find used Linhofs for about 200€, but to start Large Format Photography with a Flatbed scanner is like using bad lenses on the best Digital Back. Don`t do it!

Michael

Dear Michael,

I'm aware of the fact you mencioned, but because of my current budget limitation, I feel between a rock and a hard place and will have to take a decision probably unperfect for the moment, but at least that will allows me to start in LF.
Then the question is what kind of scan minimal investement would you consider coherent  to exploit the LF resolution?
My idea was using a flatbed scan at home and charge to a lab in Madrid drumscans only with the few images I will print for exhibitions.
But maybe it is not a good calculation, it is true that sometimes for saving we end pay twice.

Fred.

[MHFA]

Dear Fred,

I also started with a Flatbed scanner and now if have to scan all the pictures twice. Drumscanners are sometimes really cheap...
2 years ago i bought a Linhof Technika 5x7 in Madrid for a real good price. You ever looked in Spain for old Linhofs or SINAR. The right LF Camera depends a lot on the kind of pictures you`re planning. Another way is a LF with Rollfilm. If you find a good lab with a Frontier the scans are really good and very cheap.

Kind regars
Michael

[fredjeang]

Dear Fred,

I also started with a Flatbed scanner and now if have to scan all the pictures twice. Drumscanners are sometimes really cheap...
2 years ago i bought a Linhof Technika 5x7 in Madrid for a real good price. You ever looked in Spain for old Linhofs or SINAR. The right LF Camera depends a lot on the kind of pictures you`re planning. Another way is a LF with Rollfilm. If you find a good lab with a Frontier the scans are really good and very cheap.

Kind regars
Michael

Thanks Michael,
Yes, there is choise in Madrid for labs that work with Frontier. The option of Rollfilm is in my mind.
Cheers,

Fred.

[LiamStrain]

Dear Fred,

in Germany you can find used Linhofs for about 200€, but to start Large Format Photography with a Flatbed scanner is like using bad lenses on the best Digital Back. Don`t do it!

Michael

Much depends on your required print sizes, but I'll humbly disagree. They are not ideal, but can perform very well for the price. You can always have a lab scan if you are putting together a gallery show. But for small prints (11x14 and under) from 4x5 film, you are not severely taxing the abilities of any modern flatbed.

[shutay]

Much depends on your required print sizes, but I'll humbly disagree. They are not ideal, but can perform very well for the price. You can always have a lab scan if you are putting together a gallery show. But for small prints (11x14 and under) from 4x5 film, you are not severely taxing the abilities of any modern flatbed.

+1

I have never scanned my 4x5 negs/slides at full resolution on my flatbed scanner, I wouldn't have the patience (or the storage space) for it. If I really needed a large scan/print, I wouldn't do it myself anyway, I'd take it to my favourite printer and he'll do the drum scan for me, all included in the price for the print. I am usually scanning my 4x5 negs/slides at 800 dpi to 1000 dpi - which equates to about 12mp - 20mp, which is a good compromise of file size, room to crop, etc. and not taking too long to scan. Don't forget to thoroughly clean your flatbed and negatives/slides before you scan... that takes time too.

[Harold Clark]

Those MPPs were the staple bodies for 4x5 way back when I started in an industrial photo-unit in 1960... nothing 70s about them!

If I had to buy something LF today, then I would be looking at one of the other old-timers, the Sinar Norma. A monorail offers more control, even if it does become a small sail in the right wrong conditions.

Why settle for part of the movements - even the wind can be creative...

Rob C

I heartily second the Sinar Norma suggestion. I used a 4x5 Norma for all my architectural photography until digital took over. They are a great pleasure to work with, so precise and solid.

[KevinA]

I heartily second the Sinar Norma suggestion. I used a 4x5 Norma for all my architectural photography until digital took over. They are a great pleasure to work with, so precise and solid.

,
I would also rate the Plaubel alongside the Sinar. I have a 5x7 and it's absolutely gorgeous, every bit as good and engineered as either a Sinar or Linhof.

Kevin.

[fredjeang]

,
I would also rate the Plaubel alongside the Sinar. I have a 5x7 and it's absolutely gorgeous, every bit as good and engineered as either a Sinar or Linhof.

Kevin.

Plaubel ? what optics do you use with the 4x5?
have you also used the 6x7 Plaubel?

[KevinA]

Plaubel ? what optics do you use with the 4x5?
have you also used the 6x7 Plaubel?

The Plaubel Peco uses the same optics as any 4x5 camera, I have a 5x7/ 13x18 Peco III.
Until recently I had a Makina 67, I sent it to Plaubel for a service (430 euro) put  a roll of film in shot half of it then dropped the camera wrecking the range finder and body.
My Peco III monorail goes back to the 60's I believe and it still locks solid like the day it was made. I had a Linhof Technika for a time, different type of camera I know, I much prefer the build on the Plaubel.
One other thing about buying LF at the moment, it's holding it's value much better than my digital disposable Canons. Oh and so nice to buy a lens and not wonder if it will work as it should or be sharp in the corners. I use a late 1800's brass barrel lens sometimes, made for 3 1/2 x 4 1/2, stopped down to f64 and beyond it covers corner to corner and is pin sharp.
I also have 305mm / 12inch Kodak portrait lens. My other optics for it are the usual Schneider Symmar's.
There is one on e bay http://cgi.ebay.com/Plaubel-Peco-Universal...125152004r20726
It would be worth checking that the back takes standard 5x4 DDS. My 5x7 took a Plaubel slide, I had to spend another £200 ish  getting a standard 5x7 back from the factory.
I love those red bellows, isn't it beautiful ?

Kevin.