I backpacked with a 4X5 Sinar system and a dozen sheet film holders for 20 years.
Some of us in these forums need to look into pack goats. You get a gear hauler and a landscaper in one semi-compact animal. win-win.
Some of us in these forums need to look into pack goats. You get a gear hauler and a landscaper in one semi-compact animal. win-win.
If I could have figured out a way to get a 6x12 roll film back on my RB67, I might never have discovered LF. So now I can do 6x17 without a roll back.
I'm seeing $368 US new for the Dayi. I've missed a couple of Horseman backs under $500 lately and finally gave up and bought one for over $500. The Dayi is likely fine, there are reports of sloppy build quality and there are the pros and cons of it being multi-format (extra parts to get lost/broken).
Back to 6x12. I personally like a wide-angle focal length in conjunction with the panoramic formats. I know it doesn't have to be this way, but that's what I like. Who in here is/has shot 6x12 with "normal" focal lengths and do you like the results? 150,180 and 210mm come to mind.
Back to 6x12. I personally like a wide-angle focal length in conjunction with the panoramic formats. I know it doesn't have to be this way, but that's what I like. Who in here is/has shot 6x12 with "normal" focal lengths and do you like the results? 150,180 and 210mm come to mind.
One of the reasons I purchased a 4x5 camera was a bigger negative. Specifically, I wanted better panoramas, as my current method is cropping 6x7 which doesn't produce a large negative. Looking at my options now I am trying to understand the purpose of 6x12 roll film backs for 4x5 cameras.
If my math is correct, a regular 4x5 sheet is wider than a 6x12 negative. Meanwhile, these roll film backs do not seem as convenient to use as sheet film. You have to focus on the ground glass, then take the regular back off, mount a 6x12 back, etc. Basically smaller negative + slower shooting + extra weight + extra cost. And despite this, they do exist.
I am obviously missing something here. What is it?
6x12cm in color isn't too daunting. 4x5" in color is currently only reserved for "pigs who are more equal than others".It's also lower cost per shot.
6x12cm in color isn't too daunting. 4x5" in color is currently only reserved for "pigs who are more equal than others".
It was a tongue-in-cheek reference to Animal Farm and the current price levels of 4x5" color film. Sorry if that wasn't obvious; I was under the impression that anyone in the western world presently alive would have got the joke; maybe it wasn't as universal as I had anticipated. My apologies.we are NOT pigs
It was a tongue-in-cheek reference to Animal Farm and the current price levels of 4x5" color film. Sorry if that wasn't obvious; I was under the impression that anyone in the western world presently alive would have got the joke; maybe it wasn't as universal as I had anticipated. My apologies.
I love shooting color. I'd love to shoot more large format color. And I really need to dig up the 6x12 back and my Sinar F.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?