Reading mode: Light Dark

Large format, an elusive concept

Go to last post
JimKasson

JimKasson

Community Leader
Forum Moderator
Messages
52,259
Solutions
52
Reaction score
59,049
Location
Monterey, CA, US
The new Edmund Optics catalog came yesterday. Normally, I just file it away and look at it when I have a specific need. But today I started leafing through it, and noticed something in the industrial lens section. APS-H and FF are considered large format by the Edmund folks. Normal coverage appears to be that of a C-mount lens. C-mount lenses are built for the 8 mm and 16 mm film formats and the 1/3", 1/2", 2/3", 1", and 4/3" video formats, which corresponds to a range of image circles approximately from 5 to 22 mm in diameter.

Things are similar in the cine world. Arri's LF cameras have 36.70 mm x 25.54 mm sensors. Red's Monstro sensors are 40.96mm x 21.6mm.

I guess all things are relative when it comes to sensor size.

Jim
 
JimKasson said:
The new Edmund Optics catalog came yesterday. Normally, I just file it away and look at it when I have a specific need. But today I started leafing through it, and noticed something in the industrial lens section. APS-H and FF are considered large format by the Edmund folks. Normal coverage appears to be that of a C-mount lens. C-mount lenses are built for the 8 mm and 16 mm film formats and the 1/3", 1/2", 2/3", 1", and 4/3" video formats, which corresponds to a range of image circles approximately from 5 to 22 mm in diameter.

Things are similar in the cine world. Arri's LF cameras have 36.70 mm x 25.54 mm sensors. Red's Monstro sensors are 40.96mm x 21.6mm.

I guess all things are relative when it comes to sensor size.
Click to expand...
I'm about 82% certain that I read somewhere in one of the trio of Ansel Adams instruction books* that in the early twentieth century, 4x5" film was considered / called medium format. Unfortunately, last time I went looking for that quote, I couldn't find it.

*I'm sure you know, but to be clear for any who may not: The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, the versions published in the early 1980s. And Adams fully knew where things were evolving: "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them." The Negative, p. xiii (March 1981)
 
NAwlins Contrarian said:
*I'm sure you know, but to be clear for any who may not: The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, the versions published in the early 1980s. And Adams fully knew where things were evolving: "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them." The Negative, p. xiii (March 1981)
Click to expand...
Ansel told me that he liked the tones in the poster version of Winter Sunrise, Sierra Nevada, from Lone Pine, scanned on a Scitex or similar scanner by an experienced operator, better than the ones in his darkroom prints. He said the scanner operator was able to do things he couldn't do chemically.

--
https://blog.kasson.com
 
Last edited:
Hi,

You are not alone in recalling that 4x5 is medium format at one point. And the 120 roll film was known as small format. I recall that from somewhere or something or someone, long ago.....

And I know it changed somewhere along the timeline to where 4x5 became large format and the various 120 film using cameras became medium format.

And I seem to recall where 135 format was miniature format but then became small format.

So. Anyway. 8x10. Was always large format, right?

Stan
 
Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

You are not alone in recalling that 4x5 is medium format at one point. And the 120 roll film was known as small format. I recall that from somewhere or something or someone, long ago.....

And I know it changed somewhere along the timeline to where 4x5 became large format and the various 120 film using cameras became medium format.

And I seem to recall where 135 format was miniature format but then became small format.

So. Anyway. 8x10. Was always large format, right?
Click to expand...
12x20 banquet cameras and bigger. That’s the real large format.

😉
 
I don't know about the current versions, but I do remember seeing (and owning one or two) of those early posters and they were rather incredible. If I recall, I liked Clearing Winter Storm better as a poster than a print of the same size....

Funny to hear I was not alone.

--Darin
 
JimKasson said:
Ansel told me that he liked the tones in the poster version of Winter Sunrise, Sierra Nevada, from Lone Pine,.....
Click to expand...
I grew up close to that area and the views can be stupendous with the right cloud cover.
 
Hi,

- Serious Mode On

Ah! I'd not heard that before.

Did they skip over Very and just jump to Ultra?

I ask because Very comes before Ultra in radio. Such as Low Frequency then Medium Frequency then High Frequency then Very High Frequency and then Ultra High Frequency.

- Serious Mode Off

Maybe we can now call small format Low Format? :P

There are also Very Low Frequencies such as Navies use to contact submerged vessels. Maybe we can use Very Low Format for cell phone camera sensors. ;)

Stan
 
Back to the world many/most of us live in, there's a frequent poster on FM who calls 44x33 "miniMF", because it's smaller than 645. I think the term is quite apt, but another poster referred to as comparable to dragging one's fingernails down a blackboard.
 
Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

- Serious Mode On

Ah! I'd not heard that before.

Did they skip over Very and just jump to Ultra?

I ask because Very comes before Ultra in radio. Such as Low Frequency then Medium Frequency then High Frequency then Very High Frequency and then Ultra High Frequency.

- Serious Mode Off
Click to expand...
Yes, skip they did. Apparently not much overlap between ULF photographers and RF practitioners.
 
Not sure about the origin date but 4x5 is large format according to Hasselblad.

Hasselblad defines medium format as anything lager than full frame (35mm equivalent):

"Medium format refers to the active image area, be it film or digital, with anything larger than the 24x36mm dimensions of 35mm film, also known as 35mm format, and smaller than the 4x5 inch, or large format, image area." -Hasselblad (think this document form 2018)

See, https://www.hasselblad.com/fr-fr/press/press-releases/2018/medium-format-advantages-karl-taylor/
 
Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

- Serious Mode On

Ah! I'd not heard that before.

Did they skip over Very and just jump to Ultra?

I ask because Very comes before Ultra in radio. Such as Low Frequency then Medium Frequency then High Frequency then Very High Frequency and then Ultra High Frequency.

- Serious Mode Off

Maybe we can now call small format Low Format? :P

There are also Very Low Frequencies such as Navies use to contact submerged vessels. Maybe we can use Very Low Format for cell phone camera sensors. ;)
Click to expand...
No SLF and ELF photographers?
 
Valued Customer said:
Not sure about the origin date but 4x5 is large format according to Hasselblad.

Hasselblad defines medium format as anything lager than full frame (35mm equivalent):

"Medium format refers to the active image area, be it film or digital, with anything larger than the 24x36mm dimensions of 35mm film, also known as 35mm format, and smaller than the 4x5 inch, or large format, image area." -Hasselblad (think this document form 2018)

See, https://www.hasselblad.com/fr-fr/press/press-releases/2018/medium-format-advantages-karl-taylor/
Click to expand...
So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF. And so is the Baby Rollei. And 6x17.
 
JimKasson said:
Valued Customer said:
Not sure about the origin date but 4x5 is large format according to Hasselblad.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
4x5 inches seems reasonable. Fuji labels 33x44 mm as large format, which seems less reasonable.

Fuji Large Format
Fuji Large Format
JimKasson said:
JimKasson said:
Hasselblad defines medium format as anything lager than full frame (35mm equivalent):

"Medium format refers to the active image area, be it film or digital, with anything larger than the 24x36mm dimensions of 35mm film, also known as 35mm format, and smaller than the 4x5 inch, or large format, image area." -Hasselblad (think this document form 2018)

See, https://www.hasselblad.com/fr-fr/press/press-releases/2018/medium-format-advantages-karl-taylor/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Seems like a reasonable overview of the current state of affairs as it has been in recent decades.
JimKasson said:
So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.
Click to expand...
Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.
JimKasson said:
And so is the Baby Rollei.
Click to expand...
Currently an obsolete and obscure medium format size using 127 film, but there are folks who will cut 120 down to fit a 127 spool.
JimKasson said:
And 6x17.
Click to expand...
Panoramic medium format, panoramic cameras have also been made for 35 mm (small format) film and large format sheet sizes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_format
 
TechTalk2 said:
TechTalk2 said:
So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.
Click to expand...
Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.
Click to expand...
I had a 3 1/4 and 4 1/4 Speed Graphic in the 50's I didn't keep it long, because I had a hard time finding negative carriers, developing hangers, and the like in the newspaper darkrooms I was using. I switched to 4x5, and things got easier, but I didn't notice a big improvement in IQ.
 
Valued Customer said:
JimKasson said:
TechTalk2 said:
JimKasson said:
So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.
Click to expand...
Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.
Click to expand...
I had a 3 1/4 and 4 1/4 Speed Graphic in the 50's ….. I switched to 4x5, and things got easier, but I didn't notice a big improvement in IQ.
Click to expand...
What this due to the film, equipment, or user or combination of their three?
Click to expand...
Hard to say, but 4x5 isn’t all that much bigger than 3 1/4 x 4 1/4. About 40% in area or 19% in diagonal.
 
Back when Edmund’s catalogs were printed at about 5”x7” and were still moving a lot of WW-II military surplus optical gear I think they had some aerial reconnaissance lenses that covered the small 5” wide roll film square format. I had one of those lenses which had the characteristic uranium or thorium discoloring.

E-O nowadays offers a lot of machine vision equipment; in that field is there a format larger than 24x36?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top