A travel-sized large-format 4x5 camera?

Sinar made one back in the early 80's, called the Sinar Handy, just parts from the modular system. You could still throw one together today if you can find the right lens board. If I have to lug around a cooler of 4x5 holders I'll just pack my old Graflex.

Jun 17, 2014permalink

RonGreer

hand held 4x5, as shown in the video, is not going to produce good results. There's a reason press photographers used flash; to freeze the image. I love the concept though and I wish them luck; really need a tripod though.

May 28, 2014*permalink

Ron, what are you talking about? Light is light, whether from the sun or sun gun. But yes, if you are going to use a pinhole lens or shoot in low light then you would need a tripod.

Jun 17, 2014permalink

Joe Ogiba

The ultimate joke, the camera is lightweight but the film is a million times the size of a 256GB SDXC card and would cost a million $ for film and processing into digital images compared to the amount of full frame 36mp images that could fit on one 256GB SDXC card.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8967120

May 18, 2014permalink

Joe, 4x5 b&w film is fairly inexpensive to process yourself, and a lot of fun. And a million $ would buy an awful lot of it.

Jun 17, 2014permalink

MAubrey

36MP? Heh.

Even at the super low resolution of a 2400dpi scan you're looking at over 100MP.

Aug 14, 2014permalink

Rainer2022

I don't see the immense image quality in the pictures shown in the film.

These days, you can get a 35mm SLR plus great lens for cheap money. Or, get yourself a Mamiya RB.

May 11, 2014permalink

It's because the lens used is a pinhole with no optics.

Jun 17, 2014permalink

maruzeiro

Great camera to travel to Brazil! Specially Rio de Janeiro.

Apr 25, 2014permalink

justinwonnacott

Cute.

Too bad it eats money (sheet film) and kills fish.

A speed graphic is cooler and is about the same size with a rising front . Actually , I sold my view cameras a long time ago, no regrets at all.

Apr 24, 2014permalink

Dismayed

I'd opt for a Crown Graphic instead. Much more capable and flexible, and only a bit heavier.

Apr 24, 2014permalink

KAllen

Paul .
Fun in the digital age, 5x4 made simple for a digital generation use to AF AE and dial in iso.
Some will make compelling art with it and enjoy the journey from concept to hanging the gelatine print.
I have a canoe, sure I've seen boats with engines that do the hard work for you, I prefer the journey in the canoe.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Paul Guba

I guess having learned photography on 4x5 and 8x10 cameras I too don't get it. Truth is digital cameras exceed film with the exception of 8x10 film. Having scanned film for output back to film essentially lossless or hard time distinguishing the difference digital cameras exceed the quality of that scan for 4x5. So what is the sense other to say I did? I understand there is still some mystique with large format but it is essentially that.

If I were to spend the money and time to process 4x5 film I would want all the benefits that are available with a camera that shoots the film. That is just me, having shot it for years I would feel cheated not having it. Though others may feel differently.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

john-photoguy

Very funny comments. Simply if you don't get it, then you have no need. If you get it, then you wished you had found the Kickstarter! Anxious to get mine. It will be a fun summer indeed!

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Finally, someone with a head on his shoulders!

Jun 17, 2014permalink

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bobcrowley/new55-film

i don't agree. This does not aim to be a a Technika, but a cheap entry to large format photography. Despite not having movements, it is good for large prints at museum quality if the proper lens and tripod are used.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

new boyz

If a MF mirrorless would ever materialized, there will be a market for a 4x5 to 44x33mm sensor "speed booster" alike adapter. Even 60x45mm(645) to 44x33 adapter will be very welcome.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

chillgreg

This is like a car with pedals. It confuses me why it actually exists! (scratching left side of head with right hand)

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Frank Petronio

These comments are hilarious, keep em coming

Apr 23, 2014permalink

E Seale

If you want to explore / get (back) into 4x5 shooting, you might also want to take a look at this Kickstarter effort at reviving 4x5 B&W instant (nee Polaroid) pack film:

Seems to produce good results, leaves you with both a print and fine-grained negative, and no need for a darkroom.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

KAllen

The idea is older than Polaroid. The materials it's made of are probably the new twist.
LF isn't cheap, you need more than a lens and holder.
Strangely enough I got my Razzledog out today with the intension of listing it on ebay.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

I've seen someone like this... Polaroid "police" camera, with a pistol grip and 105/4.5 Tomioka Tominon lens, although it was slightly bulkier and designed for Polaroid Land back. This idea roots from there, I surmise.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

nonuniform

I'm excited to get mine. Sorry so few people have a sense of fun or adventure.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

I'm amazed how many have square heads and can't think outside that box!

Jun 17, 2014permalink

KAllen

It's a fun camera for those that want something different, for those that don't want to do it all with a computer.For those that think there might be more to photography than collecting hard drives full of pixels.
Not a bad idea and looks fun.
There is of course the need for a large format enlarger for the full analogue route or a scanner for the hybrid route. You will also need to add DDS and a changing bag for in the field loading.
A simple way to get into alternative printing techniques and learning about film, nothing wrong with that.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Soggoth

Without traditional view camera standard movements (rise, fall, tilt, shift) the whole idea doesn't have much sense

Apr 22, 2014permalink

What about press cameras (namely Graflex SpeedGraphic 4x5")? They didn't have THAT big movements, just slight rise and tilt of the front lens board. I already see this thing with Grafmatic film holder (the guy uses standard Lisco/Fidelity two-sheet holders, which scream Graflok). With non-pinhole lens (I suggest Fujinon, not Schneider) and with Grafmatic this contraption should gain the responsiveness required from travel P&S AND quality desired from mighty expensive 4x5 sheets, and spare the necessity of carrying the daily bulk of conventional film holders.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Apr 23, 2014permalink

You're right, cameras today don't need all that stuff. How did they ever produce images back then?

Jun 17, 2014permalink

Franka T.L.

Well well, prove that there's really nothing new under the sun. Such simple box camera is anything but new. That design dated way back to the time when Brass Lens are common. And there's literally hundreds of camera models of this design ..

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Akpinxit

looks like unneeded pain
4X5 instagram shooting...

Apr 22, 2014permalink

ProfHankD

Why is this here? Not digital, not even very innovative. There are plenty of smaller, nicer, pinhole-lens 4x5 cameras out there, not to mention used real 4x5 field/press-view cameras in that price range with an old Optar 135mm f/4.7 or somesuch.

On the other hand, I've been working on developing a cheap 4x5 digital sensor for a couple of years... so I do believe 4x5 format has a future. This isn't very different from the 3D-printed body I've been working on, aside from the fact that I don't want to use film -- especially not sheet film. ;-)

Apr 22, 2014permalink

steveh0607

At last, a true full frame camera! Now we don't have to suffer the poor depth of field the 35mm offers.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Soggoth

4x5 is a cropped size for amateurs!
8x10 is way to go!
:)

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Hush-hush! 12x20" Graflex Banquet Camera takes the floor %)

Apr 22, 2014permalink

ProfHankD

Yeah, they come much bigger than that. Biggest I've used was a 30x40" that had a vacuum back to hold the film really flat. Not very portable -- it weighed a couple of tons and was intended for making halftones, etc., for printing or making nameplates. Sadly, it ended-up being cut into pieces because the room it was in had been built around it, and there was no other way to get it out.

May 9, 2014permalink

tkbslc

I have a hard time believing a $150 plastic film camera can beat even a high end compact, large film or no.

Edit: Looking through the photos on flickr, I think you'd better off with a quality used 35mm camera if you are after the film look and some DOF control. Maybe something like the Olympus XA or Stylus Epic.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

The quality of 5x4 is miles better than a high end compact. Used correctly it will be a lot better than a full frame DSLR.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

TheChefs

comparing 35mm film to LF is like saying this digital point and shoot with tiny sensor will have the same DOF control as FF DSLR.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Let us talk facts, not perception. The lens is the most important part. With a good lens, and decent light metering and guesstimate of distance the result will be on par wiht a Linhof. A 4x5" scanned at 3200 dpi (you could go higher, let's be "reasonable" here would yield a picture of 4x5x3200x3200 pixels or almost 205 (!) Megapixel. This is why those enormous picturesin museums are usually made with technical cameras.
An Alpa camera (google them) is not that much more user friendly, yet its customers don't complain.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Rocky Mtn Old Boy

$150 with a pinhole lens?
I'd rather buy a used Zone VI, Wista, Graphlex, Calumet, etc etc etc off of ebay... there are a zillion more capable 4x5 bodies from $50 on up that one can play with that have swings/tilts (something interesting).

There might be a niche group that will find this of interest... Lomography fans.

That said, in a few years, the Wanderlust will be nothing more than a footnote in the annals of photographic history. Sorry Wanderlust... but really.

Affordable 4x5 digital back for the win.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

Franka T.L.

A brand new holga 6X12 pinhole cost only about what at best $40.00 and it can take good old 120 film , probably a lot more useful if I just want something along that

Apr 22, 2014permalink

It's amazing how all these press photographers use to use 5x4 without having to use movements in the past...

Apr 22, 2014permalink

I'd rather buy a talcum powder can and drill a tiny hole in it!

Jun 17, 2014permalink

primeone

This was a Kickstarter project, about a year ago. Very cool to see a project like this come to fruition. There's a wide version, too, with a fixed focus body for 65mm lens.

I think they need a fundraiser for the 4x5 digital back to compliment this body!

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Rocky Mtn Old Boy

Dust the body... but totally agree on the digital back. Take scads more money to get that product up and going, but can you imagine? An affordable digital back that could be used with the freakin' tens of thousands of 4x5s gathering dust in basements around the world. Hell, I think I still have a cherry Vermont Zone VI packed in a box... somewhere, lol.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

mrdancer

So, I get the impression that this camera is most suited for landscape photography.

What if I pull my little camera out of my pocket, slap it on a tripod and take a few dozen photos, spend 2-3 minutes with Image Composite Editor to automatically stitch them together and end up with same or higher-resolution image with much more DOF? Photo setup time is probably about the same to ensure I get a decent end product, post-production maybe a little quicker with the little camera (assuming I convert RAWs, also). Maybe I lose some DR compared to the film, but could probably get most of that back by shooting RAWs.

Then I can use the little camera to shoot all kinds of other photos, too, and not have to carry a backpack with it...

What's the advantage of this big camera again?

Apr 22, 2014permalink

If you had ever used 5x4 you would not be asking that question.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Indeed, mrdancer, rent a 4x5 kit,study the operation, make landscape pictures, examine the results and you'd wish that you could delete your comment.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

mrdancer

What, exactly, are the main benefits of the 4x5 film over, say, a 250mpxl stitch from a lesser camera, when shooting a landscape still? I get the color thing, but that is relatively minor in the grand scheme of things, and somewhat subjective. The resolution is there, and the increased DOF for landscapes is there (and most likely an advantage held by the lesser camera).

Please note that my comments are limited to the 4x5 camera in this article, certainly not all 4x5 cameras.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

The advantage is to stop, think, and compose an image

Jun 17, 2014permalink

mauijohn

Too big as a travel size..but can be defense weapons for muggers when traveling.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

MarkByland

Vimeo has the worst streaming capability and stability of any video service on the internet yet is the choice of many. Why? I can't make it 20 seconds in to the video without lag catching up. I gave up on watching the video.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

tkbslc

I feel quite the opposite. Vimeo always streams well for me, while youtube stutters if I watch HD.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Oldmanadrift

What is the point of a large negative without perspective control rise/fall, swing/tilt etc? Even the old Graflex had some movement and was handheld, with the ability to focus! The video depicted point & shoot snapshots which would be better served with a digital pocket camera IMO.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

HubertChen

Buy a Zeiss Ikonta used with 6x9 cm roll film. With a Zeiss lens, precise focal distance markings and a better balance of film format to hand holding, you will get sharper pictures at faster shooting speed (Roll Film) and still higher resolution images. The Zeiss Ikonta is fold-able and I used that to have lens movement. Not too precise, but much better than no lens movement. Great to increase depth of field in landscape photography and with practice works well enough.

This camera will certainly qualify to shoot with a unique device and film cost will not kill you.

As for scanner, use your 16 MP DSLR with a Macro lens. Works fast with excellent quality.

For anybody looking for a different photography experience, this would be a more practical one.

When shooting black and white, you can benefit from larger latitude than your DSLR, so at least there is a technical benefit to go through this pain.

Unfolding this camera on party will also make it easy to start a conversation :-)

Apr 22, 2014permalink

itsastickup

Can one get a ground glass back/holder? without that I can't see how one is going to focus accurately enough to get all that resolution.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Rod McD

Hmmmm. Fun maybe BUT........ I used to shoot 4X5". I think a lot of people who (might) buy this camera would find it way more expensive to use than they imagine (at over $10 per E6 shot purchased and processed) and way more difficult (because a 90mm lens with no movements has very little DOF).

If I was going to go back to 4X5" I'd certainly be buying the recommended 90mm Super Angulon, but I'd be mounting it into a decent field camera with all the usual movements.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Summi Luchs

The technical quality of the handheld, unsteady teaser video shows what to expect from handheld 4x5 photos. It will turn a quality wise hard to beat film format into an expesive kind of lomography. The obvoiusly guessed distance settings will contribute even more to a "lomo look".

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

GodSpeaks

This 'might' have been interesting back in the days of film (ie: last Century), but today?

Apr 22, 2014permalink

brendon1000

Photography is a hobby for many. Some people love tinkering with old film cameras. I have tried film and the experience is very different than using a modern DSLR camera.

To be sure it wasn't my cup of tea but I can see the charm some people may have.

Its like those people who use love tinkering with old bikes. Performance wise a cheap Honda 250cc might outperform any of those oldies and give far less vibrations with a far higher fuel efficiency. But the charm of riding an older heavier bike is something you can't get from a lightweight Honda.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

ManuelVilardeMacedo

Brendon: not really like tinkering with old bikes. There are areas where digital still has to catch up with film, chiefly dynamic range. Digital is almost there, for sure, but it still has some way to go.
Also, when you use a film camera you have to master exposure in a way you feel you're not obliged to when you use a digital camera. The fact that you're never 100% sure of what the outcome will be - you have no display to show you the image - makes you improve your skills. Plus the equipment is cheaper and readily available: you can buy a Hasselblad 500 C/M for €500, whereas you'll have to mortgage your house to buy a medium format digital camera.
The most important, however, is the thrill you get out of shooting film. Digital can be nice, of course, but there's too much predictability and it's just too 'safe'.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

bobbarber

Also colors... Digital colors are "not as good", to be charitable. Anybody who shoots a roll of color film, even cheap color film, after years of shooting digital, will readily notice the difference.

I think of film now as vinyl for sound. There is a movement back to vinyl, a small movement to be sure, but a movement nonetheless, and the reason is sound quality. Those of us who "tinker" with film (I shoot mostly digital, film once in a while), appreciate the quality that film gives you, albeit with a lot more work!

Apr 22, 2014permalink

brendon1000

Honestly I never like the IQ of film. I very much prefer a 35mm FF camera to film any day. :P

Its a personal thing I suppose but I am not fond of the grainy film look.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

ManuelVilardeMacedo

Brendon, the grain depends largely on the film you use. I get grain-free images with Kodak T-Max 100, Ilford Pan F Plus 50 and all colour films south of ASA 160, though it baffles me to find that Agfa APX 100 and Ilford FP4 Plus 125 are quite grainy (though they have the 'right' kind of grain).
Bob Barber, you're right: there's no substitute for vinyl when it comes to sound quality. CD never quite made it, SACD and DVD-Audio were flops - and don't get me started with MP3! Nothing can beat a pristine vinyl record in terms of transparency, speed and dynamics. No wonder vinyl sales are increasing every year, while CD sales keep declining.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

bobbarber

brendon,

Digital has some advantages, to be sure. It is cleaner, so if you like that look, digital's the way to go.

I find that at print sizes of 8x10, it is hard to notice grain in a decent scanned film image. If I pixel-peep those same scanned film images, they break down at 100%. However, they look great printed at reasonable sizes. What I notice instead is the better colors, better dynamic range, etc. of film as compared to digital.

Big film like this will allow a lot bigger than 8x10 prints, but it is a lot of work and expense. I mostly shoot digital too, but film can give great results.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Go to a photography museum and look at the big prints, even the modern ones. They are usually taken with 4x5". You will be impressed with the quality.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

JamieTux

Can you still get quickload anywhere?

Apr 22, 2014permalink

GarageBoy

Sadly, no

Apr 22, 2014permalink

JamieTux

I knew the answer - but that's the concept the video is selling :)

Apr 23, 2014permalink

These days, I'm really of the opinion that it's really all about the photos you make, not about the device you use to make them. I think this camera is really about the device you use to make the photos. When I look at a photo, I really couldn't care less about what device made the photo (whether it be a smart phone, or an m4/3 camera, or a 35mm FF camera, or a 4x5 camera). I just care if the photo is good or not. However, this camera should be fun for someone who gets a kick out of shooting with a unique device. I just don't think a device such as a 4x5 camera should be used so haphazardly as a "point-n-shoot". Kinda defeats the purpose of 4x5 if you're just zone focusing, handholding, pointing and shooting like the guy in the video.

If I had one, I'd probably use it for portraits, on a tripod, not really for travel.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

If you can't tell the difference in prints between m4/3 and 4x5, I would suggest having your eyes checked.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

@Dave Luttmann - not everyone looks at prints under a loupe or magnifier, LOL. It also depends on how large you print, too. I'll bet that 90% of all images shot with this rig will never be printed, and 95% of them will never be printed at a large enough of a size to really make the most of such a large negative. Besides, it's been a long, long time since I've seen an image where I had to say to myself, "Not enough resolution!" That's because great images really aren't about resolution. But even if you do have all that resolution, I think it's rather counterproductive to be shooting with no form of image stabilization other than your bare hands. I'm not so sure this guy's handheld film images are really going to be any sharper than a good digital camera with image stabilization and greater ISO range.

Apr 23, 2014*permalink

It has nothing to do with viewing a print under a loupe. The fact that you start your comment with that clearly shows you missed the point.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

While I like the idea of the device, I agree with your conclusion: this is a camera for thoughtful, deliberate shooting on a tripod, and then enjoy the quality afterwards. Using it as a P&S is a quick path to very expensive disappointment.

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Kodachrome200

I shoot 4x5. this honestly sucks all the joy out of working 4x5. I dont need that much resolution I like camera control and the slow process. also all those shots while sharp looks hazy like there is no contrast. Is he using a crappy lens? or is it something to do with the camera design. also how is he focusing it? is he just guessing? because hyperfocal photography in 4x5 takes ALOT of light so this isnt just an easy camera to walk around and shoot with unless its really bright sunny day or you use high iso film or most likely both

Apr 22, 2014permalink

eozdural

isn't he using a pinhole lens? I thought that's what it says in the text.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Kodachrome200

well then i like it even less

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Kaiju

Hey, don't slam 4x5 pinhole (though, of course, I know it's your opinion, and therefore valid). :) I love doing surreal, ultra-wide pinhole photography on 120, 4x5, and 8x10 film. However, I have to say that I don't like this camera. It's far too limiting. Imagine buying a 4x5 camera that can take only one lens focal length as well... I love my Crown Graphic and Shen Hao (that I use with lenses)! My pinhole cameras are all too short a focal length to shoot using my "lensed" 4x5 cameras (I shoot at 25mm most of the time).

Apr 22, 2014permalink

bobbarber

...or you are shooting landscapes. That's how I'd use it. No need to hand hold it. Just use a beanbag, hyperfocal, and get some amazing shots on hikes.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Lukino

There is no lens, or film holder, or a shutter, or a "real" viewfinder (good luck using a open finder for wide angle).
So you basically pay 150$ for a plastic cone?

Apr 22, 2014permalink

GarageBoy

And a helicoid focusing mount - (albeit, a shitty plastic one) Schneider's focus mounts were $400 themselves

Apr 22, 2014permalink

So you pack this contraption, have to buy the 90mm lens (as it supposedly only comes with the pinhole attachment) pack in about 30 sheets of film and your 35 liter travel pack is full to the brim. ... so much for "goes wherever you go"...
And 30 hipster shots later you're out of film and probably using the iphone again.

..
Or get a more practical camera to begin with.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

TheChefs

Or learn how to get the first photo right the first time around and probably just need 2 or 4 sheets.

Large format isn't for mindless snapping hopping that one day you might get lucky with a decent photo. They are for people who know what they want and know what they are doing. Not for the ones who post up 100s of photos which are not looked at by anybody.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

jetals

A few sheets may suffice if you are only going to take photos of one thing.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

@ TheChefs - when was the last time you went to any photo-worthy destination and only took 2 or 4 shots? Just because someone happens to take more than 2 or 4 shots doesn't mean they are "mindlessly snapping hoping that one day one might get lucky with a decent photo." Sure, it's romantic to think that you can take a trip somewhere, and be so fortunately that you only take 2 or 4 shots and know that those 2 or 4 shots are all that you'll ever want to shoot on that trip. But, come on, let's be realistic. We're not all Ansel Adams.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

The thing is people who use large format tend to know what they are doing with a camera so would not waste 30 sheets of film because if they did with processing they would have blown about £150 on those 30 shots. There are plenty of people out there with a 90mm in a camera bag ready to use on this camera. Do you even know what 30 sheets of 5x4 film looks like? Not very large. You can also get compact film holders to reduce what you need to carry around.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

@TheChefs
Sure thing mate... 30-40 sheets of film, lets say on a month long trip through some stunning landscapes. I guess not since the invention of roll-film has anyone done that for other reasons than simply WANTING to... just over the last weekend I'e done some extensive hiking, and well I was pretty happy not to lug around the largest gear, and have more than 30 pictures to choose from afterwards.

Also I must believe you have never done any professional (paid for) photographic work. for ten images good enough for the client to use, I guess there are about a hundred to throw away... Mind you those 100 aren't necessarily bad photos - but they are not spot on.

But I guess you are good enough to make every frame count, every exposure, especially with a manual camera, perfect... you manage to get every shot tack sharp, hand held. well I'm in awe.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

@Stu5

I used to work with film extensively, to the point where I had my own colour & Bw processing lab, including colour printing up to 1mx1.2m approx.
I guess I have a vague idea about the cost involved in processing.
And about the sizes of various films.

Whilst I see *some* appeal in shooting LF... quality wise it takes a LOT more than a crappy old lens and a non-precise plastic body to really make use of the format's virtues.
So you lug around the cheap-o-lf-camera... you buy the film at premium prices these days, you will most likely need someone else to do the processing (and most likely screw up a lot of the stuff... (or to get full use, your own lab), and all that to produce photos that quality wise don't max out by far what the format would have to offer, when you can buy a used pro-grade MF Camera for the same (or less)... and get stunning results... or use a good DSLR.

Just look at the sample photos on the website... honestly, it is not that stunning, is it.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

electrophoto so a Schneider Super-Angulon 90 mm F/8.0 MC lens is a crappy old lens is it? How do you know the body is non-precise? You have no way of telling that. In theory there is no reason the camera body is not very precise. So are you telling us you cannot develop 5x4 sheet film in a Paterson dev tank? Most people with any experience with 5x4 can manage that very easily. As long and the camera is light tight and ridged then it does not need to be flash with features, in the hands of a capable photographer.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

Stu5,
Develop it in a patterson dev tank? Sure, if B&W is the only thing you're opting for... (or some very funky colour... if you care for manual processing).

Precision... well look at the thread on the camera's "barrel"... it's coarse, and it's plastic. At least from a mechanical engineers point of view, this is not how precision is defined.
Also the way the video shows the film-holder being inserted, of course the video doesn't show details, but it looks like a good source of light-leaks in the construction.

The Schneider is ok ... probably not going to be the main source of problems in that package.

Last but not least, look at the SAMPLES provided by the MANUFACTURER of that camera... now whilst I've seen worse in the past 20 years with cameras... I've also seen a LOT BETTER (and that includes a lot of smaller type film and Digital Equivalents)...
Now I take it that a manufacturer is going to show case the best possible output, rather then the worst... well...

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Hello the photos are on Flickr, what do you expect. You can even see aliasing effects on them. You have no idea how the images were scanned so you have no idea what quality loss has occurred at that stage. Until you have the camera in your hands and tested it you have no idea if there is a good source of light leaks in the construction.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

Ah ok, Stu5,
Ignore the rest... and blame flickr and the scanner... best retreat strategy so far.

Apr 22, 2014*permalink

It is not a retreat strategy, you can see the issues there if you know what you are looking for. If you don't, you will blame the camera.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Grafmatic, my friend... Grafmatic, and no problems with full backpack of stupid two-sheet holders. Sometimes I really miss 6,5x9 cm cut film when I take my Crown Graphic 2x3 with Mamiya 67 back for a walk (original 2x3" back is a crapload of trouble today, it was not designed for modern thick films), but that thing died about 15 or so years before my birth. I think on how to befriend Fuji Instax Wide cartridges, but they require their own machinery for development, although the disadvantage here is the lack of enlargeable negative.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

TheChefs

T3 and electrophoto,

I don't shoot LF and I do not shoot big commercial stuff, I do shoot film MF and I do take portraits of people and I get paid for it, since some people desire the real film look, especially black and white. I don't have much interest in landscape photography per se, but I will take a snapshot of nice scenery. My interest is more in people.

In Australia we had 4 day long weekend, I went to Melbourne from Sydney. I took my hasselblad with 3 backs. Each back loaded with Provia 400X, Portra 800, Delta 3200. After a lot of walking, eating and exploring, I only took 3 x Provia , 2 x Portra and 3 x Delta shots. I only take shots of the things I really want and when everything looks just right to my eye in the viewfinder. I don't see the point of shooting lots and then sorting out through the photos.

Apr 23, 2014*permalink

chillgreg

"And 30 hipster shots later you're out of film and probably using the iphone again."

LMAO!!! Comment of the day :))

Apr 23, 2014permalink

Guys. Think about Ansel Adams. An example of slow, limited yet knowledgeable photo taking in nature. That is what can be cool with this camera.
I'd still bring a more manageable camera as well. This could not be my single camera on a trip

Apr 23, 2014permalink

3dreal

No new idea. some guys of http://www.paparazzis.ch/
do this every year at basel fasnacht-canrival of basle. Maybe if you surf the site you will see the cam. Looks like a view/polaroid with digitalcompact inside.
For the same eople of tageswoche.ch even installed a camera in a window for selfportraits. timelapse of the shootings can be downloaded online.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

jaaboucher

What a great way to get into 4x5 printing without having to change most of my shooting style.

That is, everything except that I can take more than two photos per "card" in this case.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

stevo23

Eh, not so hot. Just having a big sheet of film don't make it good.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Peter KT Lim

Show off more than reality. Today a pack of 4x5 harm your pocket very deep.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

And the digital backs trying to match it are ever so cheap.....

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Gerbear

Arista EDU Ultra 100 ISO 4x5/50 sheets $32.99 Freestyle Photographic Supplies
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/190145-Arista-EDU-Ultra-100-ISO-4x5-50-sheets
Lenses available from http://www.keh.com/

Apr 22, 2014permalink

d2f

Nice idea but one has to take into account the cost of the color film, processing and printing. Over a period of five years the cost of which could over take the cost of the camera and lens. Speaking only for myself if you are not producing very large prints I do not see a need for any 4x5 camera. If on the other hand you have a need the image quality then I would lean towards a high quality 4x5 camera with all the movements mounted on a solid tripod. A compromise might be a medium format camera like the Mamiya 7 or Fujica GSW 690. But given the recent advances in digital cameras the image quality gap is closing in on medium format film, if not already surpassed it. With that said I think for the most part film cameras are history. Instead just pull out the smartphone and take the shot.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Monochrom

The tiny piece of glass in a smartphone that they call a "lens" will never give you the quality that a medium format or even a 35mm format can give you. Never mind what they say about megapixels: the glass can never produce enough sharpness and contrast to match the quality of the sensor.
Film on the other hand is still the most archivable medium in photography. If stored properly, it will be there a hundred years or more from now. Will your harddisks start up even twenty years from now?
Not that 99% of the smartphone pictures will be of much relevance even a year from now...

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Anyone who has worked with 4x5 understands what the benchmark for quality really is.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

http://www.deardorffcameras.com/products-page/deardorff-cameras/12x20-deardorff-view-camera-v12-duplicate-3/

Well, then how comes we see this so often in professional use these days?

Apr 22, 2014permalink

luben solev

But you know in your heart of hearts that all those 4x5 photographers look at the 8x10 photographers and say "Now that's quality", while all the 8x10 photographers are secretly lusting after something like this:

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Electric, I see 4x5 used a lot for landscape work. Maybe you need to venture past the iphone crowd and expand your horizons a bit. The fact you even make such a statement shows your rather limited understanding.

Apr 22, 2014permalink

Michael Ma

Is that a hipster?

Apr 22, 2014permalink