advice on going back to film

[redwoodtwig]

I recently was asked by a photographer friend if I wanted to buy his Sinar F with a 210 Schneider lens, a bunch of film, even a tripod for $500.  It seems a fair price and though I haven't seen the equipment yet, knowing him it will be in good condition.

the question is, should I?  Three years ago I sold my Hassy and went digital.  Largely because of the cost of processing the film.  I'm not a full time photographer, though I did recently have a gallery show.  Many years ago I had a Linhof and I'll never forget the quality of the good images that came from working in 4x5.  

There is no way I can afford a digital back, nor do I have the assets to set up a darkroom, though I do have the place for it, a basement with running water.  I'm thinking I would be scanning the images.  I have a scanner and did scan a couple images from some of the negatives I'd made with the Linhof.  But that path almost requires a new computer -- it takes nearly a half hour to scan one.

What would I do with it?  Landscapes and figure studies, both in the studio and outdoors.

I'd be interested in your opinions.

Thanks,
Brandon Smith
http://brandonsmithgallery.com

[Rob C]

Anything to do with film has exactly the same problems associated with it: a darkroom; ventilation; processing; a quality enlarger; print washing and print drying and spotting (at least!)

You also need to have deep pockets if you are not already a skilled printer (wet), because it seems to me that it´s a unidirectional route where wet printers can learn digital printing more rapidly than digital ones learn wet!

There is no point in cutting scanning cost by trying to fly via flatbeds - anyone who does digital printing from analogue capture to professional standards will tell you the same. As with everything in life, the weakest link (usually the wallet) is where the whole edifice starts to collapse. And if you don´t aspire to pro standards, why go the 4x5 way in the first place?

Also, there is  no way of knowing how secure film supplies will remain - even there, money talks. Why blow capital on yesterday? If you have it, spend for the future.

No free lunches, I guess.

Rob C

[BernardLanguillier]

I recently was asked by a photographer friend if I wanted to buy his Sinar F with a 210 Schneider lens, a bunch of film, even a tripod for $500.  It seems a fair price and though I haven't seen the equipment yet, knowing him it will be in good condition.

What would I do with it?  Landscapes and figure studies, both in the studio and outdoors.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142921\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Brando,

On top of what Rob already mentioned, the Sinar doesn't appear to be a credible option if you intend to take images in the outdoors more than a few tens of meters away from your car. A cheap second hand Tachihara wood camera would be a far better option IMHO.

Regards,
Bernard

[tived]

Brando,

On top of what Rob already mentioned, the Sinar doesn't appear to be a credible option if you intend to take images in the outdoors more than a few tens of meters away from your car. A cheap second hand Tachihara wood camera would be a far better option IMHO.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142998\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I second Bernard's opinion - my sinar P is even heavier then when I got it, due to the dust it has collected. I tried to drag that damn thing out, to the park next to me...man, was I soar afterworth. I should done a maraton instead, at least I would gotten a prize :-) not! :-)

Definately get one of the lightweight 4x5's ...those negs are just amazing - wish I could have a wet darkroom

Henrik

[thsinar]

MY aplogies if I allow myself to intervene in the debate, but something has been issed here.

We are speaking here about the Sinar f (filed) which was purposely built light and handy for the use on location. This camera has nothing to do with a Sinar p or p2, it's a completely different built and as such can be recommended for such work.

Best regards,
Thierry

Brando,

On top of what Rob already mentioned, the Sinar doesn't appear to be a credible option if you intend to take images in the outdoors more than a few tens of meters away from your car. A cheap second hand Tachihara wood camera would be a far better option IMHO.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142998\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Hank]

For me the question would boil down to whether or not the movements will add significantly to your ability to meet your photo goals.  

We moved our business to digital long ago, completely replacing all 120 and 35mm film.  But for some subjects we still have to use 4x5 film.  Those either require movements or extreme detail beyond what we can achieve with a DSLR.  The former are specific types of landscapes or product shots, and latter are almost always very large groups of people which will be enlarged significantly.  In that case face details lost to a DSLR are retained on 4x5 film, just as was they were lost with 120 and 35mm film.  While we went from 2500-3000 rolls a year of the smaller films to zero when converting to digital, today we shoot the same 200 or so sheets of 4x5 that we shot before adopting DSLRs.

[luong]

Large format photography can be very rewarding *if you have the mindset for it*. You don't have to shoot everything in LF , therefore limiting your costs and (hopefully) improving your keeper rates. You also don't have to scan at the highest resolution until you decide to make very large prints. A large format transparency scanned on a consumer-grade flatbed  outresolves any 35mm DSLR by a significant margin.  The Sinar F is relatively portable for a monorail (see also http://www.largeformatphotography.info/mono-field.html) but there are certainly more convenient options.

[Neil Hunt]

Brandon,

Having used a Sinar F about 20 years ago all I'd add to the previous posts is that like most monorails, they are quite unmanageable if you work in anything approaching windy conditions. In fact much above a moderate breeze wrecks your sharpness pretty effectively.

Neil.

I recently was asked by a photographer friend if I wanted to buy his Sinar F with a 210 Schneider lens, a bunch of film, even a tripod for $500.  It seems a fair price and though I haven't seen the equipment yet, knowing him it will be in good condition.

the question is, should I?  Three years ago I sold my Hassy and went digital.  Largely because of the cost of processing the film.  I'm not a full time photographer, though I did recently have a gallery show.  Many years ago I had a Linhof and I'll never forget the quality of the good images that came from working in 4x5. 

There is no way I can afford a digital back, nor do I have the assets to set up a darkroom, though I do have the place for it, a basement with running water.  I'm thinking I would be scanning the images.  I have a scanner and did scan a couple images from some of the negatives I'd made with the Linhof.  But that path almost requires a new computer -- it takes nearly a half hour to scan one.

What would I do with it?  Landscapes and figure studies, both in the studio and outdoors.

I'd be interested in your opinions.

Thanks,
Brandon Smith
http://brandonsmithgallery.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142921\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[James Godman]

I plan to keep my Sinar F kit forever.  I love it.  I hope film is available until I'm really old and can't walk or something.  Mine has always been quite sturdy on the proper support.  I'd say go for it.

[Kumar]

I've used my Sinar F2 on location all the time, with a set of five lenses. It's not exactly the same as carrying a DSLR over your shoulder, but it's certainly manageable. I use it with a Betterlight scan back and rollfilm. I shoot mainly in urban locations, so I use a cart, but I have taken it on a couple of hikes. If there's a wind blowing, just block it with your body. For 500 bucks, you really shouldn't be having second thoughts!

Cheers,
Kumar

[mikeseb]

Unless the $500 is rent or grocery money, go for it. You have the itch, else you'd not be looking here for us to justify your purchase (  ); it has to be scratched, so get to scratchin'!

I have the Sinar F; for a monorail it is reasonably portable. There are cases available that allow you to "hang" it by its rail for transport.

I have recently dragged mine out again after years of dusty dormancy. What a pleasure to use. It's a different mode of working.

Good point about the scanning, though. I use a flatbed to scan mine and it's pretty good but not as good as the scans I get on 120 in a Nikon 8000. My wife would shoot me if I told her I "need" somebody's homeless Imacon....

[BernardLanguillier]

MY aplogies if I allow myself to intervene in the debate, but something has been issed here.

We are speaking here about the Sinar f (filed) which was purposely built light and handy for the use on location. This camera has nothing to do with a Sinar p or p2, it's a completely different built and as such can be recommended for such work.

Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=143569\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thierry,

A very nice piece of equipment for sure, but at 3.6 kg and the bulk it has, I personnally wouldn't see myself carrying it in my Osprey backpack.  

My 2.6+ kg Ebony 45SU is already a lot to carry on long treks in a 85 liters pack when crampons and a tent are part of the equation, I really don't see how I would fit a f1 or f2 in there. Others might obviously have more stamina or skills.

Regards,
Bernard

[redwoodtwig]

Thierry,

A very nice piece of equipment for sure, but at 3.6 kg and the bulk it has, I personnally wouldn't see myself carrying it in my Osprey backpack.  

My 2.6+ kg Ebony 45SU is already a lot to carry on long treks in a 85 liters pack when crampons and a tent are part of the equation, I really don't see how I would fit a f1 or f2 in there. Others might obviously have more stamina or skills.

Regards,
Bernard
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for all the input, and I was sorely tempted.  I currently carry quite a load as it is,  and that was not as much a consideration as time to relearn how to use it, and time to actually use it.  And, budget.  I'm thinking I'll be more ahead getting a new darkroom, that is, upgrading my nearly five year old computer for something more able to handle CS2.

One of the things I wanted to do with it was mentioned above, large crowds of people where I'd want a large print with enough detail so people can pick themselves out.
What I've been doing is using a panoramic tripod attachment (nodal ninja) and stitching the results (autostitch is free and seems to work just as good as the photomerge in PS, or would if I understood the parameters better).  The results, when I've exposed the separate images correctly, have been fantastic.  But overwhelm my 1GB computer.  

The discipline for doing that is comparable to handling a view camera in terms of having to pay attention to what you're doing.  But I've had to use perspective correction since there is no tilt control.  And that becomes extremely tedious on a 100MB image file.

Thanks again, and your comments about why you feel working with 4x5 have helped re-affirm my decision to make those huge clear images, though using what I have.  

Besides, the guy who was going to sell it has changed his mind and now wants to do more work with it himself...

Brandon Smith
[a href=\"http://BrandonSmithGallery.com]http://BrandonSmithGallery.com[/url]
Some of the panoramas are at http://synature.smugmug.com/gallery/3657190#208794561
but the largest I can show here is 1600 pixels wide and the biggest one, the park, is 19742x6453 pixels.

[KAP]

I recently was asked by a photographer friend if I wanted to buy his Sinar F with a 210 Schneider lens, a bunch of film, even a tripod for $500.  It seems a fair price and though I haven't seen the equipment yet, knowing him it will be in good condition.

the question is, should I?  Three years ago I sold my Hassy and went digital.  Largely because of the cost of processing the film.  I'm not a full time photographer, though I did recently have a gallery show.  Many years ago I had a Linhof and I'll never forget the quality of the good images that came from working in 4x5. 

There is no way I can afford a digital back, nor do I have the assets to set up a darkroom, though I do have the place for it, a basement with running water.  I'm thinking I would be scanning the images.  I have a scanner and did scan a couple images from some of the negatives I'd made with the Linhof.  But that path almost requires a new computer -- it takes nearly a half hour to scan one.

What would I do with it?  Landscapes and figure studies, both in the studio and outdoors.

I'd be interested in your opinions.

Thanks,
Brandon Smith
http://brandonsmithgallery.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142921\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

At $500. I'd give it a go, if you like it add something better suited to outdoor photography. I had an "F" and used it on location several times. If you don't like it get get rid of it, you'l hardly make a big lose, could even turn a profit.
I also had a Linhof baseboard easier to carry and better suited to travel, but it weighed more and was more awkward and fiddly to set up. The "F" is a good camera and a good way to see if you like LF. I would budget a changing bag, Readyload holder and film into the package if you intend going on the road with it.
Scanner wise, they are so cheap secondhand now. There is a nice Creo on ebay . In the UK a decent drum and recently a top line Agfa flatbed, none of them will fetch more than a decent lens. The problem is weight and size (except the Creo), they are like a upright piano in size and weight.

Kevin.